5790 Federal Register / Vol. 90, No. 11 / Friday, January 17, 2025 / Proposed Rules 

CFR 46.215 that would require further 

analysis under NEPA. 

Effects on the Energy Supply (E.O. 

13211) 

This proposed rule is not a significant 

energy action under the definition in 

E.O. 13211; the proposed rule is not 

likely to have a significant adverse effect 

on the supply, distribution, or use of 

energy, and the proposed rule has not 

otherwise been designated by the 

Administrator of Office of Information 

and Regulatory Affairs as a significant 

energy action. A statement of energy 

effects is not required. 

Clarity of This Rulemaking 

The NPS is required by E.O.s 12866 

(section 1(b)(12)) and 12988 (section 

3(b)(1)(B)), and 13563 (section 1(a)), and 

by the Presidential memorandum of 

June 1, 1998, to write all rules in plain 

language. This means that each rule the 

NPS publishes must: 

(a) Be logically organized; 

(b) Use the active voice to address 

readers directly; 

(c) Use common, everyday words and 

clear language rather than jargon; 

(d) Be divided into short sections and 

sentences; and 

(e) Use lists and tables wherever 

possible. 

If you feel that the NPS has not met 

these requirements, send us comments 

by one of the methods listed in the 

ADDRESSES section. To better help the 

NPS revise the rule, your comments 

should be as specific as possible. For 

example, you should identify the 

numbers of the sections or paragraphs 

that you find unclear, which sections or 

sentences are too long, the sections 

where you feel lists or tables would be 

useful, etc. 

Public Participation 

It is the policy of the Department of 

the Interior, whenever practicable, to 

afford the public an opportunity to 

participate in the rulemaking process. 

Accordingly, interested persons may 

submit written comments regarding this 

proposed rule by one of the methods 

listed in the ADDRESSES section of this 

document. 

Public Availability of Comments 

Before including your address, phone 

number, email address, or other 

personal identifying information in your 

comment, you should be aware that 

your entire comment—including your 

personal identifying information—may 

be made publicly available at any time. 

List of Subjects in 36 CFR Part 7 

National parks, Reporting and 

Recordkeeping requirements. 

For the reasons stated in the 

preamble, and under the authority of 16 

U.S.C. 363 and 54 U.S.C. 100751, the 

National Park Service proposes to 

amend 36 CFR part 7, as set forth below: 

PART 7—SPECIAL REGULATIONS, 

AREAS OF THE NATIONAL PARK 

SYSTEM 

■ 1. The authority citation for part 7 

continues to read as follows: 

Authority: 54 U.S.C. 100101, 100751, 

320102; Sec. 7.96 also issued under DC Code 

10–137 and DC Code 50–2201.07. 

■ 2. Amend § 7.65 by removing 

paragraph (b)(1)(iv) and revising 

paragraph (b)(2)(ii)(D) to read as follows: 

§ 7.65 Assateague Island National 

Seashore. 

* * * * * 

(b) * * * 

(2) * * * 

(ii) * * * 

(D) Which has more than two axles on 

vehicles and trailers towed by any 

vehicle. 

* * * * * 

Shannon Estenoz, 

Assistant Secretary for Fish and Wildlife and 

Parks. 

[FR Doc. 2025–01210 Filed 1–16–25; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 4312–52–P 

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION 

AGENCY 

40 CFR Part 52 

[EPA–R09–OAR–2024–0600; FRL–12508– 

01–R9] 

Air Plan Revisions; Arizona; Arizona 

Department of Environmental Quality 

AGENCY: Environmental Protection 

Agency (EPA). 

ACTION: Proposed rule. 

SUMMARY: The Environmental Protection 

Agency (EPA) is proposing an approval 

and a limited approval and limited 

disapproval of a State Implementation 

Plan (SIP) submission made by the State 

of Arizona to address emissions of 

particulate matter 10 micrometers in 

diameter or smaller (PM10) from 

agricultural operations. The SIP 

submission includes an amended 

statute, two definition rules, and two 

rules regulating crop and animal 

operations in Pinal County, Arizona. We 

are proposing action on local rules to 

regulate these emission sources under 

the Clean Air Act (CAA or ‘‘Act’’). We 

are taking comments on this proposal 

and plan to follow with a final action. 

DATES: Comments must be received on 

or before February 18, 2025. 

ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, 

identified by Docket ID No. EPA–R09– 

OAR–2024–0600 at https://

www.regulations.gov. For comments 

submitted at Regulations.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 one of the people identified in 

the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT

section. 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-epadockets. If you need assistance in a 

language other than English or if you are 

a person with a disability who needs a 

reasonable accommodation at no cost to 

you, please contact one of the people 

identified in the FOR FURTHER

INFORMATION CONTACT section. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: For 

general inquiries and inquiries related 

to the Arizona Administrative Code: 

Christine Vineyard, EPA Region IX, 75 

Hawthorne St., San Francisco, CA 

94105. By phone: (415) 947–4125; email 

at vineyard.christine@epa.gov. For 

inquiries related to the Arizona Revised 

Statutes: Alina Batool, EPA Region IX, 

75 Hawthorne St., San Francisco, CA 

94105. By phone (415) 972–3345; email 

at batool.alina@epa.gov. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

Throughout this document, ‘‘we,’’ ‘‘us,’’ 

and ‘‘our’’ refer to the EPA. 

Table of Contents 

I. The State’s Submittal 

A. What did the State submit? 

B. Are there other versions of the statute 

and rules? 

C. What is the purpose of the submitted 

rule and statutory revisions? 

II. The EPA’s Evaluation and Action 

A. How is the EPA evaluating the statute 

and rules? 


KHAMMOND on DSK9W7S144PROD with PROPOSALS
Federal Register / Vol. 90, No. 11 / Friday, January 17, 2025 / Proposed Rules 5791 

B. Do the statute and rules meet the 

evaluation criteria? 

C. What are the deficiencies? 

D. The EPA’s recommendations to further 

improve the statute and rules 

E. Proposed action and public comment 

III. Incorporation by Reference 

IV. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews 

I. The State’s Submittal 

A. What did the State submit? 

Table 1 lists the statute and rules 

addressed by this proposal with the 

dates that they were adopted and 

submitted to the EPA by the Arizona 

Department of Environmental Quality 

(ADEQ or ‘‘State’’). 

TABLE 1—SUBMITTED STATUTE AND RULES

Arizona revised statutes 

(ARS) Statute title Amended Submitted 

ARS section 49–457 ......... Agricultural best management practices committee; members; powers; permits; 

definitions.

03/26/2021 03/03/2023 

Arizona administrative 

code (AAC) 

AAC Title .................................................................................................................. Amended Submitted 

AAC R18–2–610 ............... Definitions for R19–2–610.01, R18–2–610.02, and R18–2–610.03 ........................ 11/26/2021 03/03/2023 

AAC R18–2–610.03 .......... Agricultural PM General Permit for Crop Operations; Pinal County PM Nonattainment Area.11/26/2021 03/03/2023 

AAC R18–2–611 ............... Definitions for R18–2–611.01, R18–2–611.02, and R18–2–611.03 ........................ 11/26/2021 03/03/2023 

AAC R18–2–611.03 .......... Agricultural PM General Permit for Animal Operations; Pinal County PM Nonattainment Area.11/26/2021 03/03/2023 

On September 3, 2023, the SIP 

submittal containing the documents 

listed in Table 1 was deemed complete 

by operation of law. 

B. Are there other versions of the statute 

and rules? 

We approved an earlier version of 

ARS 49–457 into the SIP on June 29, 

1999 (64 FR 34726). We also approved 

earlier versions of AAC R18–2–610 and 

R18–2–610.03 into the SIP on May 1, 

2017 (82 FR 20267). If we finalize this 

proposal to approve the submitted 

version of ARS 49–457 and AAC R18– 

2–610 and to issue a limited approval 

and limited disapproval of the 

submitted version of AAC R18–2– 

610.03, then these versions will replace 

the versions of this statute and these 

rules in the SIP. 

We note that on October 11, 2001, we 

approved AAC R18–2–611, 

‘‘Agricultural PM–10 General Permit; 

Maricopa PM10 Nonattainment Area’’ 

into the Arizona SIP, which applies to 

Maricopa County commercial farmers 

(crop operations). See 66 FR 51869 

(October 11, 2001). The March 3, 2023 

submittal of rule AAC R18–2–611, 

‘‘Definitions for R18–2–611.01, R18–2– 

611.02, and R18–2–611.03’’ is a separate 

rule that was not submitted to replace 

the existing SIP-approved rule AAC 

R18–2–611, ‘‘Agricultural PM–10 

General Permit; Maricopa PM10

Nonattainment Area.’’ If the EPA 

approves the new rule AAC R18–2–611, 

‘‘Definitions for R18–2–611.01, R18–2– 

611.02, and R18–2–611.03’’ into the 

Arizona SIP, there will be two different 

rules in the SIP with the same number, 

but they would be differentiated by their 

different titles and dates. 

C. What is the purpose of the submitted 

rule and statutory revisions? 

Emissions of PM, including PM10, 

contribute to effects that are harmful to 

human health and the environment, 

including premature mortality, 

aggravation of respiratory and 

cardiovascular disease, decreased lung 

function, visibility impairment, and 

damage to vegetation and ecosystems. 

The CAA requires states to have SIPs 

that provide for attainment, 

maintenance, and enforcement of the 

PM10 NAAQS, including the adoption 

and implementation of regulations to 

control PM emissions in designated 

PM10 nonattainment areas. ADEQ’s 

submission addresses emissions from 

certain sources of PM10 emissions 

through a statutory provision and 

several regulations. 

First, this submission would revise 

the existing SIP-approved version of 

ARS section 49–457 by, among other 

things, expanding the definition of 

‘‘regulated agricultural activities’’ to 

include activities of dairies, beef 

feedlots, poultry facilities, and swine 

facilities. It would also expand the 

definition of ‘‘regulated area’’ to apply 

to any PM10 nonattainment areas 

designated by the EPA on or after June 

1, 2009, which includes the West Pinal 

County PM10 nonattainment area. 

Second, this submission would revise 

existing regulations in the Arizona SIP. 

AAC R18–2–610 makes largely 

administrative updates to the existing 

crop operations definitions rule and 

adds a definition for ‘‘unpaved vehicle 

or equipment traffic area.’’ AAC R18–2– 

610.03 amends the existing crop 

operations rule applicable to the West 

Pinal County PM10 nonattainment area, 

primarily adding a requirement for 

operators to implement two, as opposed 

to one, best management practices 

(BMPs) from the list of options for 

different areas. 

Third, this submission would add a 

new regulation to the Arizona SIP. AAC 

R18–2–611.03 requires that commercial 

dairy operations, beef cattle feedlots, 

poultry facilities, and swine facilities 

implement BMPs to reduce PM10

emissions from those sources. The new 

AAC R18–2–611 provides definitions 

for AAC R18–2–611.03 and other animal 

operations BMP rules in the State. 

The EPA’s technical support 

documents (TSDs) have more 

information about the statute and rules. 

II. The EPA’s Evaluation and Action 

A. How is the EPA evaluating the statute 

and rules? 

SIP rules must meet applicable 

substantive requirements, e.g., must be 

sufficiently stringent (see CAA sections 

172(c)(1) and 189(a)(1)(C)), must be 

enforceable (see CAA section 110(a)(2)), 

must not interfere with applicable 

requirements concerning attainment and 

reasonable further progress or other 

CAA requirements (see CAA section 

110(l)). 

States must adopt and implement 

reasonably available control measures 

(RACM), including reasonably available 

control technology (RACT), in Moderate 

PM10 nonattainment areas (see CAA 

section 189(a)(1)(C)). Nonattainment 

areas that are classified as Serious must 

also demonstrate that they have 

implemented best available control 

measures (BACM). (see CAA section 

189(b)(1)(B)). In addition, each 


KHAMMOND on DSK9W7S144PROD with PROPOSALS
5792 Federal Register / Vol. 90, No. 11 / Friday, January 17, 2025 / Proposed Rules 

attainment plan must ‘‘provide for the 

implementation of all reasonably 

available control measures as 

expeditiously as practicable (including 

such reductions in emissions from 

existing sources in the area as may be 

obtained through the adoption, at a 

minimum, of reasonably available 

control technology) and shall provide 

for attainment of the national primary 

ambient air quality standards.’’ (see 

CAA section 172(c)(1)). RACM and 

BACM findings are generally made in 

the context of an overall attainment 

demonstration. Because this submission 

is not being evaluated at this time as 

part of an attainment plan submission, 

we will not evaluate these rules for 

RACM and BACM in this action and 

will instead do so as part of a future 

attainment planning action. 

Guidance and policy documents that 

we use to evaluate control rules 

submitted for PM10 nonattainment areas, 

including enforceability, revision/ 

relaxation, and rule stringency 

requirements, include the following: 

1. ‘‘State Implementation Plans; 

General Preamble for the 

Implementation of Title I of the Clean 

Air Act Amendments of 1990,’’ 57 FR 

13498 (April 16, 1992); 57 FR 18070 

(April 28, 1992). 

2. ‘‘Issues Relating to VOC Regulation 

Cutpoints, Deficiencies, and 

Deviations,’’ EPA, May 25, 1988 (the 

Bluebook, revised January 11, 1990). 

3. ‘‘Guidance Document for Correcting 

Common VOC & Other Rule 

Deficiencies,’’ EPA Region 9, August 21, 

2001 (the Little Bluebook). 

4. ‘‘State Implementation Plans for 

Serious PM–10 Nonattainment Areas, 

and Attainment Date Waivers for PM–10 

Nonattainment Areas Generally; 

Addendum to the General Preamble for 

the Implementation of Title I of the 

Clean Air Act Amendments of 1990,’’ 59 

FR 41998 (August 16, 1994). 

5. ‘‘PM–10 Guideline Document,’’ 

EPA 452/R–93–008, April 1993. 

B. Do the statute and rules meet the 

evaluation criteria? 

The EPA is proposing to conclude 

that the submitted statute, ARS § 49–457 

meets the evaluation criteria. We note 

that ARS § 49–457 is not intended to 

regulate agricultural activities in 

isolation. Although it establishes a 

number of substantive requirements (for 

example, the requirement that a person 

who commences a regulated agricultural 

activity must comply with the permit), 

it does not specify, in detail, the 

requirements for regulated entities. As a 

result, our evaluation of enforceability is 

not an evaluation of whether the statute 

in isolation establishes specific 

enforceable requirements on agricultural 

activities, but is instead an evaluation of 

whether the requirements of the statute 

are sufficiently clear and enforceable 

that, when combined with specific local 

rules implementing the statute (which 

also have been or will be submitted into 

the SIP), these rules can be enforced. We 

propose to find that the rule provisions 

regarding applicability, BMPs, 

recordkeeping, reporting and other 

requirements in the statute are clear. 

These and other provisions are 

sufficient to establish a framework 

under which, in combination with local 

rules, affected sources and regulators 

can evaluate and determine compliance 

with ARS § 49–457 consistently as 

required by CAA section 110(a). 

The EPA is proposing to conclude 

that the submitted regulations, AAC 

R18–2–610, R18–2–610.03, AAC R18–2– 

611, and R18–2–611.03 largely meet the 

evaluation criteria. The provisions of 

the rule are generally clear and mostly 

specify requirements in a manner that 

sufficiently specifies what is necessary 

in order to comply. The updated 

regulations also strengthen the SIP, 

adding additional control requirements 

for both animal and crop operations. 

Rule provisions that do not meet the 

evaluation criteria are summarized 

below and discussed further in the TSD. 

C. What are the deficiencies? 

EPA is proposing to conclude that 

R18–2–610.03 and R18–2–611.03 do not 

satisfy the requirements of section 110 

and part D of title I of the Act, because 

they are not sufficiently enforceable and 

therefore prevent full approval of the 

SIP revision. 

The crop and animal operation rules 

require operators to complete a Best 

Management Practices Program General 

Permit Record Form annually. This form 

is not submitted to the Director but must 

instead be provided to the Director 

within two business days of notice to 

the operator. The form must contain the 

name of the operator, signature, date 

signed, and the mailing or physical 

address of the operation. For animal 

operations, the form must contain a 

specification of the BMPs selected for 

each category. For crop operations the 

requirement is less clear. Paragraph C.3 

of R18–2–610.03 states that the form 

shall include ‘‘The following 

information for each best management 

practice selected for tillage, ground 

operations and harvest, cropland, 

noncropland, commercial farm roads, 

and significant earth moving activities 

(if applicable).’’ However, there is no 

list of ‘‘following information’’ so it is 

not clear what, if anything, must be 

included pursuant to this requirement. 

The rules also require operators to 

maintain records demonstrating 

compliance for three years. The records 

must include a copy of the BMP 

Program General Permit Record Form, 

but the rules do not otherwise specify 

any records that must be maintained or 

reported. Finally, the rules require 

operators to complete a survey every 

three years that includes the number of 

animals for each type of operation, the 

total miles of unpaved roads, the total 

acreage of access connections and 

equipment areas, the chosen BMPs, and, 

for some operators, whether water was 

applied on a high risk day. The survey 

is sent out by ADEQ and responses are 

submitted to the Arizona Department of 

Agriculture (ADA). The survey results 

are aggregated by the ADA and reported 

to ADEQ. The rules prohibit the report 

from including any operator’s name 

(that is, the results are anonymous). 

Under Rules R18–2–610.03 and R18– 

2–611.03, absent a specific request from 

the Director (upon which an operator 

would have two business days to 

provide records), source-specific 

compliance information is only 

obtained through the survey. This 

process is not enforceable because 

compliance information is only 

available if ADEQ sends out the survey 

and the ADA subsequently reports the 

information to ADEQ or the ADEQ 

exercises its discretion to request 

records. Further, because the report 

from ADA to ADEQ is aggregated so that 

the individual operators remain 

anonymous, it is not clear whether the 

survey results would be sufficient to 

verify or incentivize compliance. 

Moreover, because these rules require 

operators to select from a menu of 

compliance options, it is not clear how 

compliance could be determined 

without knowing the chosen 

compliance options. While it may be 

possible to verify whether a particular 

BMP is being implemented, for 

example, cessation of night tilling, 

access restrictions, reduced vehicle 

speeds, or watering, if there is no record 

of which BMPs have been selected, a 

determination of noncompliance with 

the rules would essentially require an 

exhaustive demonstration that none of 

the BMPs are being implemented. In the 

absence of the Director exercising their 

discretion to request records, it becomes 

nearly impossible to enforce the 

requirements in these rules. 

D. The EPA’s Recommendations to 

Further Improve the Statute and Rules 

The TSDs include recommendations 

for the next time the State modifies the 

statute and rules. 


KHAMMOND on DSK9W7S144PROD with PROPOSALS
Federal Register / Vol. 90, No. 11 / Friday, January 17, 2025 / Proposed Rules 5793 

E. Proposed Action and Public 

Comment 

The EPA is proposing to approve the 

statute, ARS § 49–457, and the 

definition rules, AAC R18–2–610 and 

R18–2–611. The statute sets out the 

basic framework of the statewide 

agricultural BMP program, 

strengthening the program by expanding 

its geographic scope and strengthening 

its substantive requirements, 

particularly in nonattainment areas 

classified as Serious. The crop 

operations definitions rule, AAC R18– 

2–610 updates a number of definitions, 

largely with administrative updates. The 

animal operations definitions rule, AAC 

R18–2–611 does not itself contain 

substantive requirements but lays out 

definitions to support animal operation 

BMP rules in Arizona. The statute and 

definitions rules do not contain 

deficiencies that prevent our approval, 

and we therefore propose to approve 

them as authorized in section 110(k)(3) 

of the Act. 

The EPA is also proposing a limited 

approval and limited disapproval of the 

submitted Pinal County crop operation, 

AAC R18–2–610.03, and animal 

operation, AAC R18–2–611.03, rules. 

The EPA is proposing a limited 

approval because the EPA’s analysis 

demonstrates that the rules would 

strengthen the SIP. The crop operations 

rule strengthens existing requirements, 

and the animal operations rule 

establishes new requirements for 

agricultural PM10 sources in Pinal 

County. The EPA is proposing a 

simultaneous limited disapproval for 

these rules based on the enforceability 

issues identified in section II.C. of this 

notice and described in detail in the 

rule TSD. 

If we finalize this approval and 

limited approval and limited 

disapproval as proposed, we will 

replace the existing version of ARS 

§ 49–457 and AAC R18–2–610 and AAC 

R18–2–610.03 in the SIP, as well as add 

the new AAC R18–2–611 and AAC R18– 

2–611.03 to the SIP. We will accept 

comments from the public on this 

proposal until February 18, 2025. If 

finalized, this action would incorporate 

the submitted rules into the SIP, 

including those provisions identified as 

deficient. This approval is limited 

because the EPA is simultaneously 

proposing a limited disapproval. If we 

finalize this disapproval as proposed, 

CAA section 110(c) would require the 

EPA to promulgate a federal 

implementation plan within 24 months 

unless we approve subsequent SIP 

revisions that correct the deficiencies 

identified in our final action. 

In addition, final disapproval would 

trigger the offset sanction in CAA 

section 179(b)(2) 18 months after the 

effective date of a final disapproval, and 

the highway funding sanction in CAA 

section 179(b)(1) six months after the 

offset sanction is imposed. A sanction 

would not be imposed if the EPA 

determines that a subsequent SIP 

submission corrects the deficiencies 

identified in our final action before the 

applicable deadline. The EPA intends to 

work with the State to correct the 

deficiencies in a timely manner. 

Note that the submitted rules have 

been adopted as Arizona State law, and 

the EPA’s final limited disapproval 

would not prevent the State from 

enforcing them. The limited disapproval 

also would not prevent any portion of 

the rules from being incorporated by 

reference into the federally enforceable 

SIP as discussed in a July 9, 1992 EPA 

memo found at: https://www.epa.gov/ 

sites/production/files/2015-07/ 

documents/procsip.pdf. 

III. Incorporation by Reference 

In this rule, the EPA is proposing to 

include in a final EPA rule regulatory 

text that includes incorporation by 

reference. In accordance with 

requirements of 1 CFR 51.5, the EPA is 

proposing to incorporate by reference 

ARS § 49–457, ‘‘Agricultural best 

management practices committee; 

members; powers; permits; definitions’’ 

revised on March 26, 2021, which 

establishes a framework for an 

agricultural best management practice 

permit in Arizona, and AAC R18–2–610, 

‘‘Definitions for R19–2–610.01, R18–2– 

610.02, and R18–2–610.03,’’ AAC R18– 

2–610.03, ‘‘Agricultural PM General 

Permit for Crop Operations; Pinal 

County PM Nonattainment Area,’’ AAC 

R18–2–611, ‘‘Definitions for R18–2– 

611.01, R18–2–611.02, and R18–2– 

611.03,’’ and AAC R18–2–611.03, 

‘‘Agricultural PM General Permit for 

Animal Operations; Pinal County PM 

Nonattainment Area,’’ which establish 

agricultural best management practice 

permits for crop and animal operations 

in Pinal County. The EPA has made, 

and will continue to make, these 

materials available through 

www.regulations.gov and at the EPA 

Region IX Office (please contact one of 

the people identified in the FOR FURTHER

INFORMATION CONTACT section of this 

preamble for more information). 

IV. Statutory and Executive Order 

Reviews 

Under the CAA, the Administrator is 

required to approve a SIP submission 

that complies with the provisions of the 

Act and applicable federal regulations. 

42 U.S.C. 7410(k); 40 CFR 52.02(a). 

Thus, in reviewing SIP submissions, the 

EPA’s role is to review state choices, 

and approve those choices if they meet 

the minimum criteria of the Act. 

Accordingly, this proposed action is 

proposing an approval, limited 

approval, and limited disapproval of 

state law as meeting federal 

requirements and does not impose 

additional requirements beyond those 

imposed by state law. 

Additional information about these 

statutes and Executive Orders can be 

found at https://www.epa.gov/lawsregulations/laws-and-executive-orders. 

A. Executive Order 12866: Regulatory 

Planning and Review and Executive 

Order 13563: Improving Regulation and 

Regulatory Review 

This action is not a significant 

regulatory action and was therefore not 

submitted to the Office of Management 

and Budget (OMB) for review. 

B. Paperwork Reduction Act (PRA) 

This action does not impose an 

information collection burden under the 

PRA because this action does not 

impose additional requirements beyond 

those imposed by state law. 

C. Regulatory Flexibility Act (RFA) 

I certify that this action will not have 

a significant economic impact on a 

substantial number of small entities 

under the RFA. This action will not 

impose any requirements on small 

entities beyond those imposed by state 

law. 

D. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act 

(UMRA) 

This action does not contain any 

unfunded mandate as described in 

UMRA, 2 U.S.C. 1531–1538, and does 

not significantly or uniquely affect small 

governments. This action does not 

impose additional requirements beyond 

those imposed by state law. 

Accordingly, no additional costs to 

state, local, or tribal governments, or to 

the private sector, will result from this 

action. 

E. Executive Order 13132: Federalism 

This action does not have federalism 

implications. It will not have substantial 

direct effects on the States, on the 

relationship between the national 

government and the States, or on the 

distribution of power and 

responsibilities among the various 

levels of government. 


KHAMMOND on DSK9W7S144PROD with PROPOSALS
5794 Federal Register / Vol. 90, No. 11 / Friday, January 17, 2025 / Proposed Rules 

F. Executive Order 13175: Coordination 

with Indian Tribal Governments 

This action does not have Tribal 

implications, as specified in Executive 

Order 13175, because the SIP is not 

approved to apply on any Indian 

reservation land or in any other area 

where the EPA or an Indian Tribe has 

demonstrated that a Tribe has 

jurisdiction, and will not impose 

substantial direct costs on Tribal 

governments or preempt Tribal law. 

Thus, Executive Order 13175 does not 

apply to this action. 

G. Executive Order 13045: Protection of 

Children From Environmental Health 

Risks and Safety Risks 

The EPA interprets Executive Order 

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 is merely proposing a limited 

approval and limited disapproval of 

state law as meeting federal 

requirements. 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 Executive 

Order 13211, because it is not a 

significant regulatory action under 

Executive Order 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. The EPA believes that this 

action is not subject to the requirements 

of section 12(d) of the NTTAA 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 Population 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 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 Executive 

Order 12898 and defines EJ as, among 

other things, ‘‘the just treatment and 

meaningful involvement of all people, 

regardless of income, race, color, 

national origin, Tribal affiliation, or 

disability, in agency decision-making 

and other Federal activities that affect 

human health and the environment.’’ 

The State did not evaluate EJ 

considerations as part of its SIP 

submittal; the CAA and applicable 

implementing regulations neither 

prohibit nor require such an evaluation. 

The EPA did not perform an EJ analysis 

and did not consider EJ in this action. 

Due to the nature of the action being 

taken here, this action is expected to 

have a neutral to positive impact on the 

air quality of the affected area. 

Consideration of EJ is not required as 

part of this action, and there is no 

information in the record inconsistent 

with the stated goal of Executive Orders 

12898 and 14096 of achieving EJ for 

communities with EJ concerns. 

List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52 

Environmental protection, Air 

pollution control, Incorporation by 

reference, Intergovernmental relations, 

Particulate matter, Reporting and 

recordkeeping requirements. 

Dated: January 2, 2025. 

Martha Guzman Aceves, 

Regional Administrator,Region IX. 

[FR Doc. 2025–00115 Filed 1–16–25; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 6560–50–P 

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION 

AGENCY 

40 CFR Part 60 

[EPA–HQ–OAR–2024–0358; FRL–12031–03– 

OAR] 

RIN 2060–AW35 

Reconsideration of Standards of 

Performance for New, Reconstructed, 

and Modified Sources and Emissions 

Guidelines for Existing Sources: Oil 

and Natural Gas Sector Climate 

Review; Correction 

AGENCY: Environmental Protection 

Agency (EPA). 

ACTION: Proposed rule; correction. 

SUMMARY: The Environmental Protection 

Agency (EPA) is modifying proposed 

amendments to the New Source 

Performance Standards and Emission 

Guidelines for Existing Sources for the 

Crude Oil and Natural Gas Source 

Category in response to petitions for 

reconsideration. This action corrects 

information collection estimates in the 

January 15, 2025 notice of proposed 

rulemaking. 

DATES: Comments on this proposed 

correction must be received by March 3, 

2025. 

You may send comments, identified 

by Docket ID No. EPA–HQ–OAR–2024– 

0358, by any of the following methods: 

• Federal eRulemaking Portal: 

https://www.regulations.gov (our 

preferred method). Follow the online 

instructions for submitting comments. 

• Email: a-and-r-docket@epa.gov. 

Include Docket ID No. EPA–HQ–OAR– 

2024–0358 in the subject line of the 

message. 

• Mail: U.S. Environmental 

Protection Agency, EPA Docket Center, 

Docket ID No. EPA–HQ–OAR–2024– 

0358, Mail Code 28221T, 1200 

Pennsylvania Avenue NW, Washington, 

DC 20460. 

• Hand/Courier Delivery: EPA Docket 

Center, WJC West Building, Room 3334, 

1301 Constitution Avenue NW, 

Washington, DC 20004. The Docket 

Center’s hours of operation are 8:30 

a.m.–4:30 p.m., Monday–Friday (except 

Federal Holidays). 

Instructions: All submissions received 

must include the Docket ID No. for this 

rulemaking. Comments received may be 

posted without change to https://

www.regulations.gov, including any 

personal information provided. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Frank Benjamin-Eze, Sector Policies and 

Programs Division (E143–05), Office of 

Air Quality Planning and Standards, 

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, 

109 T.W. Alexander Drive P.O. Box 

12055 RTP, North Carolina 27711; 

telephone number: (919) 541–3753; and 

email address: benjamineze.frank@

epa.gov. Additional questions may be 

directed to the following email address: 

O&GMethaneRule@epa.gov. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: On 

January 15, 2025, EPA published a 

notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM) 

entitled ‘‘Reconsideration of Standards 

of Performance for New, Reconstructed, 

and Modified Sources and Emissions 

Guidelines for Existing Sources: Oil and 

Natural Gas Sector Climate Review’’ 

(RIN 2060–AW35) (90 FR 3734). EPA 

revises section VI.B. (Paperwork 

Reduction Act) of the January 15, 2025, 

NPRM as described below. 


KHAMMOND on DSK9W7S144PROD with PROPOSALS