Federal Register / Vol. 87, No. 87 / Thursday, May 5, 2022 / Rules and Regulations 26677 

specific date during the first week in 

July. 

Dated: May 1, 2022. 

Nicholas R. Simmons, 

Captain, U.S. Coast Guard, Captain of the 

Port, Guam. 

[FR Doc. 2022–09623 Filed 5–4–22; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 9110–04–P 

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION 

AGENCY 

40 CFR Part 52 

[EPA–R06–OAR–2021–0032; FRL–8688–02– 

R6] 

Air Plan Approval; Oklahoma; 

Interstate Visibility Transport 

AGENCY: Environmental Protection 

Agency (EPA). 

ACTION: Final rule. 

SUMMARY: Pursuant to the Federal Clean 

Air Act (CAA or the Act), the 

Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) 

is approving elements of a State 

Implementation Plan (SIP) submission 

from the State of Oklahoma for the 2015 

Ozone National Ambient Air Quality 

Standard (NAAQS) and disapproving 

elements of two SIP submissions for the 

2010 sulfur dioxide (SO2) and the 2012 

fine particulate matter (PM2.5) NAAQS. 

These infrastructure SIP (i-SIP) 

submissions address how the existing 

SIP provides for implementation, 

maintenance, and enforcement of these 

NAAQS. The i-SIP requirements are to 

ensure that the Oklahoma SIP is 

adequate to meet the State’s 

responsibilities under the CAA for these 

NAAQS. Specifically, this final rule 

addresses the interstate visibility 

transport requirements of the i-SIP for 

the 2015 Ozone NAAQS, 2010 SO2, and 

2012 PM2.5 NAAQS under CAA section 

110(a)(2)(D)(i)(II). We are also finalizing 

our determination that the deficiencies 

in the Oklahoma SIP that form the basis 

of our disapproval of the interstate 

visibility transport portions of the 

Oklahoma i-SIP submissions for the 

2010 SO2 and 2012 PM2.5 NAAQS are 

remedied by the existing Federal 

Implementation Plan (FIP) in place for 

the Oklahoma Regional Haze program, 

and that no further Federal action is 

required to address the disapproval. 

DATES: This rule is effective on June 6, 

2022. 

ADDRESSES: The EPA has established a 

docket for this action under Docket ID 

No. EPA–R06–OAR–2021–0032. All 

documents in the docket are listed on 

the https://www.regulations.gov 

website. Although listed in the index, 

some information is not publicly 

available, e.g., 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. Publicly available docket 

materials are available electronically 

through https://www.regulations.gov. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Dayana Medina, EPA Region 6 Office, 

Regional Haze and SO2 Section, 214– 

665–7241, medina.dayana@epa.gov. 

Out of an abundance of caution for 

members of the public and our staff, the 

EPA Region 6 office may be closed to 

the public to reduce the risk of 

transmitting COVID–19. Please call or 

email the contact listed above if you 

need alternative access to material 

indexed but not provided in the docket. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

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

and ‘‘our’’ means the EPA. 

I. Background 

The background for this action is 

discussed in detail in our July 22, 2021 

proposal (86 FR 38630). In that 

document, we proposed to approve the 

interstate visibility transport element of 

the i-SIP submission from the State of 

Oklahoma for the 2015 Ozone NAAQS. 

We also proposed to disapprove the 

interstate visibility transport elements of 

two i-SIP submissions from the State of 

Oklahoma: One for the 2010 SO2

NAAQS and the other for the 2012 PM2.5

NAAQS. We simultaneously proposed, 

in exercising our authority under 

section 110(c) of the Act, to find that the 

deficiencies in the Oklahoma SIP that 

formed the basis of our proposed 

disapproval of the interstate visibility 

transport portions of the Oklahoma i-SIP 

submissions for the 2010 SO2 and 2012 

PM2.5 NAAQS are already addressed by 

the existing FIP in place for the 

Oklahoma Regional Haze program, and 

that no further Federal action is 

required. The reader should refer to our 

notice of proposed rulemaking for our 

evaluation of the Oklahoma i-SIP 

submissions and a detailed explanation 

of our rationale for this action. 

The public comment period for the 

proposed action closed on August 23, 

2021. We received one public comment 

concerning our proposed action. The 

comment is included in the publicly 

posted docket associated with this 

action at https://www.regulations.gov. 

Below we provide a summary of the 

comment along with our response. After 

careful consideration of the comment 

received, we have decided to finalize 

our action with no changes from the 

proposed action. 

II. Response to Comments 

Comment: The commenter expressed 

appreciation for EPA’s close evaluation 

of Oklahoma’s SIP submittals and 

expressed support of EPA’s 

determinations and actions identified in 

the proposed rule. 

Response: We appreciate the 

commenter’s support of our proposed 

rule. 

Comment: The commenter stated that 

they do not object to EPA’s 

determination, among others, that the 

existing FIP in place for the Oklahoma 

Regional Haze program is sufficient to 

remedy the proposed disapproval of the 

interstate visibility transport portions of 

the Oklahoma i-SIP submissions for the 

2010 SO2 and 2012 PM2.5 NAAQS but 

asked EPA to revisit, as necessary and 

appropriate in the future, whether the 

existing FIP continues to remain 

sufficiently stringent to comply with the 

requirements of the CAA, including 

whether it is adequately ensuring 

reasonable progress towards achieving 

Oklahoma’s regional haze goals. 

Response: First, we note that 

comments regarding the stringency of 

the existing Oklahoma Regional Haze 

FIP and whether it is sufficient to 

comply with the regional haze 

requirements of the CAA are beyond the 

scope of this action, and as such, we 

will not be responding to them. We also 

note that we are not implementing a 

new or revised FIP in this action but are 

instead finding that the existing regional 

haze FIP also addresses the deficiencies 

in the Oklahoma SIP that form the basis 

of our disapproval of the interstate 

visibility transport portions of the 

Oklahoma i-SIP submissions for the 

2010 SO2 and 2012 PM2.5 NAAQS. EPA 

will review and take action on any 

future regional haze SIP revisions 

submitted by Oklahoma in separate 

future actions. 

III. Impact on Areas of Indian Country 

As stated in the proposed action, 

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 


lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with RULES1
26678 Federal Register / Vol. 87, No. 87 / Thursday, May 5, 2022 / Rules and Regulations 

1A copy of the Governor’s July 22, 2020 request 

can be found in the docket for this rulemaking on 

the https://www.regulations.gov website. See 

Document ID No. EPA–R06–OAR–2021–0032–0017. 2 In ODEQ v. EPA, the D.C. Circuit held that 

under the CAA, a state has the authority to 

implement a SIP in non-reservation areas of Indian 

country in the state, where there has been no 

demonstration of tribal jurisdiction. Under the D.C. 

Circuit’s decision, the CAA does not provide 

authority to states to implement SIPs in Indian 

reservations. ODEQ did not, however, substantively 

address the separate authority in Indian country 

provided specifically to Oklahoma under 

SAFETEA. That separate authority was not invoked 

until the State submitted its request under 

SAFETEA, and was not approved until EPA’s 

decision, described in this section, on October 1, 

2020. 

3A copy of EPA’s October 1, 2020 approval can 

be found in the docket for this rulemaking on the 

https://www.regulations.gov website. See Document 

ID No. EPA–R06–OAR–2021–0032–0018. 

4EPA’s prior approvals relating to Oklahoma’s 

SIP frequently noted that the SIP was not approved 

to apply in areas of Indian country (consistent with 

the D.C. Circuit’s decision in ODEQ v. EPA) located 

in the state. See, e.g., 85 FR 20178, 20180 (April 10, 

2020). Such prior expressed limitations are 

superseded by the EPA’s approval of Oklahoma’s 

SAFETEA request. 

5On December 22, 2021, EPA proposed to 

withdraw and reconsider the October 1, 2020 

SAFETEA approval. See https://www.epa.gov/ok/ 

proposed-withdrawal-and-reconsideration-andsupporting-information. EPA is engaging in further 

consultation with tribal governments and expects to 

have discussions with the State of Oklahoma as part 

of this reconsideration. EPA also notes that the 

October 1, 2020 approval is the subject of a pending 

challenge in Federal court. Pawnee Nation of 

Oklahoma v. Regan, No. 20–9635 (10th Cir.). EPA 

may make further changes to the approval of 

Oklahoma’s program to reflect the outcome of the 

proposed withdrawal and reconsideration of the 

October 1, 2020 SAFETEA approval. 

of Indian country.1 The State’s request 

excluded certain areas of Indian country 

further described below. In addition, the 

State only sought approval to the extent 

that such approval is necessary for the 

State to administer a program in light of 

Oklahoma Dept. of Environmental 

Quality v. EPA, 740 F.3d 185 (D.C. Cir. 

2014).2

On October 1, 2020, the EPA 

approved Oklahoma’s SAFETEA request 

to administer all of the State’s EPAapproved environmental regulatory 

programs, including the Oklahoma SIP, 

in the requested areas of Indian 

country.3 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’’). 

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.4 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).5

As explained above, the EPA is 

disapproving the interstate visibility 

transport portions of the Oklahoma i-SIP 

submittals for the 2010 SO2 and the 

2012 PM2.5 NAAQS because they do not 

meet the interstate visibility transport 

requirements of CAA Section 

110(a)(2)(D)(i)(II) with respect to these 

NAAQS; however, the EPA is also 

making the determination that the 

deficiencies forming the basis of the 

disapproval of these SIPs are met 

through the existing FIP in place for the 

Oklahoma Regional Haze program. The 

FIP applies to all lands within the State 

regardless of land status. In practice, the 

FIP requirements, as discussed in the 

proposed rule, only apply to the 

Oklahoma Gas & Electric (OG&E) 

facilities, Sooner Station Units 1 and 2 

(located within Noble County) and 

Muskogee, Units 4 and 5 (located within 

Muskogee County and the Cherokee 

Nation Reservation). 

Additionally, the EPA is approving 

the interstate visibility transport 

element of the Oklahoma i-SIP for the 

2015 Ozone NAAQS. Consistent with 

the D.C. Circuit’s decision in ODEQ v. 

EPA and with EPA’s October 1, 2020, 

SAFETEA approval, this portion of the 

SIP applies in certain areas of Indian 

country. Under EPA’s October 1, 2020 

SAFETEA approval, the SIP will apply 

to all Indian country within the State of 

Oklahoma, other than the excluded 

Indian country lands. Because—per the 

State’s request under SAFETEA—EPA’s 

October 1, 2020 approval does not 

displace any SIP authority previously 

exercised by the State under the CAA as 

interpreted in ODEQ v. EPA, the SIP 

will also apply to any Indian allotments 

or dependent Indian communities 

located outside of an Indian reservation 

over which there has been no 

demonstration of tribal authority. 

This action does not result in the 

imposition of new requirements for the 

affected sources. Rather, it approves 

Oklahoma’s determination that the 

regional haze measures that have 

already been approved and are currently 

being implemented satisfy the visibility 

transport requirements for the 2015 

Ozone NAAQS and also makes the 

determination that the regional haze 

measures promulgated by EPA in the 

Oklahoma FIP that are currently being 

implemented address the deficiencies in 

the Oklahoma SIP with respect to 

visibility transport requirements for the 

2010 SO2 and 2012 PM2.5 NAAQS. 

IV. Final Action 

The EPA is approving the interstate 

visibility transport elements of the i-SIP 

submission from the State of Oklahoma 

for the 2015 Ozone NAAQS. We are also 

disapproving the interstate visibility 

transport elements of two i-SIP 

submissions from the State of 

Oklahoma: One for the 2010 SO2

NAAQS and the other for the 2012 PM2.5

NAAQS. We simultaneously find, in 

exercising our authority under section 

110(c) of the Act, that the deficiencies 

in the Oklahoma SIP that form the basis 

of our disapproval of the interstate 

visibility transport portions of the 

Oklahoma i-SIP submissions for the 

2010 SO2 and 2012 PM2.5 NAAQS are 

already addressed by the existing FIP in 

place for the Oklahoma Regional Haze 

program, and that no further Federal 

action is required. 

V. Environmental Justice 

Considerations 

Executive Order 12898 (Federal 

Actions To Address Environmental 

Justice in Minority Populations and 

Low-Income Populations, 59 FR 7629, 

Feb. 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. The 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.’’ The 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 


lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with RULES1
Federal Register / Vol. 87, No. 87 / Thursday, May 5, 2022 / Rules and Regulations 26679 

6https://www.epa.gov/environmentaljustice/ 

learn-about-environmental-justice. 

7See the United States Census Bureau’s 

QuickFacts on Oklahoma at https://

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

PST045221. 

8See the United States Census Bureau’s 

QuickFacts on Oklahoma at https://

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

PST045221. 

9SO2, nitrogen dioxide (NO2), and particulate 

matter are among six criteria air pollutants for 

which the EPA has established NAAQS. The CAA 

requires the EPA to periodically review the 

scientific basis for the NAAQS by preparing an 

integrated science assessment. The integrated 

science assessment provides the EPA’s evaluation 

and synthesis of the most policy-relevant science 

related to the health effects of the criteria 

pollutants. The most recent integrated science 

assessments for SO2, NO2, and particulate matter 

can be accessed here: https://www.epa.gov/naaqs/ 

sulfur-dioxide-so2-primary-air-quality-standards; 

https://www.epa.gov/naaqs/nitrogen-dioxide-no2- 

primary-air-quality-standards; and https://

www.epa.gov/naaqs/particulate-matter-pm-airquality-standards. 

policies.’’ 6 EPA is providing additional 

analysis of environmental justice 

associated with this action. We are 

doing so for the purpose of providing 

information to the public, not as a basis 

of our final action. 

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 

(35 percent versus 40 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 13.4 

percent) and the percent of the 

population that is American Indian/ 

Alaska Native is significantly higher 

than the national average (9.4 percent 

versus 1.3 percent). The percent of the 

population that is two or more races is 

higher than the national averages (6.3 

percent versus 2.8 percent). The percent 

of people living below the poverty level 

in Oklahoma is higher than the national 

average (14.3 percent versus 11.4 

percent). The percent of people over 25 

with a high school diploma in 

Oklahoma is similar to the national 

average (88.6 percent versus 88.5 

percent), while the percent with a 

Bachelor’s degree or higher is below the 

national average (26.1 percent versus 

32.9 percent). 

This final rule approves Oklahoma’s 

determination that the regional haze 

measures that have already been 

approved into the Oklahoma SIP and are 

currently being implemented satisfy the 

visibility transport requirements for the 

2015 Ozone NAAQS and also makes the 

determination that the regional haze 

measures promulgated by EPA in the 

Oklahoma FIP that are currently being 

implemented address the deficiencies in 

the Oklahoma SIP with respect to the 

visibility transport requirements for the 

2010 SO2 and 2012 PM2.5 NAAQS. The 

existing regional haze measures on 

which Oklahoma and EPA are relying to 

satisfy the visibility transport 

requirements for these three NAAQS 

have resulted in significant emissions 

reductions, as discussed in the proposed 

rule. Some of the pollutants which form 

haze have also been linked to serious 

health problems, such as increased 

respiratory illness, decreased lung 

function, and even premature death.9

Therefore, we believe that these existing 

regional haze measures and resulting 

emissions reductions have contributed 

to reduced environmental and health 

impacts on all populations in 

Oklahoma, including people of color 

and low-income populations in 

Oklahoma. We conclude that this final 

rule does not have disproportionately 

high or adverse human health or 

environmental effects on communities 

with environmental justice concerns. 

VI. Statutory and Executive Order 

Reviews 

A. Executive Order 12866: Regulatory 

Planning and Review and Executive 

Order 13563: Improving Regulation and 

Regulatory Review 

This final action is not a ‘‘significant 

regulatory action’’ and was therefore not 

submitted to the Office of Management 

and Budget for review. 

B. Paperwork Reduction Act (PRA) 

This final action does not impose an 

information collection burden under the 

PRA because it does not contain any 

information collection activities. 

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 merely 

approves a portion of one SIP 

submission as meeting the CAA and 

disapproves portions of two SIP 

submissions as not meeting the CAA. 

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. The action imposes no 

enforceable duty on any state, local or 

tribal governments or the private sector. 

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. 

F. Executive Order 13175: Consultation 

and Coordination With Indian Tribal 

Governments 

This final action approving the 

interstate visibility transport element of 

the Oklahoma i-SIP submission for the 

2015 Ozone NAAQS and disapproving 

the interstate visibility transport 

elements of the Oklahoma i-SIP 

submissions for the 2010 1-hour SO2

NAAQS and the 2012 PM2.5 NAAQS 

(and making a determination that no 

further action is required to address the 

deficiencies identified in the 

disapproval) will apply to certain areas 

of Indian country as discussed in the 

preamble, and therefore has tribal 

implications as specified in E.O. 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 38 

tribal governments whose lands are 

located within the exterior boundaries 

of the State of Oklahoma. EPA did not 

receive any comments from tribal 

governments or requests for 

consultation. 

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 


lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with RULES1
26680 Federal Register / Vol. 87, No. 87 / Thursday, May 5, 2022 / Rules and Regulations 

Executive order. This action is not 

subject to Executive Order 13045 

because it merely approves a portion of 

one SIP submission as meeting the CAA 

and disapproves portions of two SIP 

submissions as not meeting the CAA. 

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 

This rulemaking does not involve 

technical standards. 

J. Executive Order 12898: Federal 

Actions To Address Environmental 

Justice in Minority Populations and 

Low-Income Populations 

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. This action merely 

approves a portion of a SIP submission 

as meeting the CAA and disapproves 

portions of two SIP submissions as not 

meeting the CAA. 

K. Congressional Review Act (CRA) 

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. The 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). 

L. 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 July 5, 2022. Filing a petition 

for reconsideration by the Administrator 

of this final rule does not affect the 

finality of this action for the purposes of 

judicial review, nor does it extend the 

time within which a petition for judicial 

review may be filed and shall not 

postpone the effectiveness of such rule 

or action. This action may not be 

challenged later in proceedings to 

enforce its requirements. (See section 

307(b)(2).) 

List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52 

Environmental protection, Air 

pollution control, Incorporation by 

reference, Intergovernmental relations, 

Nitrogen dioxide, Ozone, Particulate 

matter, Sulfur oxides, Visibility 

transport. 

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

Dated: April 25, 2022. 

Earthea Nance, 

Regional Administrator, Region 6. 

For the reasons stated in the 

preamble, the EPA amends 40 CFR part 

52 as follows: 

PART 52—APPROVAL AND 

PROMULGATION OF 

IMPLEMENTATION PLANS 

■ 1. The authority citation for part 52 

continues to read as follows: 

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

Subpart LL—Oklahoma 

■ 2. Section 52.1928 is amended by 

adding paragraphs (e) and (f) to read as 

follows: 

§ 52.1928 Visibility protection. 

* * * * * 

(e) The portion of the State 

Implementation Plan pertaining to 

adequate provisions to prohibit 

emissions from interfering with 

measures required in another state to 

protect visibility for the 2015 ozone 

national ambient air quality standard 

(NAAQS), submitted on October 25, 

2018, and clarified in a letter dated 

January 5, 2021, is approved. 

(f) The portions of the State 

Implementation Plans pertaining to 

adequate provisions to prohibit 

emissions from interfering with 

measures required in another state to 

protect visibility for the 2010 1-hour 

SO2 NAAQS, submitted on January 28, 

2015, and the 2012 PM2.5 NAAQS, 

submitted on June 16, 2016, are 

disapproved. The deficiencies in the 

Oklahoma SIP that form the basis of our 

disapproval of the interstate visibility 

transport portions of these two State 

Implementation Plan submissions are 

addressed by § 52.1923. 

[FR Doc. 2022–09194 Filed 5–4–22; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 6560–50–P 

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION 

AGENCY 

40 CFR Part 62 

[EPA–R06–OAR–2021–0517; FRL–8798–02– 

R6] 

Approval and Promulgation of State 

Air Quality Plans for Designated 

Facilities and Pollutants; Texas; 

Control of Emissions From Existing 

Other Solid Waste Incineration Units 

AGENCY: Environmental Protection 

Agency (EPA). 

ACTION: Final rule. 

SUMMARY: Pursuant to the Federal Clean 

Air Act (CAA or the Act), the 

Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) 

is approving the CAA section 111(d)/ 

129 state plan submitted by the State of 

Texas for sources subject to the Other 

Solid Waste Incineration Units (OSWI) 

Emission Guidelines (EG). The Texas 

OSWI plan was submitted to fulfill State 

obligations under CAA section 111(d)/ 

129 to implement and enforce the 

requirements under the OSWI EG. The 

EPA is approving the state plan in part 

and amending the agency regulations in 

accordance with the requirements of the 

CAA. 

DATES: This rule is effective on June 6, 

2022. The incorporation by reference of 

certain material listed in the rule is 

approved by the Director of the Federal 

Register June 6, 2022. 

ADDRESSES: The EPA has established a 

docket for this action under Docket No. 

EPA–R06–OAR–2021–0517. All 

documents in the docket are listed on 

the https://www.regulations.gov 

website. Although listed in the index, 

some information is not publicly 

available, e.g., 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 electronically through https:// 

www.regulations.gov. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Karolina Ruan Lei, EPA Region 6 Office, 

Air and Radiation Division—State 

Planning and Implementation Branch, 

1201 Elm Street, Suite 500, Dallas, TX 

75270, (214) 665–7346, ruanlei.karolina@epa.gov. Out of an 

abundance of caution for members of 

the public and our staff, the EPA Region 

6 office may be closed to the public to 

reduce the risk of transmitting COVID– 

19. Please call or email the contact 

listed above if you need alternative 


lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with RULES1