62150 Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 198 / Friday, October 12, 2012 / Rules and Regulations 

report containing this action and other 

required information to the U.S. Senate, 

the U.S. House of Representatives, and 

the Comptroller General of the United 

States prior to publication of the rule in 

the Federal Register. A major rule 

cannot take effect until 60 days after it 

is published in the Federal Register. 

This action is not a ‘‘major rule’’ as 

defined by 5 U.S.C. 804(2). 

C. Petitions for Judicial Review 

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 December 11, 2012. 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, in 

which EPA determines that the 

Pittsburgh Area has attained the 1997 

annual PM2.5 NAAQS and attained the 

1997 annual PM2.5 NAAQS by its 

attainment date, 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, Particulate matter, Reporting 

and recordkeeping requirements. 

Shawn M. Garvin, 

Regional Administrator, Region III. 

40 CFR part 52 is amended 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. 

Subpart NN—Pennsylvania 

■ 2. Section 52.2056 is amended by 

adding paragraph (h) to read as follows: 

§ 52.2056 Determinations of Attainment. 

* * * * * 

(h) Based upon EPA’s review of the 

air quality data for the 3-year period 

2007 to 2009, EPA determined that the 

Pittsburgh-Beaver Valley fine particle 

(PM2.5) nonattainment area attained the 

1997 annual PM2.5 National Ambient 

Air Quality Standard (NAAQS) by the 

applicable attainment date of April 5, 

2010. Therefore, EPA has met the 

requirement pursuant to CAA section 

179(c) to determine, based on the area’s 

air quality as of the attainment date, 

whether the area attained the standard. 

EPA also determined that the 

Pittsburgh-Beaver Valley PM2.5

nonattainment area is not subject to the 

consequences of failing to attain 

pursuant to section 179(d). 

■ 3. Section 52.2059 is amended by 

adding paragraph (g) to read as follows: 

§ 52.2059 Control strategy: Particulate 

matter. 

* * * * * 

(g) Determination of Attainment. EPA 

has determined, as of October 12, 2012, 

that based on 2008 to 2010 and 2009 to 

2011 ambient air quality data, the 

Pittsburgh-Beaver Valley fine particle 

(PM2.5) nonattainment area has attained 

the 1997 annual PM2.5 national ambient 

air quality standards (NAAQS). This 

determination, in accordance with 40 

CFR 52.1004(c), suspends the 

requirements for the Pittsburgh-Beaver 

Valley PM2.5 nonattainment area to 

submit an attainment demonstration, 

associated reasonably available control 

measures, a reasonable further progress 

plan, contingency measures, and other 

planning SIPs related to attainment of 

the standard for as long as this area 

continues to meet the 1997 annual PM2.5

NAAQS. 

[FR Doc. 2012–24782 Filed 10–11–12; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 6560–50–P 

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION 

AGENCY 

40 CFR Part 52 

[EPA–R04–OAR–2011–0227; FRL–9734–7] 

Approval and Promulgation of 

Implementation Plans; Kentucky; 

Approval of Revisions to the Jefferson 

County Portion of the Kentucky SIP; 

New Source Review; Prevention of 

Significant Deterioration 

AGENCY: Environmental Protection 

Agency (EPA). 

ACTION: Final rule. 

SUMMARY: EPA is taking final action to 

approve multiple changes to the 

Jefferson County portion of the 

Kentucky State Implementation Plan 

(SIP), submitted by the Commonwealth 

of Kentucky, through the Kentucky 

Division for Air Quality (KDAQ), to EPA 

in two submittals dated June 1, 2009, 

and February 8, 2011. These revisions 

were submitted by KDAQ on behalf of 

the Louisville Metro Air Pollution 

Control District (LMAPCD) (also 

referred to as Jefferson County) and 

modify the LMAPCD New Source 

Review (NSR) Prevention of Significant 

Deterioration (PSD) permitting 

regulations. EPA is approving Jefferson 

County’s June 1, 2009, and February 8, 

2011, SIP revisions because the Agency 

has determined that these SIP revisions 

are consistent with the Clean Air Act 

(CAA or Act) and EPA regulations 

regarding the PSD permitting program. 

DATES: This rule is effective November 

13, 2012. 

ADDRESSES: EPA has established a 

docket for this action under Docket 

Identification No. EPA–R04–OAR– 

2011–0227. All documents in the docket 

are listed on the www.regulations.gov 

Web site. Although listed in the index, 

some information is not publicly 

available, i.e., Confidential Business 

Information 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 through 

www.regulations.gov or in hard copy at 

the Regulatory Development Section, 

Air Planning Branch, Air, Pesticides and 

Toxics Management Division, U.S. 

Environmental Protection Agency, 

Region 4, 61 Forsyth Street SW., 

Atlanta, Georgia 30303–8960. EPA 

requests that if at all possible, you 

contact the person listed in the FOR

FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section to 

schedule your inspection. The Regional 

Office’s official hours of business are 

Monday through Friday, 8:30 to 4:30, 

excluding federal holidays. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: For 

information regarding the Jefferson 

County portion of the Kentucky SIP, 

contact Ms. Twunjala Bradley, 

Regulatory Development Section, Air 

Planning Branch, Air, Pesticides and 

Toxics Management Division, U.S. 

Environmental Protection Agency, 

Region 4, 61 Forsyth Street SW., 

Atlanta, Georgia 30303–8960. Ms. 

Bradley’s telephone number is (404) 

562–9352; email address: 

bradley.twunjala@epa.gov. For 

information regarding the GHG 

Tailoring Rule, 2002 NSR Reform and 

NSR PM2.5 Rule, contact Yolanda 

Adams, Air Permits Section, at the same 

address above. Ms. Adams’ telephone 

number is (404) 562–9214; email 

address: adams.yolanda@epa.gov. For 

information regarding the Phase II Rule 

and ozone NAAQS, contact Jane Spann, 

Regulatory Development Section, at the 

same address above. Ms. Spann’s 

telephone number is (404) 562–9029; 

email address: spann.jane@epa.gov. For 

information regarding the PM2.5

NAAQS, contact Mr. Joel Huey, 

Regulatory Development Section, at the 


wreier-aviles on DSK5TPTVN1PROD with RULES
Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 198 / Friday, October 12, 2012 / Rules and Regulations 62151 

1Throughout this document IBR means 

incorporate or incorporates by reference. 

2With respect to the NSR PM2.5 Rule, Phase II 

Rule and NSR Reform, Jefferson County’s SIP 

revisions only address PSD requirements at 

Regulation 2.05. The nonattainment NSR provisions 

for Jefferson County (Regulation 2.04) for these 

provisions are still under development by 

LMAPCD. 

3On March 31, 2010, EPA stayed the Fugitive 

Emissions Rule (73 FR 77882) for 18 months to 

October 3, 2011, to allow the Agency time to 

propose, take comment and issue a final action 

regarding the inclusion of fugitive emissions in NSR 

applicability determinations. This stay was 

established as a result of EPA granting the Natural 

Resource Defense Council’s petition for 

reconsideration on the original Fugitive Emissions 

Rule. See 73 FR 77882 (December 19, 2008). On 

March 30, 2011 (76 FR 17548), EPA proposed an 

interim rule which superseded the March 31, 2010, 

stay and clarified and extended the stay of the 

Fugitive Emission Rule until EPA completes its 

reconsideration. The interim rule simply reverts the 

CFR text back to the language that existed prior to 

the Fugitive Emissions Rule changes in the 

December 19, 2008, rulemaking. EPA plans to issue 

a final rule affirming the interim rule as final. The 

final rule will remain in effect until EPA completes 

its reconsideration. 

same address above. Mr. Huey’s 

telephone number is (404) 562–9104; 

email address: huey.joel@epa.gov. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

Table of Contents 

I. Background 

II. EPA’s Action on Jefferson County’s SIP 

Revision to Adopt the GHG Tailoring 

Rule 

III. EPA’s Action on Jefferson County’s SIP 

Revision to Adopt the NSR PM2.5 PSD 

Permitting Requirements 

IV. EPA’s Action on Jefferson County’s SIP 

Revisions to Adopt the Phase II Rule 

V. EPA’s Action on Jefferson County’s SIP 

Revision to Adopt the Federal NSR 

Reform and Reasonable Possibility 

Provisions 

VI. EPA’s Action on Jefferson County’s 

Automatic Rescission Clause 

VII. Final Action 

VIII. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews 

I. Background 

On June 1, 2009, and February 8, 

2011, the Commonwealth of Kentucky 

through KDAQ (and on behalf of 

LMAPCD) submitted two SIP revisions 

to EPA for approval into the Jefferson 

County portion of the Kentucky SIP to 

adopt federal NSR PSD permitting 

requirements. The SIP revisions consist 

of changes to the LMAPCD Air Quality 

Regulations, Regulation 2 Permit 

Requirements: Regulation 2.05— 

Prevention of Significant Deterioration 

of Air Quality, and incorporate by 

reference (IBR) 1 several NSR PSD 

permitting requirements promulgated at 

40 CFR 52.21. Specifically, the June 1, 

2009, SIP revision: (1) Incorporates 

provisions for implementing the PSD 

program for the PM2.5 NAAQS as 

promulgated in the NSR PM2.5 Rule,2 73 

FR 28321 (May 16, 2008); (2) adopts 

PSD provisions related to the 

implementation of the 1997 8-hour 

ozone Phase II Rule (Phase II Rule), 

including nitrogen oxides (NOX) as a 

precursor to ozone, 70 FR 71612 

(November 29, 2005); and (3) adopts 

federal PSD regulations established in 

the 2002 NSR Reform Rules, 67 FR 

80186 (December 31, 2002), and the 

NSR Reasonable Possibility Rule, 72 FR 

72607 (December 21, 2007). These PSD 

permitting provisions became effective 

in Jefferson County on May 20, 2009. 

The February 8, 2011, SIP revision 

provides Jefferson County with the 

authority to regulate greenhouse gas 

(GHG) emissions under its PSD program 

and establishes appropriate emission 

thresholds for determining which new 

stationary sources and modification 

projects become subject to LMAPCD’s 

PSD permitting requirements for their 

GHG emissions as promulgated in the 

GHG Tailoring Rule, 75 FR 31514 (June 

3, 2010). These GHG PSD applicability 

provisions became effective in Jefferson 

County on November 17, 2010. In 

addition, the February 8, 2011, 

submittal adopts a provision that would 

automatically render Jefferson County’s 

Regulation 2.05 or a portion thereof 

invalid in the wake of certain court 

decisions or other events (the 

‘‘automatic rescission clause’’). 

Approval of Jefferson County’s GHG 

permitting regulations also includes a 

proposal to simultaneously rescind the 

federal implementation plan (FIP) that 

EPA promulgated on January 14, 2011. 

See 76 FR 2581. 

On June 6, 2012, EPA published a 

proposed rulemaking to approve the 

aforementioned changes to Jefferson 

County’s NSR PSD program. See 77 FR 

33363. Comments on the proposed 

rulemaking were due on or before July 

6, 2012. No comments, adverse or 

otherwise, were received on EPA’s June 

6, 2012, proposed rulemaking. Pursuant 

to section 110 of the CAA, EPA is now 

taking final action to approve the 

changes to Jefferson County’s NSR PSD 

program as provided in EPA’s June 6, 

2012, proposed rulemaking. A summary 

of the background for today’s final 

action is provided below. EPA’s June 6, 

2012, proposed rulemaking contains 

more detailed information regarding the 

Jefferson County SIP revisions being 

approved today. Please refer to the 

relevant sections in the proposed 

rulemaking for EPA’s rationale for this 

final action. See 77 FR 33363. 

In addition to incorporating the 

changes discussed above, Jefferson 

County’s proposed SIP revisions include 

PSD permitting provisions that: (1) 

Exclude facilities that produce ethanol 

through a natural fermentation process 

from the definition of ‘‘chemical process 

plants’’ in the major NSR source 

permitting program as amended in the 

Ethanol Rule, 72 FR 24060 (May 1, 

2007); and (2) IBR changes pursuant to 

EPA’s Fugitive Emissions Rule, 73 FR 

77882 (December 19, 2008).3 In today’s 

rulemaking, EPA is not taking action on 

LMAPCD’s changes to its PSD 

regulations to adopt provisions 

promulgated in the Ethanol Rule nor is 

EPA taking action on LMAPCD’s 

changes to incorporate the provisions of 

the Fugitive Emissions Rule. 

Jefferson County’s practice for 

revising its PSD regulations is to IBR 

into its SIP the version of the Code of 

Federal Regulations (at 40 CFR 52.21) 

that is in effect as of a specified date. 

LMAPCD’s Regulation 2.05 contains the 

preconstruction review program that 

provides for the prevention of 

significant deterioration of ambient air 

quality as required under part C of title 

I of the CAA (the PSD program). 

Jefferson County’s June 1, 2009, SIP 

revision, which provided version 9 of 

LMAPCD’s Regulation 2.05, IBR the 

federal PSD regulations as set forth at 40 

CFR 52.21, and as amended as of July 

1, 2008. Subsequently, the February 8, 

2011, SIP revision, which provided 

version 10 of LMAPCD’s Regulation 

2.05, IBR federal PSD regulations as set 

forth at 40 CFR 52.21, and as amended 

as of July 1, 2010, thereby superseding 

version 9 of Regulation 2.05. 

Throughout this rulemaking, EPA will 

refer to the June 1, 2009, and February 

8, 2011, SIP revisions as ‘‘Jefferson 

County’s SIP revisions.’’ In effect, the 

Jefferson County SIP revisions change 

the LMAPCD’s IBR date for Regulation 

2.05 to July 1, 2010. 

II. EPA’s Action on Jefferson County’s 

SIP Revision To Adopt the GHG 

Tailoring Rule 

As mentioned above, on February 8, 

2011, KDAQ, on behalf of LMAPCD, 

submitted to EPA a revision to the 

Jefferson County portion of Kentucky’s 

SIP to IBR NSR PSD requirements for 

GHG. Specifically, the February 8, 2011, 

SIP revision includes changes to 

LMAPCD’s Regulation 2.05—Prevention 

of Significant Deterioration of Air 

Quality (version 10) to provide authority 

to LMAPCD to regulate GHG under the 

PSD program, and establishes 

appropriate PSD applicability 

thresholds for GHGs, consistent with 

EPA’s Tailoring Rule. 


wreier-aviles on DSK5TPTVN1PROD with RULES
62152 Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 198 / Friday, October 12, 2012 / Rules and Regulations 

LMAPCD is currently the SIPapproved permitting authority for the 

PSD program in Jefferson County, 

Kentucky, and does not interpret its 

current SIP-approved PSD regulations at 

Regulation 2.05 (i.e., version 9), which 

IBR the federal PSD regulations, to be 

applicable to GHG. In letters dated 

October 4, 2010, and October 19, 2010, 

LMAPCD notified EPA that it did not 

have the authority to regulate GHG 

under the PSD program, and thus was 

in the process of revising its regulations 

(the subject of this final action) to 

provide LMAPCD with this authority. 

The February 8, 2011, SIP revision IBR 

the federal PSD regulations at 40 CFR 

52.21 as of July 2010 into Jefferson 

County Regulation 2.05 to include the 

relevant federal GHG Tailoring Rule 

changes that provide LMAPCD with the 

authority to regulate GHG under the 

PSD program and establish the 

thresholds for GHG permitting 

applicability. The GHG Tailoring Rule 

changes that this final action 

incorporates into the Jefferson County 

portion of Kentucky’s SIP define the 

term ‘‘subject to regulation’’ for the PSD 

program and define ‘‘greenhouse gases’’ 

and ‘‘tons per year (tpy) carbon dioxide 

equivalent emissions’’ (CO2e). 

Additionally, the changes specify the 

methodology for calculating an 

emissions increase for GHG, the 

applicable thresholds for GHG 

emissions subject to PSD, and the 

schedule for when the applicability 

thresholds take effect. See 75 FR at 

31606–31607. EPA has determined that 

these provisions, which provide 

LMAPCD with the authority to regulate 

GHG under the PSD program and 

establish the thresholds for GHG 

permitting applicability, are consistent 

with EPA’s PSD regulations for GHG 

emitting sources as promulgated in the 

GHG Tailoring Rule and section 110 of 

the CAA. Therefore, EPA is approving 

the GHG PSD permitting revision into 

the Jefferson County portion of 

Kentucky’s SIP. In addition, EPA is 

rescinding the FIP promulgated January 

14, 2011, codified in 40 CFR 52.37(b)(7), 

that ensures the availability of a PSDpermitting authority for GHG-emitting 

sources in Jefferson County, Kentucky. 

This FIP is no longer necessary since the 

GHG PSD permitting revision is being 

approved into the Jefferson County 

portion of Kentucky’s SIP. Therefore, 

this final action removes Jefferson 

County from the list at 40 CFR section 

52.37. 

III. EPA’s Action on Jefferson County’s 

SIP Revision To Adopt the NSR PM2.5

PSD Permitting Requirements 

Jefferson County’s Regulation 2.05— 

Prevention of Significant Deterioration 

of Air Quality IBR the provisions at 40 

CFR 52.21, as amended in the NSR 

PM2.5 Rule for PSD. Specifically, 

Jefferson County’s June 1, 2009, and 

February 8, 2011, SIP revisions IBR the 

following NSR PM2.5 provisions for PSD: 

(1) Requirement for NSR permits to 

address directly emitted PM2.5 and 

precursor pollutants; (2) significant 

emission rates for direct PM2.5 and 

precursor pollutants (SO2 and NOX); (3) 

PSD and NNSR requirement of states to 

address condensable PM in establishing 

enforceable emission limits for PM10 or 

PM2.5; and (4) PM2.5 emission offsets 

regarding the PM10 ‘‘grandfathering’’ 

provision. In the February 8, 2011, SIP 

revision, LMAPCD elected to IBR the 

grandfathering provision at 40 CFR 

52.21(i)(1)(xi) in its PSD regulations at 

Regulation 2.05. EPA took final action to 

repeal the PM10 grandfathering 

provision on May 18, 2011. See 76 FR 

28646. Therefore, EPA is not taking 

action to approve this provision into the 

Jefferson County portion of the 

Kentucky SIP. Jefferson County will 

need to update its PSD provisions to 

reflect the repeal of the PM10

grandfathering provision in federal 

regulations at 40 CFR 52.21. At this time 

Jefferson County’s PSD regulations are 

approvable because they are at least as 

stringent as the current federal 

regulations and are consistent with 

section 110 of the CAA. 

Jefferson County’s February 11, 2011, 

SIP revision also IBR, into the Jefferson 

County portion of the Kentucky SIP, 

PSD regulations regarding the 

requirement to address condensable PM 

in applicability determinations and in 

establishing enforceable emission limits 

in PSD and nonattainment NSR permits, 

as established in the NSR PM2.5 Rule. As 

discussed above in Section III.B, under 

a separate action, EPA has proposed to 

correct the inadvertent inclusion of 

‘‘particulate matter emissions’’ in the 

definition of ‘‘regulated NSR pollutant’’ 

as an indicator for which condensable 

emissions must be addressed. See 77 FR 

75656 (March 16, 2012). Further, on 

May 14, 2012, the Commonwealth of 

Kentucky, on behalf of LMAPCD, 

provided a letter to EPA with 

clarification of Jefferson County’s intent 

in light of EPA’s March 12, 2012, 

proposed rulemaking. Specifically, in 

the letter Kentucky requested that EPA 

not approve (into the Jefferson County 

portion of the SIP) the term ‘‘particulate 

matter emissions’’ (at Regulation 2.05) 

as part of the definition for ‘‘regulated 

NSR pollutant’’ that condensable 

emissions be accounted for in 

applicability determinations and in 

establishing emissions limitations for 

PM. Therefore, given the 

Commonwealth’s and LMAPCD’s 

request and EPA’s intention to amend 

the definition of ‘‘regulated NSR 

pollutant,’’ EPA is not taking action to 

approve the terminology ‘‘particulate 

matter emissions’’ into the Jefferson 

County portion of the Kentucky SIP (at 

Regulation 2.05) for the condensable 

provision at the definition of ‘‘regulated 

NSR pollutant.’’ EPA is, however, 

approving into the SIP at Regulation 

2.05 the remaining condensable 

requirement at 40 CFR 51.166(b)(49)(vi) 

that condensable emissions be 

accounted for in applicability 

determinations and in establishing 

emissions limitations for PM2.5 and 

PM10. EPA has determined that Jefferson 

County’s June 1, 2009, and February 8, 

2011, SIP revisions are consistent with 

the NSR PM2.5 Rule for PSD and with 

section 110 of the CAA. See NSR PM2.5

Rule, 75 FR 31514. 

IV. EPA’s Analysis of Jefferson County’s 

SIP Revisions To Adopt the Phase II 

Rule 

Jefferson County’s June 1, 2009, SIP 

revision updated LMAPCD’s PSD 

program to include NOX as an ozone 

precursor for PSD permitting, consistent 

with changes to the federal regulations 

set forth in the Phase II Rule at 40 CFR 

52.21. Subsequently, on February 8, 

2011, KDAQ submitted a SIP revision 

which included the June 1, 2009, 

changes in addition to other federal PSD 

permitting updates to the Jefferson 

County portion of the Kentucky SIP. 

Jefferson County’s SIP revisions IBR the 

federal PSD regulations (at 40 CFR 

52.21) to include the NOX as a precursor 

PSD-only permitting provisions 

promulgated in the Phase II Rule into 

the Jefferson County portion of the 

Kentucky SIP at Regulation 2.05— 

Prevention of Significant Deterioration 

of Air Quality (version 10) as of July 1, 

2010. EPA has determined that Jefferson 

County’s SIP revisions are consistent 

with the PSD Phase II Rule permitting 

requirements and section 110 of the 

CAA. 

V. EPA’s Action on Jefferson County’s 

SIP Revision To Adopt the Federal NSR 

Reform and Reasonable Possibility 

Provisions 

As mentioned in Section I, LMAPCD’s 

PSD Program at Regulation 2.05— 

Prevention of Significant Deterioration 

for Air Quality establishes the 

preconstruction review program as 


wreier-aviles on DSK5TPTVN1PROD with RULES
Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 198 / Friday, October 12, 2012 / Rules and Regulations 62153 

required under part C of title I of the 

CAA. The changes to LMAPCD’s PSD 

rules, which EPA is now approving into 

the Jefferson County portion of the 

Kentucky SIP, were established to 

update the existing PSD Program to 

meet the requirements of the 2002 NSR 

Reform Rules. Jefferson County’s SIP 

revisions IBR the 2002 NSR Reform PSD 

changes regarding baseline actual 

emissions, actual-to-projected-actual 

applicability tests, and plantwide 

applicability limit provisions. Jefferson 

County’s June 1, 2009, and February 8, 

2011, SIP revisions both address the 

federal PSD requirements promulgated 

in the 2002 NSR Reform Rules. The 

proposed revisions explicitly exclude 

the pollution control projects and clean 

unit portions of the 2002 NSR Reform 

Rules that were vacated by the D.C. 

Circuit Court. See New York v. EPA, 413 

F.3d 3 (D.C. Cir. 2005). 

With regard to the remanded portions 

of the 2002 NSR Reform Rules related to 

recordkeeping and EPA’s December 21, 

2007, clarification of the term 

‘‘reasonable possibility’’ (72 FR 72607), 

Jefferson County’s SIP revisions IBR the 

federal revised ‘‘reasonable possibility’’ 

provisions at 40 CFR 52.21(r)(6). Thus, 

LMAPCD’s recordkeeping and reporting 

provisions are the same as the federal 

requirements promulgated in EPA’s 

December 21, 2007, final action. 

In addition to incorporating the 

federal PSD regulations, Jefferson 

County’s February 8, 2011, SIP revision 

includes a technical support document 

(TSD), which assesses the impact of 

adopting the 2002 NSR Reform 

provisions into Jefferson County’s PSD 

permitting program and the air quality 

impacts. As mentioned above, LMAPCD 

has a SIP-approved PSD program. 

However, due to the limited number of 

sources in Jefferson County, the 

permitting program does not assess 

many major PSD permits. In fact, in 

nearly ten years, LMAPCD has only 

analyzed two projects under PSD. Most 

sources in Jefferson County are 

permitted through LMAPCD’s minor 

source program, which allows sources 

to take emission limits to avoid PSD 

permitting. Additionally, regarding 

criteria pollutants, the TSD explains 

that sources typically subject to PSD 

permitting (i.e., point sources) have not 

been the primary driver for past or 

current nonattainment NAAQS 

designations in Jefferson County. See 

the TSD in the Docket ID No. EPA–R04– 

OAR–2011–0227. 

LMAPCD’s TSD concluded that 

adoption of the 2002 NSR Reform 

improvements would not impede the 

LMAPCD’s ability to comply with the 

NAAQS or any reasonable progress 

towards continued maintenance. After 

evaluating Jefferson County’s SIP 

revision and the TSD provided with the 

February 8, 2011, SIP revision, EPA has 

determined that the SIP revisions to 

adopt NSR Reform and reasonable 

possibility provisions are consistent 

with the requirements for the 

preparation, adoption and submittal of 

implementation plans for the federal 

PSD program at 40 CFR 52.21 and the 

2002 NSR Reform Rule. 

VI. EPA’s Action for Jefferson County’s 

Automatic Rescission Clause 

Jefferson County’s February 8, 2011, 

SIP revision adds a new section to 

Regulation 2.05, Section 2 ‘‘Effect of 

Stay, Vacatur, or Withdrawal,’’ also 

known as an automatic rescission 

clause. This clause provides that in the 

event that EPA or a federal court stays, 

vacates, or withdraws any section or 

subsection of 40 CFR 52.21, that section 

or subsection shall automatically be 

deemed stayed, vacated or withdrawn 

from Jefferson County’s SIP-approved 

PSD program at Regulation 2.05. The 

period of delay resulting from a stay 

would begin and end for purposes of 

Jefferson County’s SIP on the date 

specified by EPA in a Federal Register 

notice announcing the stay. Likewise, 

any provision that is vacated or 

withdrawn shall be null and void for 

purposes of Jefferson County’s SIP as of 

the date specified in the notice of 

vacatur or withdrawal published by 

EPA in a Federal Register notice. 

EPA has determined that Jefferson 

County’s automatic rescission clause is 

approvable. In assessing the 

approvability of this provision, EPA 

considered two key factors: (1) Whether 

the public will be given reasonable 

notice of any change to the SIP that 

occurs as a result of the automatic 

rescission clause, and (2) whether any 

future change to the SIP that occurs as 

a result of the automatic rescission 

clause would be consistent with EPA’s 

interpretation of the effect of the 

triggering EPA or federal court action 

(e.g., the extent of an administrative or 

judicial stay). These criteria are derived 

from the SIP revision procedures set 

forth in the CAA and federal 

regulations. 

Regarding public notice, CAA section 

110(l) provides that any revision to a 

SIP submitted by a state to EPA for 

approval ‘‘shall be adopted by such 

State after reasonable notice and public 

hearing.’’ In accordance with CAA 

section 110(l), the LMAPCD followed 

applicable notice-and-comment 

procedures prior to adopting the 

automatic rescission clause. Thus, the 

public is on notice that the Jefferson 

County portion of the Kentucky SIP will 

automatically update to reflect any EPA 

or federal action that stays, withdraws, 

or vacates any portion of 40 CFR 52.21. 

In addition, the automatic rescission 

clause provides that no change to the 

SIP will occur until EPA publishes a 

Federal Register notice announcing that 

a portion of 40 CFR 52.21 has been 

stayed, vacated, or withdrawn. Thus, 

the timing and extent of any future SIP 

change resulting from the automatic 

rescission clause will be clear to both 

the regulated community and the 

general public. 

EPA’s consideration of whether any 

SIP change resulting from the proposed 

automatic rescission clause would be 

consistent with EPA’s interpretation of 

the effect of the triggering action on 

federal regulations is based on 40 CFR 

51.105. Under 40 CFR 51.105, 

‘‘[r]evisions of a plan, or any portion 

thereof, will not be considered part of 

an applicable plan until such revisions 

have been approved by the 

Administrator in accordance with this 

part.’’ See 40 CFR 51.105. While EPA is 

approving the automatic updating of the 

Jefferson County portion of the 

Kentucky SIP to reflect the stay, 

withdrawal or vacatur of any section or 

subsection of 40 CFR 52.21, there could 

be varying interpretations of the timing 

and extent of changes to 40 CFR 52.21 

resulting from a given EPA or federal 

court action. By tying the automatic 

updating of the SIP to EPA’s publication 

of a Federal Register notice announcing 

the change to 40 CFR 52.21, the 

automatic rescission clause ensures that 

any change to the SIP will be consistent 

with EPA’s interpretation of the 

triggering action. 

VII. Final Action 

Pursuant to section 110 of the CAA, 

EPA is taking final action to approve 

Jefferson County’s June 1, 2009, and 

February 8, 2011, SIP revisions which 

IBR (into the Jefferson County portion of 

the Kentucky SIP) federal requirements 

for NSR PSD permitting. Jefferson 

County’s SIP revisions consist of 

changes to the LMAPCD Air Quality 

Regulation 2.05—Prevention of 

Significant Deterioration of Air Quality 

and address several NSR PSD permitting 

requirements promulgated at 40 CFR 

52.21. Specifically, Jefferson County’s 

June 1, 2009, SIP revision adopts federal 

regulations relating to PSD requirements 

for the NSR PM2.5 Rule, the Phase II 

Rule, the 2002 NSR Reform Rule, and 

the NSR Reasonable Possibility Rule 

into the Jefferson County portion of the 

Kentucky SIP. Jefferson County’s 

February 8, 2011, SIP revision includes 

all of the aforementioned updates to 


wreier-aviles on DSK5TPTVN1PROD with RULES
62154 Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 198 / Friday, October 12, 2012 / Rules and Regulations 

LMAPCD’s PSD regulations but also 

provides Jefferson County with the 

authority to regulate GHG emissions 

under its PSD program, establishes 

appropriate emissions thresholds for 

determining PSD applicability with 

respect to new and modified GHGemitting sources (in accordance with 

EPA’s Tailoring Rule), and incorporates 

an automatic rescission clause for 40 

CFR 52.21 regulations. EPA has 

determined that these SIP revisions are 

approvable because they are consistent 

with the CAA and EPA regulations 

regarding PSD permitting. In addition, 

EPA is rescinding the FIP promulgated 

on January 14, 2011, at 40 CFR 

52.37(b)(7); therefore, this final rule 

removes Jefferson County from the PSD 

GHG FIP listing at 40 CFR section 52.37. 

VIII. 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 does not 

impose additional requirements beyond 

those imposed by Commonwealth 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. 

The Congressional Review Act, 5 

U.S.C. 801 et seq., as added by the Small 

Business Regulatory Enforcement 

Fairness Act of 1996, generally provides 

that before a rule may take effect, the 

agency promulgating the rule must 

submit a rule report, which includes a 

copy of the rule, to each House of the 

Congress and to the Comptroller General 

of the United States. EPA will submit a 

report containing this action and other 

required information to the U.S. Senate, 

the U.S. House of Representatives, and 

the Comptroller General of the United 

States prior to publication of the rule in 

the Federal Register. A major rule 

cannot take effect until 60 days after it 

is published in the Federal Register. 

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 December 11, 2012. 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, Greenhouse gases, 

Incorporation by reference, 

Intergovernmental relations, Particulate 

matter, Nitrogen Oxides, Reporting and 

recordkeeping requirements and 

Volatile organic compounds. 

Dated: September 12, 2012. 

A. Stanley Meiburg, 

Acting Regional Administrator, Region 4. 

40 CFR part 52 is amended as follows: 

PART 52—[AMENDED] 

■ 1. The authority citation for part 52 

continues to read as follows: 

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

Subpart A—General Provisions 

§ 52.37 [Amended] 

■ 2. Section 52.37 is amended by 

removing and reserving paragraph 

(b)(7). 

Subpart S—Kentucky 

■ 3. Section 52.920(c) Table 2 is revised 

to read as follows: 

§ 52.920 Identification of plan. 

* * * * * 

(c) * * * 

TABLE 2—EPA-APPROVED JEFFERSON COUNTY REGULATIONS FOR KENTUCKY

Reg Title/subject EPA approval 

date 

Federal 

Register 

notice 

District 

effective date Explanation 

Reg 1—General Provisions 

1.01 .............. General Application of Regulations 

and Standards.

10/23/01 66 FR 53660 03/17/99 

1.02 .............. Definitions .......................................... 11/19/02 67 FR 69688 12/19/01 

1.03 .............. Abbreviations and Acronyms ............. 11/19/02 67 FR 69688 05/15/02 

1.04 .............. Performance Tests ............................ 10/23/01 66 FR 53660 11/19/97 

1.05 .............. Compliance with Emission Standards 

and Maintenance Requirements.

10/23/01 66 FR 53660 11/18/92 


wreier-aviles on DSK5TPTVN1PROD with RULES
Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 198 / Friday, October 12, 2012 / Rules and Regulations 62155 

TABLE 2—EPA-APPROVED JEFFERSON COUNTY REGULATIONS FOR KENTUCKY—Continued 

Reg Title/subject EPA approval 

date 

Federal 

Register 

notice 

District 

effective date Explanation 

1.06 .............. Source Self-Monitoring and Reporting.10/23/01 66 FR 53660 12/15/93 

1.07 .............. Emissions During Startups, Shutdowns, Malfunctions and Emergencies.10/23/01 66 FR 53660 01/17/96 

1.08 .............. Administrative Procedures ................. 11/03/03 68 FR 62236 06/19/02 

1.09 .............. Prohibition of Air Pollution ................. 10/23/01 66 FR 53660 11/16/83 

1.10 .............. Circumvention .................................... 10/23/01 66 FR 53660 04/19/72 

1.11 .............. Control of Open Burning ................... 10/23/01 66 FR 53660 02/22/90 

1.14 .............. Control of Fugitive Particulate Emissions.10/23/01 66 FR 53660 01/20/88 

1.18 .............. Rule Effectiveness ............................. 10/23/01 66 FR 53689 09/21/94 

1.19 .............. Administrative Hearings ..................... 11/19/02 67 FR 69688 05/15/02 

Reg 2—Permit Requirements 

2.01 .............. General Application ........................... 10/23/01 66 FR 53660 04/21/82 

2.02 .............. Air Pollution Regulation Requirements and Exemptions.10/23/01 66 FR 53660 06/21/95 

2.03 .............. Permit Requirements—Non-Title V 

Construction and Operating Permits and Demolition/Renovation 

Permits.

10/23/01 66 FR 53660 12/15/93 

2.04 .............. Construction or Modification of Major 

Sources in or Impacting Upon 

Non-Attainment Areas (Emission 

Offset Requirements).

10/23/01 66 FR 53660 03/17/93 

2.05 .............. Prevention of Significant Deterioration of Air Quality.10/12/12 [Insert citation 

of publication] 

11/17/10 This approval does not include Jefferson County’s revisions to incorporate by reference the Ethanol 

Rule (72 FR 24060, May 1, 2007), 

Fugitives Emissions Rule (73 FR 

77882, December 19, 2008), the 

PM10 Grandfathering Provision and 

the term ‘‘particulate matter emissions’’ (at 40 CFR 52.21(i)(1)(xi) 

and 51.166(b)(49)(vi) respectively 

in the NSR PM2.5 Rule (73 FR 

28321, May 16, 2008). 

2.06 .............. Permit Requirements—Other 

Sources.

10/23/01 66 FR 53660 11/16/83 

2.07 .............. Public Notification for Title V, PSD, 

and Offset Permits; SIP Revisions; 

and Use of Emission Reduction 

Credits.

10/23/01 66 FR 53660 06/21/95 

2.09 .............. Causes for Permit Suspension .......... 11/03/03 68 FR 62236 06/19/02 

2.10 .............. Stack Height Considerations ............. 10/23/01 66 FR 53660 07/19/89 

2.11 .............. Air Quality Model Usage ................... 10/23/01 66 FR 53660 05/19/99 

2.17 .............. Federally Enforceable District Origin 

Operating Permits.

11/03/03 68 FR 62236 06/19/02 

Reg 3—Ambient Air Quality Standards 

3.01 .............. Purpose of Standards and Expression of Non-Degradation Intention.10/23/01 66 FR 53660 06/13/79 

3.02 .............. Applicability of Ambient Air Quality 

Standards.

10/23/01 66 FR 53660 06/13/79 

3.03 .............. Definitions .......................................... 10/23/01 66 FR 53660 06/13/79 

3.04 .............. Ambient Air Quality Standards .......... 10/23/01 66 FR 53660 04/20/88 

3.05 .............. Methods of Measurement .................. 10/23/01 66 FR 53660 04/20/88 

Reg 4—Emergency Episodes 

4.01 .............. General Provisions for Emergency 

Episodes.

10/23/01 66 FR 53660 06/13/79 

4.02 .............. Episode Criteria ................................. 10/23/01 66 FR 53660 04/20/88 

4.03 .............. General Abatement Requirements .... 10/23/01 66 FR 53660 02/16/83 

4.04 .............. Particulate and Sulfur Dioxide Reduction Requirements.10/23/01 66 FR 53660 04/19/72 


wreier-aviles on DSK5TPTVN1PROD with RULES
62156 Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 198 / Friday, October 12, 2012 / Rules and Regulations 

TABLE 2—EPA-APPROVED JEFFERSON COUNTY REGULATIONS FOR KENTUCKY—Continued 

Reg Title/subject EPA approval 

date 

Federal 

Register 

notice 

District 

effective date Explanation 

4.05 .............. Hydrocarbon and Nitrogen Oxides 

Reduction Requirements.

10/23/01 66 FR 53660 02/16/83 

4.06 .............. Carbon Monoxide Reduction Requirements.10/23/01 66 FR 53660 02/16/83 

4.07 .............. Episode Reporting Requirements ..... 10/23/01 66 FR 53660 06/13/79 

Reg 6—Standards of Performance for Existing Affected Facilities 

6.01 .............. General Provisions ............................ 10/23/01 66 FR 53660 11/16/83 

6.02 .............. Emission Monitoring for Existing 

Sources.

10/23/01 66 FR 53660 11/16/83 

6.07 .............. Standards of Performance for Existing Indirect Heat Exchangers.10/23/01 66 FR 53660 06/13/79 

6.08 .............. Standard of Performance for Existing 

Incinerators.

10/23/01 66 FR 53660 06/13/79 

6.09 .............. Standards of Performance for Existing Process Operations.10/23/01 66 FR 53660 03/17/99 

6.10 .............. Standard of Performance for Existing 

Process Gas Streams.

10/23/01 66 FR 53660 11/16/83 

6.12 .............. Standard of Performance for Existing 

Asphalt Paving Operations.

10/23/01 66 FR 53661 05/15/91 

6.13 .............. Standard of Performance for Existing 

Storage Vessels for Volatile Organic Compounds.

10/23/01 66 FR 53661 05/15/91 

6.14 .............. Standard of Performance for Selected Existing Petroleum Refining 

Processes and Equipment.

10/23/01 66 FR 53661 04/21/82 

6.15 .............. Standard of Performance for Gasoline Transfer to Existing Service 

Station Storage Tanks (Stage I 

Vapor Recovery).

01/25/80 45 FR 6092 06/13/79 

6.16 .............. Standard of Performance for Existing 

Large Appliance Surface Coating 

Operations.

10/23/01 66 FR 53661 05/15/91 

6.17 .............. Standard of Performance for Existing 

Automobile and Truck Surface 

Coating Operations.

10/23/01 66 FR 53661 11/18/92 

6.18 .............. Standards of Performance for Existing Solvent Metal Cleaning Equipment.11/19/02 67 FR 69688 05/15/02 

6.19 .............. Standard of Performance for Existing 

Metal Furniture Surface Coating 

Operations.

10/23/01 66 FR 53661 05/15/91 

6.20 .............. Standard of Performance for Existing 

Bulk Gasoline Plants.

10/23/01 66 FR 53661 11/16/83 

6.21 .............. Standard of Performance for Existing 

Gasoline Loading Facilities at Bulk 

Terminals.

10/23/01 66 FR 53661 11/16/83 

6.22 .............. Standard of Performance for Existing 

Volatile Organic Materials Loading 

Facilities.

10/23/01 66 FR 53661 03/17/93 

6.24 .............. Standard of Performance for Existing 

Sources Using Organic Materials.

10/23/01 66 FR 53661 03/17/93 

6.26 .............. Standards of Performance for Existing Volatile Organic Compound 

Water Separators.

10/23/01 66 FR 53661 06/13/79 

6.27 .............. Standards of Performance for Existing Liquid Waste Incinerators.10/23/01 66 FR 53661 06/13/79 

6.28 .............. Standard of Performance for Existing 

Hot Air Aluminum Atomization 

Processes.

10/23/01 66 FR 53661 03/18/81 

6.29 .............. Standard of Performance for Existing 

Graphic Arts Facilities Using Rotogravure and Flexography.

10/23/01 66 FR 53661 05/15/91 

6.30 .............. Standard of Performance for Existing 

Factory Surface Coating Operations of Flat Wood Paneling.

10/23/01 66 FR 53661 05/15/91 


wreier-aviles on DSK5TPTVN1PROD with RULES
Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 198 / Friday, October 12, 2012 / Rules and Regulations 62157 

TABLE 2—EPA-APPROVED JEFFERSON COUNTY REGULATIONS FOR KENTUCKY—Continued 

Reg Title/subject EPA approval 

date 

Federal 

Register 

notice 

District 

effective date Explanation 

6.31 .............. Standard of Performance for Existing 

Miscellaneous Metal Parts and 

Products Surface-Coating Operations.

10/23/01 66 FR 53661 04/23/96 

6.32 .............. Standard of Performance for Leaks 

from Existing Petroleum Refinery 

Equipment.

10/23/01 66 FR 53661 05/15/91 

6.33 .............. Standard of Performance for Existing 

Synthesized Pharmaceutical Product Manufacturing Operations.

10/23/01 66 FR 53661 05/15/91 

6.34 .............. Standard of Performance for Existing 

Pneumatic Rubber Tire Manufacturing Plants.

10/23/01 66 FR 53661 05/15/91 

6.35 .............. Standard of Performance for Existing 

Fabric, Vinyl and Paper Surface 

Coating Operations.

10/23/01 66 FR 53661 05/15/91 

6.38 .............. Standard of Performance for Existing 

Air Oxidation Processes in Synthetic Organic Chemical Manufacturing Industries.

10/23/01 66 FR 53661 12/17/86 

6.39 .............. Standard of Performance for Equipment Leaks of Volatile Organic 

Compounds in Existing Synthetic 

Organic Chemical and Polymer 

Manufacturing Plants.

10/23/01 66 FR 53661 07/17/96 

6.40 .............. Standards of Performance for Gasoline Transfer to Motor Vehicles 

(Stage II Vapor Recovery and 

Control).

10/23/01 66 FR 53661 08/18/93 

6.42 .............. Reasonably Available Control Technology Requirements for Major 

Volatile Organic Compound- and 

Nitrogen Oxides-Emitting Facilities.

10/23/01 66 FR 53661 03/17/99 

6.43 .............. Volatile Organic Compound Reduction Requirements.10/23/01 66 FR 53689 05/21/97 

6.45 .............. Standards of Performance for Existing Solid Waste Landfills.10/23/01 66 FR 53689 02/02/94 

6.44 .............. Standards of Performance for Existing Commercial Motor Vehicle and 

Mobile Equipment Refinishing Operations.

10/23/01 66 FR 53661 09/20/95 

6.46 .............. Standards of Performance for Existing Ferroalloy and Calcium Carbide Production Facilities.10/23/01 66 FR 53661 12/21/94 

6.48 .............. Standard of Performance for Existing 

Bakery Oven Operations.

10/23/01 66 FR 53661 07/19/95 

6.49 .............. Standards of Performance for Reactor Processes and Distillation Operations Processes in the Synthetic Organic Chemical Manufacturing Industry.10/23/01 66 FR 53664 06/20/01 

6.50 .............. NOX Requirements for Portland Cement Kilns.11/19/02 67 FR 69688 03/20/02 

Reg 7—Standards of Performance for New Affected Facilities 

7.01 .............. General Provisions ............................ 10/23/01 66 FR 53661 05/17/00 

7.06 .............. Standards of Performance for New 

Indirect Heat Exchangers.

10/23/01 66 FR 53661 04/21/82 

7.07 .............. Standard of Performance for New Incinerators.10/23/01 66 FR 53661 09/15/93 

7.08 .............. Standards of Performance for New 

Process Operations.

10/23/01 66 FR 53661 03/17/99 

7.09 .............. Standards of Performance for New 

Process Gas Streams.

10/23/01 66 FR 53661 06/18/97 

7.11 .............. Standard of Performance for New 

Asphalt Paving Operations.

10/23/01 66 FR 53661 05/15/91 

7.12 .............. Standard of Performance for New 

Storage Vessels for Volatile Organic Compounds.

10/23/01 66 FR 53661 05/15/91 


wreier-aviles on DSK5TPTVN1PROD with RULES
62158 Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 198 / Friday, October 12, 2012 / Rules and Regulations 

TABLE 2—EPA-APPROVED JEFFERSON COUNTY REGULATIONS FOR KENTUCKY—Continued 

Reg Title/subject EPA approval 

date 

Federal 

Register 

notice 

District 

effective date Explanation 

7.14 .............. Standard of Performance for Selected New Petroleum Refining 

Processes and Equipment.

10/23/01 66 FR 53661 06/13/79 

7.15 .............. Standards of Performance for Gasoline Transfer to New Service Station Storage Tanks (Stage I Vapor 

Recovery).

10/23/01 66 FR 53662 04/20/88 

7.18 .............. Standards of Performance for New 

Solvent Metal Cleaning Equipment.

10/23/01 66 FR 53662 05/15/91 

7.20 .............. Standard of Performance for New 

Gasoline Loading Facilities at Bulk 

Plants.

10/23/01 66 FR 53662 11/16/83 

7.22 .............. Standard of Performance for New 

Volatile Organic Materials Loading 

Facilities.

10/23/01 66 FR 53662 03/17/93 

7.25 .............. Standard of Performance for New 

Sources Using Volatile Organic 

Compounds.

10/23/01 66 FR 53662 03/17/93 

7.34 .............. Standard of Performance for New 

Sulfite Pulp Mills.

10/23/01 66 FR 53662 06/13/79 

7.35 .............. Standard of Performance for New 

Ethylene Producing Plants.

10/23/01 66 FR 53662 06/13/79 

7.36 .............. Standard of Performance for New 

Volatile Organic Compound Water 

Separators.

10/23/01 66 FR 53662 06/13/79 

7.51 .............. Standard of Performance for New 

Liquid Waste Incinerators.

10/23/01 66 FR 53662 01/20/88 

7.52 .............. Standard of Performance for New 

Fabric, Vinyl, and Paper Surface 

Coating Operations.

10/23/01 66 FR 53662 05/15/91 

7.55 .............. Standard of Performance for New Insulation of Magnet Wire.10/23/01 66 FR 53662 03/17/93 

7.56 .............. Standard of Performance for Leaks 

from New Petroleum Refinery 

Equipment.

10/23/01 66 FR 53662 05/15/91 

7.57 .............. Standard of Performance for New 

Graphic Arts Facilities Using Rotogravure and Flexography.

10/23/01 66 FR 53662 05/15/91 

7.58 .............. Standard of Performance for New 

Factory Surface Coating Operations of Flat Wood Paneling.

10/23/01 66 FR 53662 05/15/91 

7.59 .............. Standard of Performance for New 

Miscellaneous Metal Parts and 

Products Surface Coating Operations.

10/23/01 66 FR 53662 04/23/96 

7.60 .............. Standard of Performance for New 

Synthesized Pharmaceutical Product Manufacturing Operations.

10/23/01 66 FR 53662 05/15/91 

7.77 .............. Standards of Performance for New 

Blast Furnace Casthouses.

10/23/01 66 FR 53662 10/20/93 

7.79 .............. Standards of Performance for New 

Commercial Motor Vehicles and 

Mobile Equipment Refinishing Operations.

10/23/01 66 FR 53690 02/02/94 

7.81 .............. Standard of Performance for New or 

Modified Bakery Oven Operations.

10/23/01 66 FR 53662 05/17/00 

Reg 8—Mobile Source Emissions Control 

* * * * * 

[FR Doc. 2012–24096 Filed 10–11–12; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 6560–50–P 


wreier-aviles on DSK5TPTVN1PROD with RULES