Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 246 / Monday, December 23, 2024 / Proposed Rules 104481 

(65 FR 67249, November 9, 2000). This 

action will neither impose substantial 

direct compliance costs on federally 

recognized Tribal governments, nor 

preempt Tribal law. This action will not 

impose substantial direct compliance 

costs on federally recognized Tribal 

governments because no actions will be 

required of Tribal governments. This 

action will also not preempt Tribal law 

as it does not have applicable or related 

Tribal laws. 

G. Executive Order: 13045 Protection of 

Children From Environmental Health & 

Safety Risks 

The EPA interprets E.O. 13045 as 

applying only to those regulatory 

actions that concern environmental 

health or safety risks that the EPA has 

reason to believe may 

disproportionately affect children, per 

the definition of ‘‘covered regulatory 

action’’ in section 2–202 of the 

Executive Order. Therefore, this action 

is not subject to Executive Order 13045 

because it merely proposes to 

disapprove SIP revisions. Furthermore, 

the EPA’s Policy on Children’s Health 

does not apply to this action. 

H. Executive Order 13211: Actions That 

Significantly Affect Energy Supply, 

Distribution or Use 

This action is not subject to E.O. 

13211 (66 FR 28355, May 22, 2001), 

because it is not a significant regulatory 

action under E.O. 12866. 

I. National Technology Transfer and 

Advancement Act (NTTAA) 

Section 12(d) of the NTTAA directs 

the EPA to use voluntary consensus 

standards in its regulatory activities 

unless to do so would be inconsistent 

with applicable law or otherwise 

impractical. This action is not subject to 

the requirements of section 12(d) of the 

NTTAA (15 U.S.C. 272 note) because 

application of those requirements would 

be inconsistent with the CAA. 

J. Executive Order 12898: Federal 

Actions To Address Environmental 

Justice in Minority Populations and 

Low-Income Populations and Executive 

Order 14096: Revitalizing Our Nation’s 

Commitment to Environmental Justice 

for All 

Executive Order 12898 (Federal 

Actions to Address Environmental 

Justice in Minority Populations and 

Low-Income Populations, 59 FR 7629, 

February 16, 1994) directs Federal 

agencies to identify and address 

‘‘disproportionately high and adverse 

human health or environmental effects’’ 

of their actions on minority populations 

and low-income populations to the 

greatest extent practicable and 

permitted by law. EPA defines 

environmental justice (EJ) as ‘‘the fair 

treatment and meaningful involvement 

of all people regardless of race, color, 

national origin, or income with respect 

to the development, implementation, 

and enforcement of environmental laws, 

regulations, and policies.’’ EPA further 

defines the term fair treatment to mean 

that ‘‘no group of people should bear a 

disproportionate burden of 

environmental harms and risks, 

including those resulting from the 

negative environmental consequences of 

industrial, governmental, and 

commercial operations or programs and 

policies.’’ 

The air agency did not evaluate EJ 

considerations as part of the SIP 

submittals addressed in this proposed 

action; the CAA and applicable 

implementing regulations neither 

prohibit nor require such evaluation. 

The EPA did not perform an EJ analysis, 

as is described earlier in section IV 

titled, ‘‘Environmental Justice 

Considerations’’ of this document. In 

addition, there is no information in the 

record upon which this decision is 

based inconsistent with the stated goals 

of E.O.s 12898 or 14096. 

List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52 

Environmental protection, Air 

pollution control, Incorporation by 

reference, Intergovernmental relations, 

Nitrogen dioxide, Ozone, Reporting and 

recordkeeping requirements, Volatile 

organic compounds. 

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

Dated: December 12, 2024. 

Earthea Nance, 

Regional Administrator, Region 6. 

[FR Doc. 2024–29971 Filed 12–20–24; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 6560–50–P 

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION 

AGENCY 

40 CFR Parts 61 and 63 

[EPA–R06–OAR–2020–0086; FRL–12482– 

01–R6] 

National Emission Standards for 

Hazardous Air Pollutants; Delegation 

of Authority to Oklahoma 

AGENCY: Environmental Protection 

Agency (EPA). 

ACTION: Proposed rule. 

SUMMARY: The Oklahoma Department of 

Environmental Quality (ODEQ) has 

submitted updated regulations for 

receiving delegation and approval of its 

program for the implementation and 

enforcement of certain National 

Emission Standards for Hazardous Air 

Pollutants (NESHAP) for all sources as 

provided for under previously approved 

delegation mechanisms. The updated 

State regulations incorporate by 

reference certain NESHAP promulgated 

by the Environmental Protection Agency 

(EPA) as they existed through June 30, 

2022. The EPA is proposing to approve 

ODEQ’s requested delegation update. 

The proposed delegation of authority 

under this action applies to sources 

located in certain areas of Indian 

country as discussed herein. 

DATES: Written comments must be 

received on or before January 22, 2025. 

ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, 

identified by Docket No. EPA–R06– 

OAR–2020–0086, at https://

www.regulations.gov or via email to 

barrett.richard@epa.gov. Follow the 

online instructions for submitting 

comments. Once submitted, comments 

cannot be edited or removed from 

Regulations.gov. The EPA may publish 

any comment received to its public 

docket. Do not submit electronically any 

information you consider to be 

Confidential Business Information (CBI) 

or other information whose disclosure is 

restricted by statute. Multimedia 

submissions (audio, video, etc.) must be 

accompanied by a written comment. 

The written comment is considered the 

official comment and should include 

discussion of all points you wish to 

make. The EPA will generally not 

consider comments or comment 

contents located outside of the primary 

submission (i.e., on the web, cloud, or 

other file sharing system). For 

additional submission methods, please 

contact Rick Barrett, 214–665–7227, 

barrett.richard@epa.gov. For the full 

EPA public comment policy, 

information about CBI or multimedia 

submissions, and general guidance on 

making effective comments, please visit 

https://www.epa.gov/dockets/ 

commenting-epa-dockets. 

Docket: The index to the docket for 

this action is available electronically at 

www.regulations.gov. While all 

documents in the docket are listed in 

the index, some information may not be 

publicly available due to docket file size 

restrictions or content (e.g., CBI). 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Rick 

Barrett, EPA Region 6 Office, Air 

Permits Section (ARPE), 214–665–7227, 

barrett.richard@epa.gov. We encourage 

the public to submit comments via 

https://www.regulations.gov. Please call 

or email the contact listed above if you 

need alternative access to material 

indexed but not provided in the docket. 


khammond on DSK9W7S144PROD with PROPOSALS
104482 Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 246 / Monday, December 23, 2024 / Proposed Rules 

1Some NESHAP standards do not require a 

source to obtain a Title V permit (e.g., certain area 

sources that are exempt from the requirement to 

obtain a Title V permit). For these non-Title V 

sources, the EPA believes that the State must assure 

the EPA that it can implement and enforce the 

NESHAP for such sources. See 65 FR 55810, 55813 

(September 14, 2000). The EPA previously 

approved Oklahoma’s program to implement and 

enforce the NESHAP as they apply to non-part 70 

sources. See 66 FR 1584 (January 9, 2001). 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

Throughout this document wherever 

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

the EPA. 

Table of Contents 

I. What does this action do? 

II. What is the authority for delegation? 

III. What criteria must Oklahoma’s program 

meet to be approved? 

IV. How did ODEQ meet the NESHAP 

program approval criteria? 

V. What is being delegated? 

VI. What is not being delegated? 

VII. How will statutory and regulatory 

interpretations be made? 

VIII. What authority does the EPA have? 

IX. What information must ODEQ provide to 

the EPA? 

X. What is the EPA’s oversight role? 

XI. Should sources submit notices to the EPA 

or ODEQ? 

XII. How will unchanged authorities be 

delegated to ODEQ in the future? 

XIII. Impact on Areas of Indian Country 

XIV. Proposed Action 

XV. Environmental Justice Considerations 

XVI. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews 

I. What does this action do? 

The EPA is proposing to approve the 

delegation of the implementation and 

enforcement of certain NESHAP to 

ODEQ. If finalized, the delegation will 

provide ODEQ with the primary 

responsibility to implement and enforce 

the delegated standards. 

II. What is the authority for delegation? 

Section 112(l) of the Clean Air Act 

(CAA), and 40 CFR part 63, subpart E, 

authorize the EPA to delegate authority 

to any State or local agency which 

submits adequate regulatory procedures 

for implementation and enforcement of 

emission standards for hazardous air 

pollutants. The hazardous air pollutant 

standards are codified at 40 CFR parts 

61 and 63. 

III. What criteria must Oklahoma’s 

program meet to be approved? 

Section 112(l)(5) of the CAA requires 

the EPA to disapprove any program 

submitted by a State for the delegation 

of NESHAP standards if the EPA 

determines that: 

(A) the authorities contained in the 

program are not adequate to assure 

compliance by the sources within the 

State with respect to each applicable 

standard, regulation, or requirement 

established under section 112; 

(B) adequate authority does not exist, 

or adequate resources are not available, 

to implement the program; 

(C) the schedule for implementing the 

program and assuring compliance by 

affected sources is not sufficiently 

expeditious; or 

(D) the program is otherwise not in 

compliance with the guidance issued by 

the EPA under section 112(l)(2) or is not 

likely to satisfy, in whole or in part, the 

objectives of the CAA. 

In carrying out its responsibilities 

under section 112(l), the EPA 

promulgated regulations at 40 CFR part 

63, subpart E setting forth criteria for the 

approval of submitted programs. For 

example, in order to obtain approval of 

a program to implement and enforce 

Federal section 112 rules as 

promulgated without changes (straight 

delegation) for part 70 sources, a State 

must demonstrate that it meets the 

criteria of 40 CFR 63.91(d). 40 CFR 

63.91(d)(3) provides that interim or final 

Title V program approval will satisfy the 

criteria of 40 CFR 63.91(d).1 The 

NESHAP delegation for Oklahoma, as it 

applies to both part 70 and non-part 70 

sources, was most recently approved on 

October 22, 2018 (83 FR 53183). 

IV. How did ODEQ meet the NESHAP 

program approval criteria? 

As to the NESHAP standards in 40 

CFR parts 61 and 63, as part of its Title 

V submission ODEQ stated that it 

intended to use the mechanism of 

incorporation by reference to adopt 

unchanged Federal section 112 

standards into its regulations. This 

commitment applied to both existing 

and future standards as they applied to 

part 70 sources. The EPA’s final interim 

approval of Oklahoma’s Title V 

operating permits program delegated the 

authority to implement certain 

NESHAP, effective March 6, 1996 (61 

FR 4220, February 5, 1996). On 

December 5, 2001, the EPA promulgated 

full approval of the State’s operating 

permits program, effective November 

30, 2001 (66 FR 63170). These interim 

and final Title V program approvals 

satisfy the up-front approval criteria of 

40 CFR 63.91(d). Under 40 CFR 

63.91(d)(2), once a State has satisfied 

up-front approval criteria, it needs only 

to reference the previous demonstration 

and reaffirm that it still meets the 

criteria for any subsequent submittals of 

the section 112 standards. ODEQ has 

affirmed that it still meets the up-front 

approval criteria. With respect to nonpart 70 sources, the EPA has previously 

approved delegation of NESHAP 

authorities to ODEQ after finding 

adequate authorities to implement and 

enforce the NESHAP for such sources. 

See 66 FR 1584 (January 9, 2001). 

V. What is being delegated? 

By letter dated December 2, 2021, 

ODEQ requested the EPA to update its 

existing NESHAP delegation. With 

certain exceptions noted in section VI of 

this document, Oklahoma’s request 

included NESHAPs in 40 CFR parts 61 

and 63. ODEQ’s request included newly 

incorporated NESHAPs promulgated by 

the EPA and amendments to existing 

standards currently delegated, as 

amended between June 30, 2019, and 

June 30, 2020, as adopted by the State. 

By letter dated October 17, 2022, the 

EPA received a request from ODEQ to 

update its existing NESHAP delegation. 

With certain exceptions noted in section 

VI of this document, ODEQ’s request 

includes certain NESHAP in 40 CFR 

parts 61 and 63. ODEQ’s request 

included newly incorporated NESHAPs 

promulgated by the EPA and 

amendments to existing standards 

currently delegated, as amended 

between June 30, 2020, and June 30, 

2021, as adopted by the State. 

More recently, by letter dated 

November 30, 2023, the EPA received a 

request from ODEQ to update its 

existing NESHAP delegation. With 

certain exceptions noted in section VI of 

this document, ODEQ’s request includes 

certain NESHAP in 40 CFR parts 61 and 

63. ODEQ’s request included newly 

incorporated NESHAPs promulgated by 

the EPA and amendments to existing 

standards currently delegated, as 

amended between June 30, 2021, and 

June 30, 2022, as adopted by the State. 

VI. What is not being delegated? 

All authorities not affirmatively and 

expressly proposed for delegation by 

this action will not be delegated. These 

include the following parts 61 and 63 

authorities listed below: 

• 40 CFR part 61, subpart B (National 

Emission Standards for Radon 

Emissions from Underground Uranium 

Mines); 

• 40 CFR part 61, subpart H (National 

Emission Standards for Emissions of 

Radionuclides Other Than Radon From 

Department of Energy Facilities); 

• 40 CFR part 61, subpart I (National 

Emission Standards for Radionuclide 

Emissions from Federal Facilities Other 

Than Nuclear Regulatory Commission 

Licensees and Not Covered by Subpart 

H); 

• 40 CFR part 61, subpart K (National 

Emission Standards for Radionuclide 

Emissions from Elemental Phosphorus 

Plants); 

• 40 CFR part 61, subpart Q (National 

Emission Standards for Radon 


khammond on DSK9W7S144PROD with PROPOSALS
Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 246 / Monday, December 23, 2024 / Proposed Rules 104483 

Emissions from Department of Energy 

facilities); 

• 40 CFR part 61, subpart R (National 

Emission Standards for Radon 

Emissions from Phosphogypsum 

Stacks); 

• 40 CFR part 61, subpart T (National 

Emission Standards for Radon 

Emissions from the Disposal of Uranium 

Mill Tailings); and 

• 40 CFR part 61, subpart W (National 

Emission Standards for Radon 

Emissions from Operating Mill 

Tailings). 

In addition, the EPA regulations 

provide that we cannot delegate to a 

State any of the Category II Subpart A 

authorities set forth in 40 CFR 

63.91(g)(2). These include the following 

provisions: § 63.6(g), Approval of 

Alternative Non-Opacity Standards; 

§ 63.6(h)(9), Approval of Alternative 

Opacity Standards; § 63.7(e)(2)(ii) and 

(f), Approval of Major Alternatives to 

Test Methods; § 63.8(f), Approval of 

Major Alternatives to Monitoring; and 

§ 63.10(f), Approval of Major 

Alternatives to Recordkeeping and 

Reporting. Also, certain provisions in 40 

CFR parts 61 and 63 are non-delegable 

to the states as outlined in specific 

subparts. Furthermore, no authorities 

are being proposed for delegation that 

require rulemaking in the Federal 

Register to implement, or where Federal 

overview is the only way to ensure 

national consistency in the application 

of the standards or requirements of CAA 

section 112. Finally, this action does not 

propose delegation of any authority 

under section 112(r), the accidental 

release program. 

If this action is finalized as proposed, 

all questions concerning 

implementation and enforcement of the 

excluded standards in the State of 

Oklahoma should be directed to the 

EPA Region 6 Office. 

The EPA is proposing a determination 

that the NESHAP program submitted by 

Oklahoma meets the applicable 

requirements of CAA section 112(l)(5) 

and 40 CFR part 63, subpart E. 

As more fully discussed in section 

XIII of this document, the proposed 

delegation to ODEQ to implement and 

enforce certain NESHAP extends to 

sources or activities located in certain 

areas of Indian country, as defined in 18 

U.S.C. 1151. 

VII. How will statutory and regulatory 

interpretations be made? 

If this NESHAP delegation update is 

finalized as proposed, ODEQ must 

obtain concurrence from the EPA on any 

matter involving the interpretation of 

section 112 of the CAA or 40 CFR parts 

61 and 63 to the extent that 

implementation, administration, or 

enforcement of these sections have not 

been covered by prior EPA 

determinations or guidance. 

VIII. What authority does the EPA 

have? 

We retain the right, as provided by 

CAA section 112(l)(7) and 40 CFR 

63.90(d)(2), to enforce any applicable 

emission standard or requirement under 

section 112. In addition, the EPA may 

enforce any federally approved State 

rule, requirement, or program under 40 

CFR 63.90(e) and 63.91(c)(1)(i). The EPA 

also has the authority to make certain 

decisions under the General Provisions 

(subpart A) of parts 61 and 63. We are 

proposing to delegate to the ODEQ some 

of these authorities, and retaining 

others, as explained in sections V and 

VI above. In addition, the EPA may 

review and disapprove State 

determinations and subsequently 

require corrections. See 40 CFR 

63.91(g)(1)(ii). The EPA also has the 

authority to review ODEQ’s 

implementation and enforcement of 

approved rules or programs and to 

withdraw approval if we find 

inadequate implementation or 

enforcement. See 40 CFR 63.96. 

Furthermore, we retain the authority 

in an individual emission standard that 

may not be delegated according to 

provisions of the standard. Finally, we 

retain the authorities stated in the 

original delegation agreement. See 

‘‘Provisions for the Implementation and 

Enforcement of NSPS and NESHAP in 

Oklahoma,’’ effective March 25, 1982, a 

copy of which is included in the docket 

for this action. 

A table of currently delegated 

NESHAP standards and how the 

updated NESHAP delegation would 

look if this proposal is finalized may be 

found in the Technical Support 

Document (TSD) included in the docket 

for this action. The table also shows the 

authorities that cannot be delegated to 

any State or local agency. 

IX. What information must ODEQ 

provide to the EPA? 

EPA may request at any time, and 

ODEQ must provide within 45 days, 

information to review the adequacy of 

implementation and enforcement of an 

approved rule or program, as set forth at 

40 CFR 63.96(a). In receiving delegation 

for specific General Provisions 

authorities, ODEQ may request 

delegated authority to make certain 

determinations. See 40 CFR 63.91(g)(1). 

For part 63 standards, these 

determinations include: § 63.1, 

Applicability Determinations; § 63.6(e), 

Operation and Maintenance 

Requirements—Responsibility for 

Determining Compliance; § 63.6(f), 

Compliance with Non-Opacity 

Standards—Responsibility for 

Determining Compliance; § 63.6(h), 

Compliance with Opacity and Visible 

Emissions Standards—Responsibility 

for Determining Compliance; 

§ 63.7(c)(2)(i) and (d), Approval of SiteSpecific Test Plans; § 63.7(e)(2)(i), 

Approval of Minor Alternatives to Test 

Methods; § 63.7(e)(2)(ii) and (f), 

Approval of Intermediate Alternatives to 

Test Methods; § 63.7(e)(iii), Approval of 

Shorter Sampling Times and Volumes 

When Necessitated by Process Variables 

or Other Factors; § 63.7(e)(2)(iv), (h)(2) 

and (3), Waiver of Performance Testing; 

§ 63.8(c)(1) and (e)(1), Approval of SiteSpecific Performance Evaluation 

(Monitoring) Test Plans; § 63.8(f), 

Approval of Minor Alternatives to 

Monitoring; § 63.8(f), Approval of 

Intermediate Alternatives to Monitoring; 

§§ 63.9 and 63.10, Approval of 

Adjustments to Time Periods for 

Submitting Reports; § 63.10(f), Approval 

of Minor Alternatives to Recordkeeping 

and Reporting; and § 63.7(a)(4), 

Extension of Performance Test Deadline. 

ODEQ must submit to EPA Region 6 on 

a semi-annual basis, copies of 

determinations issued under these 

authorities. See 40 CFR 63.91(g)(1)(ii). 

X. What is the EPA’s oversight role? 

The EPA must oversee ODEQ’s 

decisions to ensure the delegated 

authorities are being adequately 

implemented and enforced. We will 

integrate oversight of the delegated 

authorities into the existing mechanisms 

and resources for oversight currently in 

place. If, during oversight, we determine 

that ODEQ has made decisions that 

decrease the stringency of the delegated 

standards, then ODEQ shall be required 

to take corrective actions and the 

source(s) affected by the decisions will 

be notified, as required by 40 CFR 

63.91(b) and (g)(1)(ii). We will initiate 

withdrawal of the program or rule if the 

corrective actions taken are insufficient. 

See 51 FR 20648 (June 6, 1986). 

XI. Should sources submit notices to the 

EPA or ODEQ? 

For the delegated NESHAP standards 

and authorities covered by this 

proposed action, if finalized, sources 

would submit all of the information 

required pursuant to the general 

provisions and the relevant subpart(s) of 

the delegated NESHAP (40 CFR parts 61 

and 63) directly via electronic submittal 

to online EPA database portals that are 

specified in each rule, and also as paper 

submittals to the ODEQ at the following 

address: Oklahoma Department of 


khammond on DSK9W7S144PROD with PROPOSALS
104484 Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 246 / Monday, December 23, 2024 / Proposed Rules 

2This waiver only extends to the submission of 

copies of notifications and reports; the EPA does 

not waive the requirements in delegated standards 

that require notifications and reports be submitted 

to an electronic database (e.g., 40 CFR part 63, 

subpart HHHHHHH). 3See Hazardous Air Pollutants: Amendments to 

the Approval of State Programs and Delegation of 

Federal Authorities, Final Rule (65 FR 55810, 

September 14, 2000); and ‘‘Straight Delegation 

Issues Concerning Sections 111 and 112 

Requirements and Title V,’’ by John S. Seitz, 

Director of Air Quality Planning and Standards, 

EPA, dated December 10, 1993. 

4A copy of the Governor’s July 22, 2020, request 

can be found in the docket for this proposed 

rulemaking. 

5A copy of EPA’s October 1, 2020, approval can 

be found in the docket for this proposed 

rulemaking. In accordance with Executive Order 

13990, EPA is currently reviewing our October 1, 

2020, SAFETEA approval and is engaging in further 

consultation with Tribal governments and 

discussions with the State of Oklahoma as part of 

this review. EPA also notes that the October 1, 

2020, approval is the subject of a pending challenge 

in federal court. (Pawnee v. Regan, No. 20–9635 

(10th Cir.)). Pending completion of EPA’s review, 

EPA is proceeding with this proposed action in 

accordance with the October 1, 2020, approval. 

EPA’s final action on the NESHAP delegation 

update will address the scope of the State’s program 

with respect to Indian country, and may make any 

appropriate adjustments, based on the status of our 

review at that time. If EPA’s final action on 

Oklahoma’s NESHAP delegation update is taken 

before our review of the SAFETEA approval is 

complete, EPA may make further changes to the 

approval of Oklahoma’s NESHAP delegation to 

reflect the outcome of the SAFETEA review. 

6EPA’s prior approvals relating to Oklahoma’s 

NESHAP delegation frequently noted that the 

NESHAP delegation was not approved to apply in 

areas of Indian country located in the State. See, 

e.g., 83 FR 53183 (October 22, 2018). Such prior 

expressed limitations are superseded by the EPA’s 

approval of Oklahoma’s SAFETEA request. 

7See the United States Census Bureau’s 

QuickFacts on Oklahoma at https://

www.census.gov/quickfacts/fact/table/OK,US/ 

PST045222. 

8See the United States Census Bureau’s 

QuickFacts on Oklahoma at https://

www.census.gov/quickfacts/fact/table/OK,US/ 

PST045222. 

Environmental Quality, 707 North 

Robinson, P.O. Box 1677, Oklahoma 

City, Oklahoma 73101–1677. The ODEQ 

is the primary point of contact with 

respect to delegated NESHAP. The EPA 

Region 6 proposes to waive the 

requirement that courtesy notifications 

and reports for delegated standards be 

submitted to the EPA in addition to 

ODEQ in accordance with 40 CFR 

63.9(a)(4)(ii) and 63.10(a)(4)(ii).2 For 

those standards and authorities not 

delegated as discussed above, sources 

must continue to submit all appropriate 

information to the EPA. 

XII. How will unchanged authorities be 

delegated to ODEQ in the future? 

As stated in previous NESHAP 

delegation actions, the EPA has 

approved Oklahoma’s mechanism of 

incorporation by reference of NESHAP 

standards into ODEQ regulations, as 

they apply to both part 70 and non-part 

70 sources. See, e.g., 61 FR 4224 

(February 5, 1996) and 66 FR 1584 

(January 9, 2001). Consistent with the 

EPA regulations and guidance,3 ODEQ 

may request future updates to 

Oklahoma’s NESHAP delegation by 

submitting a letter to the EPA that 

appropriately identifies the specific 

NESHAP which have been incorporated 

by reference into State rules, reaffirms 

that it still meets up-front approval 

delegation criteria for part 70 sources, 

and demonstrates that ODEQ maintains 

adequate authorities and resources to 

implement and enforce the delegated 

NESHAP requirements for all sources. 

We will respond in writing to the 

request stating that the request for 

delegation is either approved or denied. 

A Federal Register action will be 

published to inform the public and 

affected sources of the updated 

delegation, indicate where source 

notifications and reports should be sent, 

and amend the relevant portions of the 

Code of Federal Regulations identifying 

which NESHAP standards have been 

delegated to the ODEQ. 

XIII. Impact on Areas of Indian 

Country 

Following the U.S. Supreme Court 

decision in McGirt v. Oklahoma, 140 S. 

Ct. 2452 (2020), the Governor of the 

State of Oklahoma requested approval 

under Section 10211(a) of the Safe, 

Accountable, Flexible, Efficient 

Transportation Equity Act of 2005: A 

Legacy for Users, Public Law 109–59, 

119 Stat. 1144, 1937 (August 10, 2005) 

(‘‘SAFETEA’’), to administer in certain 

areas of Indian country (as defined at 18 

U.S.C. 1151) the State’s environmental 

regulatory programs that were 

previously approved by the EPA outside 

of Indian country.4 The State’s request 

excluded certain areas of Indian country 

further described below. 

On October 1, 2020, the EPA 

approved Oklahoma’s SAFETEA request 

to administer all of the State’s EPAapproved environmental regulatory 

programs, including the delegated 

portions of the NESHAP program, in the 

requested areas of Indian country.5 As 

requested by Oklahoma, the EPA’s 

approval under SAFETEA does not 

include Indian country lands, including 

rights-of-way running through the same, 

that: (1) qualify as Indian allotments, the 

Indian titles to which have not been 

extinguished, under 18 U.S.C. 1151(c); 

(2) are held in trust by the United States 

on behalf of an individual Indian or 

Tribe; or (3) are owned in fee by a Tribe, 

if the Tribe (a) acquired that fee title to 

such land, or an area that included such 

land, in accordance with a treaty with 

the United States to which such Tribe 

was a party, and (b) never allotted the 

land to a member or citizen of the Tribe 

(collectively ‘‘excluded Indian country 

lands’’). 

The EPA’s approval under SAFETEA 

expressly provided that to the extent 

EPA’s prior approvals of Oklahoma’s 

environmental programs excluded 

Indian country, any such exclusions are 

superseded for the geographic areas of 

Indian country covered by the EPA’s 

approval of Oklahoma’s SAFETEA 

request.6 The approval also provided 

that future revisions or amendments to 

Oklahoma’s approved environmental 

regulatory programs would extend to 

the covered areas of Indian country 

(without any further need for additional 

requests under SAFETEA). 

As explained above, the EPA is 

proposing to approve an update to the 

Oklahoma NESHAP delegation. 

Consistent with the EPA’s October 1, 

2020, SAFETEA approval, if this action 

is finalized as proposed, Oklahoma’s 

delegation of the NESHAP program will 

apply to all areas of Indian country 

within the State of Oklahoma, other 

than the excluded Indian country lands. 

XIV. Proposed Action 

In this action, the EPA is proposing to 

approve an update to the Oklahoma 

NESHAP delegation that would provide 

the ODEQ with the authority to 

implement and enforce certain newly 

incorporated NESHAP promulgated by 

the EPA and amendments to existing 

standards currently delegated, as they 

existed though June 30, 2021. This 

proposed delegation to ODEQ extends to 

sources and activities located in certain 

areas of Indian country, as explained in 

section XIII above. 

XV. Environmental Justice 

Considerations 

EPA reviewed demographic data, 

which provides an assessment of 

individual demographic groups of the 

populations living within Oklahoma.7

The EPA then compared the data to the 

national average for each of the 

demographic groups.8 The results of the 

demographic analysis indicate that, for 

populations within Oklahoma, the 

percent people of color (persons who 

reported their race as a category other 

than White alone (not Hispanic or 

Latino)) is less than the national average 

(36.2 percent versus 40.7 percent). 

Within people of color, the percent of 

the population that is Black or African 

American alone is lower than the 

national average (7.8 percent versus 13.6 

percent) and the percent of the 

population that is American Indian/ 


khammond on DSK9W7S144PROD with PROPOSALS
Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 246 / Monday, December 23, 2024 / Proposed Rules 104485 

Alaska Native is significantly higher 

than the national average (9.7 percent 

versus 1.3 percent). The percent of the 

population that is two or more races is 

higher than the national averages (6.6 

percent versus 2.9 percent). The percent 

of people living below the poverty level 

in Oklahoma is higher than the national 

average (15.6 percent versus 11.6 

percent). The percent of people over 25 

with a high school diploma in 

Oklahoma is similar to the national 

average (88.7 percent versus 88.9 

percent), while the percent with a 

Bachelor’s degree or higher is below the 

national average (26.8 percent versus 

33.7 percent). 

This action proposes to approve the 

requests from the State to update its 

NESHAP delegations under section 112 

of the CAA. The authorities contained 

in the Oklahoma permitting program to 

implement and enforce Federal section 

112 rules as promulgated, without 

changes for both part 70 and non-Part 70 

sources, are adequate to assure 

compliance by sources within the State 

with respect to each applicable 

standard, regulation, or requirement 

established under section 112. EPA 

believes the human health or 

environmental risk addressed by this 

action will not have potential 

disproportionately high and adverse 

human health or environmental effects 

on minority, low-income or indigenous 

populations with environmental justice 

concerns because it is not anticipated to 

result in or contribute to emissions 

increases in Oklahoma. 

XVI. Statutory and Executive Order 

Reviews 

Under the CAA, the Administrator 

has the authority to approve section 

112(l) submissions that comply with the 

provisions of the Act and applicable 

Federal regulations. In reviewing 

section 112(l) submissions, the EPA’s 

role is to approve State choices, 

provided that they meet the criteria and 

objectives of the CAA and of the EPA’s 

implementing regulations. Accordingly, 

this proposed action would merely 

approve the State’s request as meeting 

Federal requirements and does not 

impose additional requirements beyond 

those imposed by State law. For that 

reason, this proposed action: 

• Is not a significant regulatory action 

subject to review by the Office of 

Management and Budget under 

Executive Orders 12866 (58 FR 51735, 

October 4, 1993) and 14094 (88 FR 

21879, April 11, 2023); 

• Does not impose an information 

collection burden under the provisions 

of the Paperwork Reductions 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 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 subject to Executive Order 

13045 (62 FR 19885, April 23, 1997) 

because it approves a State program; 

• Is not a significant regulatory action 

subject to Executive Order 13211 (66 FR 

28355, May 22, 2001); and 

• 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 Clean Air Act. 

This proposal to approve Oklahoma’s 

request to update the NESHAP 

delegation will apply, if finalized as 

proposed, to certain areas of Indian 

country as discussed in section XIII 

above, and therefore has Tribal 

implications as specified in Executive 

Order 13175 (65 FR 67249, November 9, 

2000). However, this action will neither 

impose substantial direct compliance 

costs on federally recognized Tribal 

governments, nor preempt Tribal law. 

This action will not impose substantial 

direct compliance costs on federally 

recognized Tribal governments because 

no actions will be required of Tribal 

governments. This action will also not 

preempt Tribal law as no Oklahoma 

tribe implements a regulatory program 

under the CAA, and thus does not have 

applicable or related Tribal laws. 

Consistent with the EPA Policy on 

Consultation and Coordination with 

Indian Tribes (May 4, 2011), on July 16, 

2021, the EPA offered consultation to all 

38 Tribal governments whose lands are 

located within the exterior boundaries 

of the State of Oklahoma. Requested 

consultation was initiated on December 

21, 2021, and concluded on January 26, 

2022. 

Executive Order 12898 (Federal 

Actions To Address Environmental 

Justice in Minority Populations and 

Low-Income Populations, 59 FR 7629, 

February 16, 1994) directs Federal 

agencies to identify and address 

‘‘disproportionately high and adverse 

human health or environmental effects’’ 

of their actions on communities with 

environmental justice (EJ) concerns to 

the greatest extent practicable and 

permitted by law. Executive Order 

14096 (Revitalizing Our Nation’s 

Commitment to Environmental Justice 

for All, 88 FR 25251, April 26, 2023) 

builds on and supplements E.O. 12898 

and defines EJ as, among other things, 

the just treatment and meaningful 

involvement of all people, regardless of 

income, race, color, national origin, or 

Tribal affiliation, or disability in agency 

decision-making and other Federal 

activities that affect human health and 

the environment.’’ 

ODEQ did not evaluate EJ 

considerations as part of its submittal; 

the CAA and applicable implementing 

regulations neither prohibit nor require 

such an evaluation. EPA performed an 

EJ analysis, as is described in this 

proposed action in the section titled, 

‘‘Environmental Justice 

Considerations.’’ The analysis was done 

for the purpose of providing additional 

context and information about this 

rulemaking to the public, not as a basis 

of the action. In addition, there is no 

information in the record upon which 

this decision is based inconsistent with 

the stated goal of E.O. 12898/14096 of 

achieving EJ for communities with EJ 

concerns. 

List of Subjects 

40 CFR Part 61 

Environmental protection, Air 

pollution control, Hazardous 

substances, Intergovernmental relations, 

Reporting and recordkeeping 

requirements, Vinyl chloride. 

40 CFR Part 63 

Environmental protection, 

Administrative practice and procedure, 

Air pollution control, Hazardous 

substances, Intergovernmental relations, 

Reporting and recordkeeping 

requirements. 

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

Dated: December 12, 2024. 

Dzung Ngo Kidd, 

Acting Director, Air and Radiation Division, 

Region 6. 

[FR Doc. 2024–30245 Filed 12–20–24; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 6560–50–P 


khammond on DSK9W7S144PROD with PROPOSALS