Document ID: EPA-R01-OAR-2010-0198-0001
Agency: epa
Document Type: Proposed Rule
Title: Approvals and Promulgations of Air Quality Implementation Plans: Connecticut; NOx Emission Trading Orders as Single Source SIP Revisions
Posted Date: 2012-11-29T05:00Z

[Federal Register Volume 77, Number 230 (Thursday, November 29, 2012)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 71140-71145]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2012-28908]

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

40 CFR Part 52

[EPA-R01-OAR-2010-0198, FRL-9755-7]

Approval and Promulgation of Air Quality Implementation Plans; 
Connecticut; NOX Emission Trading Orders as Single Source 
SIP Revisions

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Proposed rule.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

SUMMARY: The EPA is proposing to approve a State Implementation Plan 
(SIP) revision submitted by the State of Connecticut. This revision 
allows facilities to create and/or use emission credits to comply with 
the NOX emission limits required by Regulations of 
Connecticut State Agencies (RCSA) section 22a-174-22 (Control of 
Nitrogen Oxides) using NOx Emission Trading Orders (trading orders). 
The intended effect of this action is to propose approval of the 
individual trading orders to allow facilities to determine the most 
cost-effective way to comply with the state regulation. This action is 
being taken in accordance with the Clean Air Act.

DATES: Written comments must be received on or before December 31, 
2012.

ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, identified by Docket ID Number EPA-
R01-OAR-2010-0198 by one of the following methods:
    1. www.regulations.gov: Follow the on-line instructions for 
submitting comments.
    2. Email: dahl.donald@epa.gov.
    3. Fax: (617) 918-0657
    4. Mail: ``Docket Identification Number EPA-R01-OAR-2010-0198'',

[[Page 71141]]

Donald Dahl, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, EPA New England 
Regional Office, Office of Ecosystem Protection, Air Permits, Toxics, 
and Indoor Programs Unit, 5 Post Office Square--Suite 100, (Mail code 
OEP05-2), Boston, MA 02109-3912.
    5. Hand Delivery or Courier. Deliver your comments to: Donald Dahl, 
Air Permits, Toxics, and Indoor Programs Unit, Office of Ecosystem 
Protection, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, EPA New England 
Regional Office, 5 Post Office Square, 5th floor, (OEP05-2), Boston, MA 
02109-3912. Such deliveries are only accepted during the Regional 
Office's normal hours of operation. The Regional Office's official 
hours of business are Monday through Friday, 8:30 to 4:30 excluding 
legal holidays.
    Instructions: Direct your comments to Docket ID No. EPA-R01-OAR-
2010-0198. EPA's policy is that all comments received will be included 
in the public docket without change and may be made available online at 
www.regulations.gov, including any personal information provided, 
unless the comment includes information claimed to be Confidential 
Business Information (CBI) or other information whose disclosure is 
restricted by statute. Do not submit through www.regulations.gov, or 
email, information that you consider to be CBI or otherwise protected. 
The www.regulations.gov Web site is an ``anonymous access'' systems, 
which means EPA will not know your identity or contact information 
unless you provide it in the body of your comment. If you send an email 
comment directly to EPA without going through www.regulations.gov your 
email address will be automatically captured and included as part of 
the comment that is placed in the public docket and made available on 
the Internet. If you submit an electronic comment, EPA recommends that 
you include your name and other contact information in the body of your 
comment and with any disk or CD-ROM you submit. If EPA cannot read your 
comment due to technical difficulties and cannot contact you for 
clarification, EPA may not be able to consider your comment. Electronic 
files should avoid the use of special characters, any form of 
encryption, and be free of any defects or viruses.
    Docket: All documents in the electronic docket are listed in the 
www.regulations.gov index. Although listed in the index, some 
information is not publicly available, i.e., CBI or other information 
whose disclosure is restricted by statute. Certain other material, such 
as copyrighted material, is not placed on the Internet and will be 
publicly available only in hard copy form. Publicly available docket 
materials are available either electronically in www.regulations.gov or 
in hard copy at Office of Ecosystem Protection, U.S. Environmental 
Protection Agency, EPA New England Regional Office, 5 Post Office 
Square, Suite 100, Boston, MA. EPA requests that if at all possible, 
you contact the contact listed in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT 
section to schedule your inspection. The Regional Office's official 
hours of business are Monday through Friday, 8:30 to 4:30 excluding 
legal holidays.
    In addition to the publicly available docket materials available 
for inspection electronically in the Federal Docket Management System 
at www.regulations.gov, and the hard copy available at the Regional 
Office, which are identified in the ADDRESSES section of this Federal 
Register, copies of the state submittals are also available for public 
inspection during normal business hours, by appointment at the State 
Air Agency. The Bureau of Air Management, Department of Environmental 
Protection, State Office Building, 79 Elm Street, Hartford, CT 06106-
1630.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Donald Dahl, Air Permits, Toxics, and 
Indoor Programs Unit, Office of Ecosystem Protection, U.S. 
Environmental Protection Agency, EPA New England Regional Office, 5 
Post Office Square, Suite 100, (OEP05-2), Boston, MA 02109-3912, phone 
number (617) 918-1657, fax number (617) 918-0657, email 
Dahl.Donald@epa.gov.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Throughout this document whenever ``we,'' 
``us,'' or ``our'' is used, we mean EPA.

Table of Contents

I. Background and Purpose
II. What action is EPA proposing in today's notice?
III. What facilities are affected by today's action?
IV. Do these trading orders allow new facilities to use emission 
credits to comply with RACT?
V. How did EPA review and evaluate these trading orders?
    A. What is EPA's analysis of the fundamental principle of 
integrity?
    1. Integrity Element One--Surplus
    2. Integrity Element Two--Enforceable
    3. Integrity Element Three--Quantifiable
    4. Integrity Element Four--Permanent
    B. What is EPA's analysis of the fundamental principle of 
equity?
    1. Equity Element One--General Equity
    2. Equity Element Two--Environmental Justice
    C. What is EPA's analysis of the fundamental principle of 
environmental benefit?
    D. What is EPA's analysis regarding the RACT sources?
    E. Conclusion
VI. Proposed Action
VII. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews

I. Background and Purpose

    On August 18, 2000, December 12, 2002, July 1, 2004, and January 
13, 2006, the State of Connecticut submitted formal revisions to its 
State Implementation Plan (SIP). These SIP revisions consist of 149 
source-specific trading orders that allow 50 sources to trade emission 
credits in order to comply with state regulations for reducing nitrogen 
oxide (NOX) emissions. We previously approved source-
specific trading orders issued by Connecticut under this program on 
September 28, 1999 (64 FR 52233) and March 23, 2001 (66 FR 16135).

II. What action is EPA proposing in today's notice?

    Today, EPA is proposing to approve 149 NOX Emission 
Trading Orders that will allow facilities in Connecticut to generate 
and or use emission credits for compliance with the NOX 
emission limits that were established as part of Connecticut's strategy 
to lower ozone levels, also known as reasonable available control 
technology (RACT). EPA is not taking action on some of the orders 
included in the July 1, 2004 submittal: Trading Order 8021 issued to 
Pfizer, Trading Order 8246 issued to Sikorsky Aircraft, Trading Order 
8110A issued to Yale University and Consent Order 7019A issued to 
Hamilton Sundstrand Corporation. EPA is also not taking action on the 
Creation Notice Nos. NJ-1, NJ-2, and NJ-4 included in the August 18, 
2000 submittal. EPA will take action on these orders and creation 
notices at a later date. Lastly, EPA is not taking action on Trading 
Orders 8115, Modification 1 and 8115A issued to University of 
Connecticut in Mansfield because these trading orders were superseded 
by Trading Order 8115B which was included in the July 1, 2004 
submittal.

III. What facilities are affected by today's action?

    EPA is proposing to approve NOX emission trading orders 
for the facilities listed in the table below.

[[Page 71142]]

------------------------------------------------------------------------
      Trading Order No(s).         Name of facility    Facility location
------------------------------------------------------------------------
1494A, 8116 Modification, 8116A,  Connecticut         Hartford.
 8116B.                            Resources
                                   Recovery
                                   Authority.
1494 Modifications 2, 3, 4, 5,    Connecticut Light   Branford,
 and 6.                            and Power.          Greenwich,
                                                       Hartford,
                                                       Montville,
                                                       Middletown,
                                                       Milford, Preston,
                                                       Norwalk, and
                                                       Torrington.
8154 Modifications 1, 2, and 3,   Combustion          Windsor.
 8154A.                            Engineering.
1626, 1626 Modification 1, 8247.  Borough of          Naugatuck.
                                   Naugatuck.
8159, 8181, 8181A, 8181A          Connecticut Light   Milford.
 Modification 1, 8219, 8219A,      and Power/Devon
 8219A Modification 1, 8251,       Power LLC.
 8251 Modification 1.
8109............................  Hamilton            Windsor Locks.
                                   Sundstrand.
8093A, 8093B, 8093C, 8093C        Pfizer............  Groton.
 Modification 1, 8136, 8136A.
8119 Modification, 8119A, 8119A   City of Norwich,    Norwich.
 Modification 1.                   Department of
                                   Public Utilities.
8092 Modification, 8103           United              Bridgeport.
 Modifications 1 and 2, 8177       Illuminating/
 Modification 1, 8241, 8241        Wisvest-
 Modification 1, 8242, 8243,       Connecticut LLC/
 8244, 8244 Modification 1,        PSEG Power
 8253, 8253 Modification 1.        Connecticut LLC.
8115 Modification 2, 8115B......  University of       Storrs.
                                   Connecticut.
8107 Modifications 1 and 2,       Northeast Nuclear   Waterford.
 8152, 8152 Modification, 8152A,   Energy/Dominion
 8221, 8221A, 8222, 8222A.         Nuclear.
8180, 8180 Modification 1,        Connecticut Jet     Branford,
 8180A, 8180A Modification 1.      Power.              Greenwich, and
                                                       Torrington.
8114 Modifications 1 and 2,       CYTEC Industries..  Wallingford.
 8114A.
8117, 8117A, 8117B..............  Sprague Paperboard  Versailles.
8157, 8160, 8162, 8182, 8182A,    Connecticut Light   Middletown.
 8182A Modification 1, 8213,       and Power/
 8213A, 8213A Modification 1,      Middletown Power
 8214, 8214A, 8214A Modification   LLC.
 1, 8215, 8215A, 8215A
 Modification 1, 8227, 8227A,
 8227A Modification 1.
8156, 8161, 8183, 8183A, 8183A    Connecticut Light   Montville.
 Modification 1, 8216, 8216A,      and Power/
 8216A Modification 1, 8217,       Montville Power
 8217A, 8217A Modification 1.      LLC.
8158, 8184, 8184A, 8184A          Connecticut Light   Norwalk.
 Modification 1, 8218, 8218A,      and Power/Norwalk
 8218A Modification 1.             Power LLC.
8134, 8134A, 8248...............  United              East Hartford.
                                   Technologies.
8175, 8175 Modification 1,        Northeast           Berlin.
 8175A, 8175A Modification 1.      Generation
                                   Company.
8102 Modification, 8153, 8176     United              New Haven.
 Modification 1, 8240, 8240        Illuminating/
 Modification 1, 8243.             Wisvest-
                                   Connecticut LLC/
                                   PSEG Power
                                   Connecticut LLC.
8220, 8220A, 8220A Modification   Bristol Meyers      Wallingford.
 1.                                Squibb.
8124, 8124A.....................  Stone Container...  Uncasville.
8120, 8120A.....................  Sikorsky Aircraft.  Stratford.
8137 Modifications 1 and 2,       AlliedSignal and    Stratford.
 8137A.                            U.S. Army Tank.
8188............................  Allegheny Ludlum..  Wallingford.
8112, 8112A, 8112A Modification   United States       Groton.
 1, 8201CC.                        Naval Submarine
                                   Base.
8230............................  Jacobs Vehicle      Bloomfield.
                                   Systems.
8110 Modification...............  Yale University...  New Haven.
8123 Modification, 8123A........  Algonquin Gas       Cromwell.
                                   Transmission.
8250, 8261......................  Algonquin Windsor   Windsor Locks.
                                   Locks.
8249, 8249 Modification 1.......  Capitol District    Hartford.
                                   Energy Center.
8094 Modification...............  Ogden Martin......  Bristol.
8095 Modification...............  American Ref-Fuel.  Preston.
8100 Modification...............  Bridgeport Resco..  Bridgeport.
8101 Modification...............  Connecticut         Middletown.
                                   Department of
                                   Mental Health and
                                   Addiction
                                   Services.
8111 Modification...............  Uniroyal Chemical.  Naugatuck.
8118 Modification...............  South Norwalk       Norwalk.
                                   Electrical Works.
8130 Modification...............  Connecticut         Newtown.
                                   Department of
                                   Public Works.
8132 Modification...............  Bridgeport          Bridgeport.
                                   Hospital.
8141 Modification...............  Town of             Wallingford.
                                   Wallingford,
                                   Department of
                                   Public Utilities.
------------------------------------------------------------------------

IV. Do these trading orders allow new facilities to use emission 
credits to comply with RACT?

    Most of the trading orders being approved today allow the same 
facilities in Connecticut to continue to create or use emission credits 
that were approved into the SIP on September 28, 1999 (64 FR 52233) and 
March 23, 2001 (66 FR 16135). Facilities that are having their trading 
orders approved for the first time are: Hamilton Sundstrand in Windsor 
Locks, Borough of Naugatuck in Naugatuck, Bristol Meyers Squibb in 
Wallingford, Capital District Energy Center in Hartford, Combustion 
Engineering in Windsor, Stone Container in Uncasville, and Sprague 
Paperboard in Versailles.

V. How did EPA review and evaluate these trading orders?

    EPA issued a guidance document ``Improving Air Quality With 
Economic Incentive Programs'' (EIP Guidance). (See EPA-452/R-01-001, 
January 2001). This guidance applies to discretionary

[[Page 71143]]

emission trading programs (EIPs) that are submitted to EPA for approval 
as a revision of the State Implementation Plan to attain national 
ambient air quality standards for criteria pollutants. This guidance 
does not require review of previously approved programs and is not 
EPA's final action on these discretionary emission trading programs. 
EPA's final action on these discretionary emission trading programs 
occurs when EPA acts on a State's request to revise the SIP. The EIP 
Guidance is non-binding.
    Fundamental principles that apply to all EIPs are integrity 
(meaning that credits are based on emission reductions that are 
surplus, enforceable, quantifiable, and permanent), equity, and 
environmental benefit. These fundamental principles can apply to an EIP 
in its entirety (the programmatic level) or to individual sources (the 
source-specific level). In addition, EIPs that allow sources to 
purchase credits to demonstrate compliance with reasonable available 
control technology (RACT) need to meet additional requirements 
specified in section 16.13 of the EIP Guidance. EPA evaluated the 
Connecticut trading orders against these three fundamental principles, 
additional requirements for sources subject to RACT, and applicable 
Clean Air Act requirements. Connecticut's trading orders are fully 
consistent with these fundamental principles and the requirements for 
sources subject to RACT, and EPA is approving these trading orders as 
part of Connecticut's SIP.

A. What is EPA's analysis of the fundamental principle of integrity?

    The fundamental principle of integrity consists of the qualities of 
being surplus, enforceable, quantifiable, and permanent.
1. Integrity Element One--Surplus
    Emission reductions are surplus if the reductions are not presently 
relied upon in any other air quality-related programs such as the SIP, 
SIP-related requirements such as transportation conformity, other 
adopted state measures not in the SIP, Federal rules that focus on 
reducing precursors of criteria pollutants such as new source 
performance standards, or a consent decree. Emission reductions 
measured by sources on a retrospective basis are surplus if the 
source's actual emissions are below its baseline allowable or 
historical actual emissions, whichever is lower, and the retrospective 
inventories reflect actual emission information as appropriate.
    Each source-specific trading order Connecticut submitted creates 
emission reduction credits (ERCs), establishes a baseline of 1990, and 
sets emission limits based on the most stringent applicable emission 
rate. Credits are only generated when a permitted facility's emissions 
are below the emission rate and the baseline. Therefore the credits 
produced are in addition to reductions from other requirements of the 
Clean Air Act.
2. Integrity Element Two--Enforceable
    Emission reductions use, generation, and other required actions in 
the EIP are enforceable on a programmatic basis if they are 
independently verifiable, define program violations, and identify those 
liable for violations. For enforceability, both the State and EPA 
should have the ability to apply penalties and secure appropriate 
corrective actions where applicable. Citizens should also have access 
to all the emissions-related information obtained from the source so 
that citizens can file suits against sources for violations. Required 
actions must be practicably enforceable in accordance with other EPA 
guidance on practicable enforceability. At the source- specific level, 
the source must be liable for violations, the liable party must be 
identifiable, and the State, the public, and EPA must be able to 
independently verify a source's compliance. The EIP Guidance outlines 
enforcement elements common to all trading EIPs in Chapter 6.0.
    Each facility participating in trading NOX credits has 
been issued a source-specific trading order containing enforceable 
conditions for quantifying, recording, and reporting ERCs. Each trading 
order establishes the monitoring/testing protocol, quantifying 
emissions based on either a periodic stack test for developing an 
emission rate or continuous emission monitors that directly measure 
NOX emissions. Each trading order establishes reporting 
requirements which includes emissions based upon the approved 
monitoring/testing protocol, the number of credits the source 
generated, if any, and credits the source previously banked or 
purchased to cover its emissions. The State also reviews all of the 
sources subject to trading orders to determine which sources did not 
meet the specific conditions of their trading orders. Connecticut has 
authority to enforce the trading orders and the underlying RACT 
requirements of Regulations of Connecticut State Agencies (RCSA) 
section 22a-174-22 pursuant to RCSA section 22a-174-12. By approving 
these source-specific trading orders, they will become part of the SIP 
and be enforceable by both EPA and citizens.
3. Integrity Element Three--Quantifiable
    The generation or use of emission reductions by a source is 
quantifiable on a source-specific basis if the source can reliably 
calculate the amount of emissions and/or emission reductions occurring 
during the implementation of the program, and replicate the 
calculations. The EIP Guidance further states that when quantifying 
results, sources must use the same methodology used to measure baseline 
emissions, unless there are good technical reasons that this approach 
is not appropriate. Common elements for quantifying results of an EIP 
are included in Chapter 5.0 of the EIP Guidance. All EIPs should 
incorporate provisions for predicting results, addressing uncertainty, 
approving quantification protocols, and emission quantification 
methods. For a reduction to be certified as an ERC, the reduction must 
be real, quantifiable, and surplus at the time the ERC is generated.
    Each source-specific trading order contains a protocol for 
quantifying emissions. Continuous Emission Monitors (CEMs) are used to 
quantify emissions at electric generating units that are creating ERCs. 
CEMs at these facilities are also used to determine if the source needs 
to use ERCs to comply with NOX RACT. For sources without 
CEMs, the protocol requires the source to determine a NOX 
emission rate through stack testing. The source is also required to 
maintain fuel use records. Each trading order contains an equation that 
calculates NOX emissions on a mass basis using the results 
from the most recent stack test, CEMs data and/or fuel records. The 
generation and use of credits is therefore quantifiable.
4. Integrity Element Four--Permanent
    To satisfy the EIP Guidance expectations for permanence, 
Connecticut's trading program must ensure that no emission increases 
(compared to emissions if there was no EIP) occur over the time defined 
in the SIP. On a source-specific basis, the permanence expectations are 
met if the sources participating in the EIP commit to actions or 
achieve reductions for a future period of time as defined in the EIP.
    Each source-specific trading order expires five years from the 
issuance date. This allows Connecticut to determine every five years if 
emission trading is still the best mechanism for reducing 
NOX emissions at an individual source. Issuing new trading 
orders every five years also allows the

[[Page 71144]]

State to take into account any new CAA requirements that become 
effective after the initial trading order was issued.
    On an annual basis, sources must report to Connecticut all ERCs 
generated and used. The State reviews each credit generated and assigns 
an identification number to each credit. The annual reports allow the 
State to determine both the generator and user of each credit. Because 
each credit generated receives an individual identification number, the 
State can reliably track their use.

B. What is EPA's analysis of the fundamental principle of equity?

    The equity principle is composed of two elements--general equity 
and environmental justice.
1. Equity Element One--General Equity
    General equity means that an EIP ensures all segments of the 
population are protected from public health problems and no segment of 
the population receives a disproportionate share of a program's 
disbenefits. EIPs should specifically protect communities from 
disproportionate impacts from emission shifts and foregone emission 
reductions.
    Connecticut has determined the majority of emission credits are 
generated at a few electric generating units and some other large 
industrial boilers that have continuous emission monitors. These 
sources are large emitters that can economically decrease emissions on 
a large scale. However, sources using emission credits are much smaller 
emitters of NOX and are spread throughout the State. 
Therefore, while the benefit of emissions reductions may be higher in 
certain geographic areas, the impact from sources using credits will 
not severely impact one geographic area over another.
2. Equity Element Two--Environmental Justice
    The environmental justice (EJ) element applies if the EIP covers 
VOCs and could disproportionately impact communities populated by 
racial minorities, people with low incomes, and/or Tribes. The 
Connecticut trading program does not allow emission trading of VOC 
credits. Therefore, today's actions allowing the trading of 
NOX emission credits does not create an EJ issue.

C. What is EPA's analysis of the fundamental principle of environmental 
benefit?

    All EIPs must be environmentally beneficial and can demonstrate 
this principle through more rapid emission reductions or faster 
attainment than would have occurred without the EIP.
    The discrete emission reduction credit (DERC) EIP meets the 
expectations for the environmental benefit principle. The ability to 
generate DERCs provides an incentive for early compliance and more 
rapid emission reductions. Connecticut sources that create emission 
credits through their respective trading orders must discount the 
actual credits generated by 10%. In addition, Connecticut discounts the 
credits generated or used at some sources depending on certain 
conditions, such as an additional 10% discount rate for sources using 
stack tests in lieu of continuous emission monitors. These various 
discount rates result in greater emission reductions then would 
otherwise be achieved without trading, resulting in an environmental 
benefit.

D. What is EPA's analysis regarding the RACT sources?

    Sources must use the presumptive RACT limit in the baseline 
calculation. Sources are not allowed to use an alternative RACT limit 
in determining the baseline emission rate.
    Connecticut's trading orders use the lower of actual emissions in 
1990 or the RACT emission limit established for the specific source 
category, whichever is less. The source-specific trading orders do not 
use an alternative RACT emission rate.
    The EIP Guidance also contains guidance for RACT emission limits 
with long averaging times and prohibits emission credits generated 
outside of the ozone season from being used during the ozone season.
    Connecticut's trading orders limit sources requiring credits for 
excess emissions during ozone season to only use credits generated 
during ozone season.

E. Conclusion

    EPA reviewed the source-specific trading orders with respect to the 
expectations of the EIP Guidance and the requirements of the Clean Air 
Act. EPA has concluded after review and analysis of the source-specific 
trading orders that they are approvable.

VI. Proposed Action

    EPA is proposing to approve the Connecticut SIP revision for the 
NOX trading orders, which were submitted on August 18, 2000, 
December 12, 2002, July 1, 2004, and January 13, 2006. EPA is 
soliciting public comments on the issues discussed in this notice or on 
other relevant matters. These comments will be considered before taking 
final action. Interested parties may participate in the Federal 
rulemaking procedure by submitting written comments to the EPA New 
England Regional Office listed in the ADDRESSES section of this Federal 
Register.
    The Agency has reviewed this request for revision of the Federally-
approved State implementation plan for conformance with the provisions 
of the 1990 amendments enacted on November 15, 1990. The Agency has 
made the determination that the SIP revision is approvable because it 
is in accordance with the CAA and EPA regulations.

VII. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews

    Under the Clean Air Act, the Administrator is required to approve a 
SIP submission that complies with the provisions of the Act and 
applicable Federal regulations. 42 U.S.C. 7410(k); 40 CFR 52.02(a). 
Thus, in reviewing SIP submissions, EPA's role is to approve state 
choices, provided that they meet the criteria of the Clean Air Act. 
Accordingly, this proposed action merely approves state law 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 Order 
12866 (58 FR 51735, October 4, 1993);
     Does not impose an information collection burden under the 
provisions of the Paperwork Reduction Act (44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.);
     Is certified as not having a significant economic impact 
on a substantial number of small entities under the Regulatory 
Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 601 et seq.);
     Does not contain any unfunded mandate or significantly or 
uniquely affect small governments, as described in the Unfunded 
Mandates Reform Act of 1995 (Pub. L. 104-4);
     Does not have Federalism implications as specified in 
Executive Order 13132 (64 FR 43255, August 10, 1999);
     Is not an economically significant regulatory action based 
on health or safety risks subject to Executive Order 13045 (62 FR 
19885, April 23, 1997);
     Is not a significant regulatory action subject to 
Executive Order 13211 (66 FR 28355, May 22, 2001);
     Is not subject to requirements of Section 12(d) of the 
National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act of 1995 (15 U.S.C. 272 
note) because application of those requirements would

[[Page 71145]]

be inconsistent with the Clean Air Act; and
     Does not provide EPA with the discretionary authority to 
address, as appropriate, disproportionate human health or environmental 
effects, using practicable and legally permissible methods, under 
Executive Order 12898 (59 FR 7629, February 16, 1994).
    In addition, this rule does not have tribal implications as 
specified by Executive Order 13175 (65 FR 67249, November 9, 2000), 
because the SIP is not approved to apply in Indian country located in 
the state, and EPA notes that it will not impose substantial direct 
costs on tribal governments or preempt tribal law.

List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52

    Environmental protection, Air pollution control, Carbon monoxide, 
Incorporation by reference, Intergovernmental relations, Nitrogen 
dioxide, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements.

    Dated: November 14, 2012.
H. Curtis Spalding,
Regional Administrator, EPA New England.
[FR Doc. 2012-28908 Filed 11-28-12; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P