Risk Screen on Substitutes for Halon 1301

Fire Suppression and Explosion Protection Applications

Proposed Substitute: FirePro®

Total Flooding Applications in Normally Unoccupied Spaces

This risk screen does not contain Clean Air Act (CAA) Confidential Business Information (CBI) and, therefore, may be disclosed to the public.

Introduction

Ozone-depleting substances (ODS) are being phased out of production in response to a series of diplomatic and legislative efforts that have taken place over the past decade, including the Montreal Protocol and the Clean Air Act Amendments of 1990 (CAAA).  The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), as authorized by Section 612 of the CAAA, is developing a program to evaluate the human health and environmental risks posed by alternatives to ODS.  The main purpose of EPA's program, called the Significant New Alternatives Policy (SNAP) program, is to identify acceptable and unacceptable substitutes for ODS in specific end uses.

EPA’s decision on the acceptability of a substitute is based largely on the findings of a screening assessment of potential human health and environmental risks posed by the substitute in specific applications.  EPA has already screened a large number of substitutes in many end uses within all of the major ODS-using sectors, including refrigeration and air conditioning, solvent cleaning, foam blowing, aerosols, fire suppression, adhesives, coatings and inks, and sterilization.  The results of these risk screens are presented in a series of Background Documents that are available in EPA's docket.

The purpose of this report is to supplement EPA’s Background Document on the fire suppression and explosion protection sector (U.S. EPA 1994). This risk screen discusses potential human health and environmental risks posed by FirePro® when used as a replacement for Halon 1301 for use as a total flooding system in normally unoccupied spaces.

FirePro® is generated in an automated manufacturing process during which the chemicals, in powder form, are mixed and then supplied to end users as a solid contained within a fire extinguisher.  In the presence of heat, the solid converts to an aerosol consisting mainly of potassium salts.  When the aerosol reacts with the flame, the potassium salts disassociate, forming potassium free radicals, which then bind to other flame free radicals to form stable products.

Table 1a, 1b, and 1c provide the composition of FirePro® prior to and after activation, respectively.

Table 1a.  Composition of FirePro®, Prior to Activation

Constituent	Chemical Formula	CAS No.	Percent of Total

(by weight)

Potassium Nitrate	KNO3	7757-79-1

	Potassium Carbonate	K2CO3	584-8-7

	Magnesium	Mg	7439-95-4

	Epoxy Resin Polymer	Polymer	25068-38-6

	Trace elements	See Table 1c	--

Table 1b.  Composition of FirePro®, Post Activation

Compound	Chemical Formula	CAS No.	Percent of Total (by weight)

Gas

Carbon Dioxide	CO2	124-38-9

	Nitrogen	N2	7727-37-9

	Water Vapor	H2O	7732-18-5

	Methane	CH4	74-82-8

	Hydrogen	H2	1333-74-0

	Carbon Monoxide	CO	630-08-0

	Particulate

Potassium Carbonate	K2CO3	584-08-7

	Potassium Nitrate	KNO3	7757-79-1

	Potassium Chloride	KCl	7447-40-7

	Trace elements	See Table 1c	---

Table 1c. Composition of Micro and Trace Elements in FirePro

Trace Elements	Concentration (ppm)	Trace Elements	Concentration (ppm)

	FP100	FP8

FP100	FP8

Al	Aluminum

	Mg	Magnesium

As	Arsenica

	Mn	Manganesea

Ba	Bariuma

	Mo	Molybdenuma

Br	Bromine

	Na	Sodium

Ca	Calciuma

	Ni	Nickela

Cd	Cadmiuma

	Rb	Rubidium

Ce	Cerium

	Sb	Antimonya

Cl	Chlorineb

	Sc	Scandiuma

Co	Cobalt

	Se	Selenium

Cr	Chromium

	Sm	Samariuma

Cs	Caesiuma

	Sr	Strontiuma

Cu	Coppera

	Te	Telluriuma

Eu	Europium

	Th	Thoriuma

Fe	Irona

	Ti1	Titaniuma

Hf	Hafniuma

	U	Uraniuma

I	Iodinea

	V	Vanadium

K	Potassium

	W	Wolframa

La	Lanthanum

	Zn	Zinc

aElements were not detected by INAA (Instrumental Neutrons Activation Analysis) and therefore were present at levels below the listed detection limits

bindicative

FirePro® systems are intended for use in normally unoccupied areas of small, medium, and large volumes (e.g. computers, electrical panels, switch gear boxes, household equipment, panels, control cabinets, engine compartments, raised floors, false ceilings, marine engine compartments, plant rooms, equipment rooms, control rooms, data rooms, and warehouses; FirePro® SNAP Submission 2004).  The FirePro® system is produced in 13 models, each designed with a different charge size.  Table 2 below shows the intended end-uses for each model.  Annex A contains further information on each model.

Table 2: Different models of FirePro® and Corresponding Possible End-Uses

Modelsa	Possible End-Uses

FP-8

FP-20 	Computers, electrical panels, switch gear boxes, household equipment, small enclosures

FP-20B	Same as above with the addition of a power-cut fuse

FP-100

FP-200	Panels, control cabinets, engine compartments, raised floors, false ceilings

FP-200M	Marine engine compartments

FP-500	Plant rooms, equipment rooms, raised floors, false ceilings, medium volume enclosures, etc.

FP-1000Mb	Manually operated for large volumes, mainly engine compartments, plant rooms

FP-1200H	Buses, trains, trams, metros

FP-1200C	For large volumes total flooding, plant rooms, control rooms, engine compartments, etc

FP-2000

FP-3000	Total flooding of large volumes, data rooms, control rooms, plant rooms, engine compartments

FP-6300C	For total flooding of large volumes, warehouses, plant rooms

a The model number indicates the size, in grams, of the charge

b The FP-1000M model is designed to be activated by manually removing a pin and throwing the device into a fire, similar to a grenade.  This model does not replace a previous halon use and is therefore not covered by the SNAP program.

Occupational exposure (during manufacturing, installation, and maintenance) and general population analyses were performed to ensure that use of the proposed blend in the applications listed above does not pose unacceptable risks to workers or the general public.  Consumer exposure modeling was not performed because no consumer applications are proposed for this blend.

Section 2 of this report summarizes the results of the risk screen for FirePro®.  Section 3 presents atmospheric modeling and potential environmental risks; Section 4 discusses occupational exposure during manufacturing, installation, and maintenance; Section 5 assesses risks associated with general population exposure; and Section 6 assesses the emissions of volatile organic compounds.

Summary of Results

FirePro® is recommended for SNAP approval in total flooding in normally unoccupied spaces.  However, the appropriate protective clothing (e.g., goggles, particulate removing respirators, and gloves) should be worn during the manufacture, clean up, and disposal of this product and should be worn or on site during the installation and maintenance of the product. The risk screen indicates that the use of the proposed substitute in normally unoccupied spaces will be less harmful to the atmosphere than the continued use of Halon 1301.  Additionally, the risk to the general population is expected to be negligible.  For applications of this and all other fire suppression equipment, ICF recommends that the applicable National Fire Protection Agency (NFPA) standards be followed (NFPA 2003).

Atmospheric Modeling

This section presents an assessment of the potential risks to atmospheric integrity posed by the use of FirePro® as a total flooding system in normally unoccupied areas.   According to the applicant, the active ingredients for this technology are solids both before and after use; therefore, the ozone-depleting potential (ODP) and the atmospheric lifetime (ALT) are both zero (FirePro® SNAP Submission 2004).  The global warming potentials (GWP) of the gaseous post-activation products released upon activation of the fire suppressant are listed in Table 3.

Table 3: Global Warming Potentials of

Gaseous Post-Activation Products

Gaseous Post-Activation Product	GWP

CH4	23

CO2	1

N2	0

H2O	0

CO	0

H2	0

The GWPs of post-activation compounds in FirePro® are well below the GWPs of previously SNAP-approved fire-suppression agents (e.g. HFCs and other high-GWP fluids).  Accordingly, use of FirePro® is not expected to pose any significant adverse atmospheric impacts.

Occupational Exposure

Exposure During Manufacture

Worker exposure during the manufacturing process is precluded by the use of appropriate protection equipment.  The main constituents of FirePro® do not have published occupational exposure limits; however some of the constituent are known eye, skin, respiratory tract, and gastrointestinal irritants.  Additionally, bromine and chlorine could be present at levels above the occupational exposure limits, as shown by Table 4.

Table 4: Tested Levels of Trace Elements Present in the FirePro® 100 System

Compared to OSHA Permitted Exposure Levels (PEL) (HSDB 2004)

Trace Element	Levels Present (ppm)	OSHA PEL TWA (ppm)

Bromine

0.1

Chlorine

1

As described by the submitter, the manufacturing of FirePro® involves an automated process which requires minimal handling of chemicals by personnel.  Workers may be exposed to the constituents (in powder form) while loading them into the mixer, a process which accounts for 15% of the entire production time.  Therefore, the mixing room should be equipped with a ventilation system and employees should be required to wear gloves, chemical suits, particulate respirators with fine dust rating/capability, and goggles.  Also an eye wash fountain and quick drench facilities must be close by the production area.  Finally, in the case of an accidental spill, workers should wear their protective equipment while wet vacuuming the particulate matter.

Exposure During Installation, Maintenance, and Cleanup

Installation and Maintenance

μm, the size of respirable dust as designated by OSHA (1997), so the levels of respirable dust will range from 13.7 to 32.9 g/m3. Therefore, if accidentally activated in the presence of workers, the level of respirable particles in the air will exceed OSHA’s limit of 5 mg/m3 of respirable particles and will therefore be considered a nuisance dust.  Additionally, bromine and chlorine could be present at levels above the American Conference of Governmental Industrial Hygienists (ACGIH) designated Short Term Exposure Limits (STEL), as shown by Table 5 below.

Table 5: Levels of Trace Elements Present when 72 g/m3 are Released from a

FirePro® System as Compared to their ACGIH STEL (HSDB 2004)

	Levels Present (ppm)	Amount (mg/m3) emitted when 72g/m3 releaseda	TLV, STEL mg/m3

Bromine

1.9	1.3

Chlorine

30.0	2.9

a To account for the worst case scenario, the largest design concentration of all the models, 72 g/m3, was used

FirePro® is automatically activated by either a thermo-sensitive cord or an electrical signal from a conventional detection and activation system in normally unoccupied spaces.  Some FirePro® systems can also be manually activated by an electrical switch or pulley system (marine use) outside of the room in which the system is located.  A pre-alarm and alarm are both set to occur when a fire is detected and before the FirePro® system is triggered.  A time delay, set in accordance with federal, state, and/or local standards, allows for the evacuation of any maintenance personnel potentially located in the area.  In addition to the time delay, each FirePro® system includes a lock-off device outside the room which permits the system to be locked to manual activation mode (only able to be activated by following procedure stated by the relevant reference standards or federal, state, or local regulations) whenever maintenance personnel are present in the area.  Assuming the lock-off device is always activated during installation and maintenance, the risk of accidental activation in the presence of personnel should be minimal.

Although FirePro is only approved for use in unoccupied areas, the possibility remains that installation and maintenance personnel could be present when a system is activated.  ICF recommends that all personnel wear goggles, gloves, and a self-contained breathing apparatus (SCBA) while performing installations and/or maintenance activities.  Because the respirable dust level is exceeded and the STEL of chlorine and bromine could be exceeded, FirePro should not be used in occupied spaces.

Clean-Up

When the FirePro® system is activated, the aerosol particles that are produced reach a homogeneous distribution within 5 to 30 seconds, depending on the model of the FirePro® system.  After approximately 250 seconds, the particles have coagulated and their average size is 1.2 μm.  The aerosol particles that are produced when the proposed substitute is discharged tend to settle at different rates, depending on their size, as shown in Table 6.

Table 6: Particle Settling Rate (m/s) Depending On Particle Size (μ)

Particle Size (μm)	Particle Settling Rate (m/s)

0.1	4.5 x 10-6

1.0	2.5 x 10-4

5.0	5.9 x 10-3

Table 7 presents the settling time for three average room heights.

Table 7: Setting Time Depending on Room Height

Room Height	Settling Time (hours)

8 ft (2.4 m)	2.7

10 ft (3.0 m)	3.4

12 ft (3.7 m)	4.1

Note: These calculations assume all particles start at the ceiling, settle at the same rate, and that no air currents present in the area.

Workers should not enter the space following discharge until all particles have settled and the gases released by the system have dissipated.  The submitter should provide guidance upon installation regarding the appropriate time frame after which workers may enter the activation site for disposal to allow the maximum settling of all the particulates. Clean-up operations are likely to result in the re-circulation of potentially toxic nuisance dust particles.  Therefore, workers entering the protected volume to clean-up after activation are required to wear chemical suits, gloves, goggles, and a particulate removing respirator with a fine dust rating capability.  The contents removed from the protective volume should be disposed of according to approved safety procedures.  Equipment should be thoroughly decontaminated after use.  When recommended safety precautions are followed, no significant adverse health effects should result.

General Population Exposure

This section screens potential risks to the general population from exposure to ambient air releases of FirePro® blend constituents or the post-activation products.  Factory releases (occurring during manufacture) and on-site releases (those occurring at the end-use) are examined in this section. By following existing regulations, ICF believes that factory or on-site releases are not likely to pose a significant threat to ambient air, surface water, or solid waste.  Consequently, use of FirePro® is not expected to pose significant risk to the general population.

Ambient Air

All manufacturing occurs in a hermetic facility with a filtered ventilation system so minimal release to the ambient air is expected.  All facility emissions are controlled through air sampling and chromatograph analysis.  On-site releases result in the discharge of gases that do not pose a threat to the general public.  The concentration of CO2 and CH4 released into the atmosphere through the accidental release of a fire extinguishing system is insignificant compared to the concentration of CO2 and CH4 emitted into the ambient air by fossil fuel combustion, iron and steel production, and various other types of anthropogenic activity.  Therefore, air emissions associated with the manufacture and use of FirePro® are not of concern to the health of the general population.

 Surface Water

If all the solid waste settles onto the floor of the unoccupied space and is removed from the site according to federal, state, and local requirements, the FirePro® components are not likely to settle into nearby streams or ponds.

Solid Waste

At the end of their lifetime, all units are returned to the manufacturer and the chemical compound is recycled.  If all spilled and settled material in the manufacturing facility and all on-site releases are cleaned up and disposed of according to federal, state, and local requirements, no release to the environment is expected.

 ADVANCE \d4

Volatile Organic Compound Analysis\

The FirePro® blend constituents and the reaction products generated from activation are not considered VOCs for purposes of local air quality.

References

CDC. 1997.  Respiratory Protection Program Manual.  Office of Health and Safety, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention.  January 1997.

FirePro® SNAP Submission. 2004. Significant New Alternatives Policy Program Submission to the United States Environmental Protection Agency, April 2004.

HSDB.  2004.  Hazardous Substances Data Bank, TOXNET.  National Library of Medicine.  Specialized Information Services.   <  HYPERLINK "http://toxnet.nlm.nih.gov"  http://toxnet.nlm.nih.gov  TOXNET>

NFPA 2003.  Draft NFPA 2010 Standard.  Standard for Fixed Aerosol Fire Extinguishing Systems.  National Fire Protetion Agency.  July 21, 2003.  <  HYPERLINK "http://www.nfpa.org/Codes/Drafts.asp"  http://www.nfpa.org/Codes/ Drafts.asp >.

OSHA. 1997.  Regulations (Standards - 29 CFR).  TABLE Z-3 Mineral Dusts - 1910.1000.  Occupational Safety and Health Standards.  Toxic and Hazardous Substances.  <http://www.osha.gov/pls/oshaweb/owadisp.show_document?p_table= STANDARDS&p_id=9994>

U.S. EPA.  1994. Risk Screen on the Use of Substitutes for Class I Ozone-Depleting Substances: Fire Suppression and Explosion Protection (Halon Substitutes).  Stratospheric Protection Division.  March 1994.

Annex A: Complete Description of FirePro® Models

Model	Contents (grams)	Ignition Mechanism	Outflow Time (sec)	# of Outflow Openings	Outflow Length (m)	Dimension  (length x diameter unless noted)	Design Conc. (g/m3)

FP-8	8	thermocord	3-6	1	0.5	14mm x 52 mm	30

FP-20,  FP-20B	20	thermocord	3-6	2	0.3	128mm x 28mm	60

FP-100	100	thermocord & electric	5-10	1	1.0	125mm x 88mm	40

FP-200	200	thermocord & electric	10-15	1	2.0	145 mm x 88mm	40

FP-200M	200	pully system	10-15	1	2.0	139 mm x 88mm	40

FP-500	500	thermocord & electric	10-15	1	2.5	220mm x 88mm	40

FP-1000M	1000	removal of security pin	20-25	2	3.0	200mm x 98 mm	30

FP-1200H, FP-1200C	1200	thermocord & electric	8-10	1	4.0	670mm x 85mm	40

FP-3000	3000	thermocord & electric	20-25	1	3.0	300mm x 340mm x 150mm (box)	60

FP-6300C	6300	thermocord & electric	20-25	1	8.0	255mm x 310mm x 198mm (box)	60

Annex B:  Equation Used to Determine Model of FirePro® Needed

The following equation, provided by the submitter, is used to determine the correct model of FirePro® needed to protect a space.

M = V x K0 x K1 x K2 x K3 x K4 x q

    M = Net weight of extinguishing material

    V = Gross volume protected (m3)

   K0 = Class of fire: A = 1, B = 0.5, C = 0.75, E = 1.3

   K1 = Uniformity of dispersion coefficient

   K2 = Loss of aerosol coefficient

   K3 = Plant safety coefficient

   K4 = Time of volume inert-condition

    q  = Extinguishing unit’s efficiency coefficient

Ö

×

Ø

×

Ø

 h}

 h}

 h}

Ù欀遤

 h}

 h}

h}

 h}

 h}

h}

h}

h}

hL

h}

hL

hµ

hµ

(

€&@

€&@

hom

þ

þ

þ

þ

õ

õ

õ

õ

ving respirator filters out dust, fibers, fumes and mists by filtering, absorbing, adsorbing, or causing a chemical reaction with the contaminants as they pass through the respirator canister or cartridge.

 NFPA sets a safety factor of 1.3 for a Class A surface fire hazard and Class B fuel hazard (2003).  In addition, the CEN (European Committee for Standardization) is developing new standards with varying safety factors by class of fire.

 Assuming the majority of the particles will settle at an approximate rate of 2.5 x 10-4 m/s, the time it will take for the particulate post-activation products to settle can be calculated by dividing the room height in meters by the particle settling rate in meters per second.

 If workers must enter the space before the discharged particles have settled and the gases released have dissipated, then workers are required to wear chemical suits, gloves, goggles, and SCBA.

September 6, 2006

  PAGE  1


[Federal Register Volume 77, Number 74 (Tuesday, April 17, 2012)]
[Notices]
[Pages 22844-22845]
[FR Doc No: 2012-9197]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

National Highway Traffic Safety Administration

[NHTSA-2010-0002]

Agency Information Collection Activity Under OMB Review: Uniform
Criteria for State Observational Surveys of Seat Belt Use

AGENCY: National Highway Traffic Safety Administration, US DOT.

ACTION: Notice.

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

SUMMARY: In compliance with the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44
U.S.C. 3501 et seq.), this notice announces that the Information
Collection Request (ICR) abstracted below has been forwarded to the
Office of Management and Budget (OMB) for review and comment. The ICR
describes the nature of the information collections and their expected
burden. The notice of proposed rulemaking, which included a statement
of the collection of information and a 60-day comment period, was
published on January 28, 2009.

DATES: Comments must be submitted on or before May 17, 2012.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Jack Oates at the National Highway
Traffic Safety Administration, Office of Regional Operations and
Program Delivery (NTI-200),<PHONE_NUMBER>, 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE.,
Washington, DC 20590.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    Title: Uniform Criteria for State Observational Surveys of Seat
Belt Use.
    OMB Control Number: 2127-0597.
    Requested Expiration Date of Approval: Three years from the
approval date.
    Type of Request: Reinstatement with change of a previously approved
collection.
    Affected Public: State Governments (the 50 States, the District of
Columbia, Puerto Rico and 4 territories).
    Form Number: N/A.
    Abstract: The Safe, Accountable, Flexible, Efficient Transportation
Equity Act: A Legacy for Users (SAFETEA-LU) (Pub. L. 109-59) provides
that the Secretary of Transportation may not approve for Section 402
funding a State highway safety program which does not provide
satisfactory assurances that the State will implement an annual
statewide seat belt use survey in accordance with criteria established
by the Secretary to ensure that the measurements of seat belt use are
accurate and representative. In addition, in 2008, the National Highway
Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) and the Governors Highway Safety
Association (GHSA) partnered to develop a voluntary minimum set of
performance measures to be used by States and federal agencies in the
development and implementation of behavioral highway safety plans and
programs. Included in the set as the core behavior measure is B-1,
observed seat belt use for passenger vehicles, front seat outboard
occupants. Since the original adoption of seat belt observational
survey Uniform Criteria in 1998, NHTSA and the States have accumulated
substantial experience in the design and implementation of these
surveys. This experience has provided insight into factors that could
affect survey accuracy and reliability. In addition, technological
improvements in road inventories have made it possible to select
observation sites in a more cost effective manner. For these reasons,
NHTSA proposed to revise the Uniform Criteria so that future surveys
will give States more accurate data to guide their occupant protection
programs.
    The States themselves use the information collected in their seat
belt use surveys to evaluate the effectiveness of their occupant
protection countermeasures programs and to identify relatively low seat
belt use areas and sub-populations requiring increased program
emphasis. NHTSA uses the collected information, pooled across the
States, to determine the relative impact of various countermeasures and
program strategies and to provide guidance to assist the States in
achieving the highest possible seat belt use. NHTSA also uses the
collected information from individual States to identify those whose
occupant protection programs would most benefit from special management
reviews, countermeasure demonstration projects and other forms of
technical assistance.
    The information collected for the States' seat belt observational
surveys is to include a specification of the survey design, to be
reassessed and, if appropriate, updated every five (5) years, or
earlier if the State so desires. The survey design specification will
include a description of the methodology used to select the survey
observation sites, the selection probability of each site, the survey
observation procedures and protocols, observer training and quality
control procedures. In addition, each State annually is to submit the
survey results, including, for each observation site, the number of
front seat outboard occupants that were observed, the number observed
to be wearing the seat belt, and the site weighting factor used to
combine the individual site data into the measure of statewide seat
belt use.
    The notice of proposed rulemaking, which included a statement of
the collection of information and a 60-day comment period, was
published on January 28, 2009. See 75 FR 4509. In the preamble to the
final rule published on April 1, 2011, the agency explained how the
collection of information contained in the final rule responded to any
comments received from the public. See 76 FR 18042. The agency also
included an identification and explanation of any modifications made in
the rule and why it certain comments were not adopted.
    Estimated Total Annual Burden: 19,040 hours.
    Estimated Number of Respondents: 56 (50 States, District of
Columbia, Puerto Rico, American Samoa, Guam, the Northern Mariana
Islands, and the U.S. Virgin Islands).

ADDRESSES: Send comments, within 30 days, to the Office of Information
and Regulatory Affairs, Office of Management and Budget, 725 17th
Street NW., Washington, DC 20503. Attention NHTSA Desk Officer.
    Comments are invited on: Whether the proposed collection of
information is necessary for the proper performance of the functions of
the agency, including whether the information will have practical
utility; the accuracy of the agency's estimate of the burden of the
proposed information collection; ways to enhance the quality, utility
and clarity of the information to be collected; and ways to minimize
the burden of the collection of information on respondents, including
the use of automated collection techniques or other forms of
information technology.

Mary D. Gunnels,
Associate Administrator, Regional Operations and Program Delivery.
[FR Doc. 2012-9197 Filed 4-16-12; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-59-P


[Federal Register: April 15, 2008 (Volume 73, Number 73)]
[Notices]
[Page 20284]
[DOCID:fr15ap08-68]

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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

[Docket No. DI08-5-000]

Loyalhanna Watershed Association, Inc.; Notice of Declaration of
Intention and Soliciting Comments, Protests, and/or Motions To
Intervene

April 8, 2008.
    Take notice that the following application has been filed with the
Commission and is available for public inspection:
    a. Application Type: Declaration of Intention.
    b. Docket No.: DI08-5-000.
    c. Date Filed: April 1, 2008.
    d. Applicant: Loyalhanna Watershed Association, Inc.
    e. Name of Project: Saxman Run Mine Drainage Treatment and
Hydroelectric Project.
    f. Location: The proposed Saxman Run Drainage Treatment and
Hydroelectric Project (Saxman) will be located on Saxman Run near the
town of Latrobe, Unity Township, Westmoreland County, Pennsylvania.
    g. Filed Pursuant to: Section 23(b)(1) of the Federal Power Act, 16
U.S.C. 817(b).
    h. Applicant Contact: Susan L. Huba, Program Manager, Loyalhanna
Watershed Association, 110 Andi Lane, Ligonier, PA 15658; telephone:
(724) 238-7560; fax:<PHONE_NUMBER>; e-mail<EMAIL_ADDRESS>    i. FERC Contact: Any questions on this notice should be addressed
to Henry Ecton,<PHONE_NUMBER>, or E-mail address:
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>    j. Deadline for filing comments, protests, and/or motions: May 09,
2008. All documents (original and eight copies) should be filed with:
Kimberly D. Bose, Secretary, Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, 888
First Street, NE., Washington, DC 20426. Comments, protests, and/or
interventions may be filed electronically via the Internet in lieu of
paper. See, 18 CFR 385.2001(a)(1)(iii) and the instructions on the
Commission's Web site at http://www.ferc.gov under the ``e-Filing link.
    Please include the docket number (DI08-5-000) on any comments,
protests, and/or motions filed.
    k. Description of Project: The proposed Saxman project will
include: (1) An intake manifold at three free-flowing pipes discharging
abandoned mine drainage; (2) a 2,200-foot-long, 14-inch-diameter
transmission pipe, conveying water from the intake manifold to the
Latrobe Municipal Authority Wastewater Treatment Plant (LMAWTP); (3) a
proposed concrete foundation and simple enclosure containing a 10-kW
turbine/generator, located at the LMAWTP; (4) a stone-and-grass-lined
tailrace to Saxman Run; and (5) appurtenant facilities. The proposed
project will not be connected to an interstate grid and will not occupy
any tribal or federal lands.
    When a Declaration of Intention is filed with the Federal Energy
Regulatory Commission, the Federal Power Act requires the Commission to
investigate and determine if the interests of interstate or foreign
commerce would be affected by the project. The Commission also
determines whether or not the project: (1) Would be located on a
navigable waterway; (2) would occupy or affect public lands or
reservations of the United States; (3) would utilize surplus water or
water power from a government dam; or (4) if applicable, has involved
or would involve any construction subsequent to 1935 that may have
increased or would increase the project's head or generating capacity,
or have otherwise significantly modified the project's pre-1935 design
or operation.
    l. Locations of the Application: Copies of this filing are on file
with the Commission and are available for public inspection. This
filing may be viewed on the Web at http://www.ferc.gov using the
``eLibrary'' link, select ``Docket No.'' and follow the instructions.
For assistance, please contact FERC Online Support at
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>or toll-free at<PHONE_NUMBER>, or TTY,
contact<PHONE_NUMBER>.
    m. Individuals desiring to be included on the Commission's mailing
list should so indicate by writing to the Secretary of the Commission.
    n. Comments, Protests, or Motions to Intervene--Anyone may submit
comments, a protest, or a motion to intervene in accordance with the
requirements of Rules of Practice and Procedure, 18 CFR 385.210, .211,
.214. In determining the appropriate action to take, the Commission
will consider all protests or other comments filed, but only those who
file a motion to intervene in accordance with the Commission's Rules
may become a party to the proceeding. Any comments, protests, or
motions to intervene must be received on or before the specified
comment date for the particular application.
    o. Filing and Service of Responsive Documents--Any filings must
bear in all capital letters the title ``COMMENTS'', ``PROTESTS'', AND/
OR ``MOTIONS TO INTERVENE'', as applicable, and the Docket Number of
the particular application to which the filing refers. A copy of any
motion to intervene must also be served upon each representative of the
Applicant specified in the particular application.
    p. Agency Comments--Federal, State, and local agencies are invited
to file comments on the described application. A copy of the
application may be obtained by agencies directly from the Applicant. If
an agency does not file comments within the time specified for filing
comments, it will be presumed to have no comments. One copy of an
agency's comments must also be sent to the Applicant's representatives.

Kimberly D. Bose,
Secretary.
 [FR Doc. E8-7927 Filed 4-14-08; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6717-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 87, Number 125 (Thursday, June 30, 2022)]
[Notices]
[Pages 39083-39084]
[FR Doc No: 2022-14011]

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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

Combined Notice of Filings #1

    Take notice that the Commission received the following exempt
wholesale generator filings:

    Docket Numbers: EG22-152-000.
    Applicants: Northwest Ohio IA, LLC.
    Description: Northwest Ohio IA, LLC submits Notice of Self-
Certification of Exempt Wholesale Generator Status.
    Filed Date: 6/23/22.
    Accession Number: 20220623-5184.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. ET 7/14/22.

    Docket Numbers: EG22-153-000.
    Applicants: Northwest Ohio Solar, LLC.
    Description: Northwest Ohio Solar, LLC submits Notice of Self-
Certification of Exempt Wholesale Generator Status.
    Filed Date: 6/23/22.
    Accession Number: 20220623-5185.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. ET 7/14/22.

    Docket Numbers: EG22-154-000.
    Applicants: EDPR CA Solar Park LLC.
    Description: Notice of Self-Certification of Exempt Wholesale
Generator Status of EDPR CA Solar Park LLC under.
    Filed Date: 6/24/22.
    Accession Number: 20220624-5147.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. ET 7/15/22.

    Docket Numbers: EG22-155-000.
    Applicants: EDPR CA Solar Park II LLC.
    Description: EDPR CA Solar Park II LLC submits Notice of Self-
Certification of Exempt Wholesale Generator Status.
    Filed Date: 6/24/22.
    Accession Number: 20220624-5152.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. ET 7/15/22.

    Docket Numbers: EG22-156-000.
    Applicants: EDPR Scarlet I LLC.
    Description: Notice of Self-Certification of Exempt Wholesale
Generator Status of EDPR Scarlet I LLC.
    Filed Date: 6/24/22.
    Accession Number: 20220624-5153.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. ET 7/15/22.

    Take notice that the Commission received the following electric
rate filings:

    Docket Numbers: ER18-1150-006.
    Applicants: Trishe Wind Ohio, LLC.
    Description: Notice of Non-Material Change in Status of Northwest
Ohio Wind, LLC.
    Filed Date: 6/24/22.
    Accession Number: 20220624-5016.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. ET 7/15/22.

    Docket Numbers: ER20-1085-002.
    Applicants: Virginia Electric and Power Company, PJM
Interconnection, L.L.C.
    Description: Compliance filing: Virginia Electric and Power Company
submits tariff filing per 35: Dominion submits Second Order No. 864
Compliance Filing in ER20-1085 to be effective N/A.
    Filed Date: 6/24/22.
    Accession Number: 20220624-5098.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. ET 7/15/22.

    Docket Numbers: ER22-1520-001.
    Applicants: Commonwealth Edison Company, PJM Interconnection,
L.L.C.
    Description: Tariff Amendment: Commonwealth Edison Company submits
tariff filing per 35.17(b): Commonwealth Edison submits response to May
26 Deficiency Notice to be effective 9/1/2022.
    Filed Date: 6/24/22.
    Accession Number: 20220624-5118.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. ET 7/15/22.

    Docket Numbers: ER22-1645-001.
    Applicants: Pacific Gas and Electric Company.
    Description: Compliance filing: Compliance Filing E&P Proforma
Letter Agreement WDT to be effective 6/15/2022.
    Filed Date: 6/24/22.
    Accession Number: 20220624-5087.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. ET 7/15/22.

    Docket Numbers: ER22-2025-000.
    Applicants: Southern California Edison Company.
    Description: Report Filing: SCE Errata to Tule Hydropower LA to
Correct Effective Date (ER22-2025) to be effective N/A.
    Filed Date: 6/23/22.
    Accession Number: 20220623-5067.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. ET 7/14/22.

    Docket Numbers: ER22-2180-000.
    Applicants: New York State Electric & Gas Corporation.
    Description: Sec.  205(d) Rate Filing: Certificate of Concurrence
to CSRA to be effective 8/22/2022.
    Filed Date: 6/23/22.
    Accession Number: 20220623-5164.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. ET 7/14/22.

    Docket Numbers: ER22-2181-000.
    Applicants: Rochester Gas and Electric Corporation.
    Description: Sec.  205(d) Rate Filing: Certificate of Concurrence
to CSRA to be effective 8/22/2022.
    Filed Date: 6/23/22.
    Accession Number: 20220623-5168.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. ET 7/14/22.

    Docket Numbers: ER22-2182-000.
    Applicants: Bruce Power Inc.
    Description: Compliance filing: Revised MBR Tariff and New eTariff
Baseline Filing to be effective 6/24/2022.
    Filed Date: 6/23/22.
    Accession Number: 20220623-5171.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. ET 7/14/22.

    Docket Numbers: ER22-2183-000.
    Applicants: Central Hudson Gas & Electric Corporation.
    Description: Central Hudson Gas and Electric Corporation submits
Certificate of Concurrence and tariff record incorporating Con Ed's
CSRA.
    Filed Date: 6/22/22.
    Accession Number: 20220622-5142.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. ET 7/13/22.

    Docket Numbers: ER22-2184-000.
    Applicants: City of Vernon, California.
    Description: Tariff Amendment: Notice of Cancellation of
Transmission Owner Tariff to be effective 10/7/2022.
    Filed Date: 6/24/22.
    Accession Number: 20220624-5015.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. ET 7/15/22.

    Docket Numbers: ER22-2185-000.
    Applicants: Black Hills Colorado Electric, LLC.
    Description: Sec.  205(d) Rate Filing: Transmission Formula Rate
Template and Protocols to be effective 9/1/2022.

    Filed Date: 6/24/22.
    Accession Number: 20220624-5032.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. ET 7/15/22.

    Docket Numbers: ER22-2186-000.
    Applicants: AEP Texas Inc.
    Description: Sec.  205(d) Rate Filing: AEPTX-Los Vientos Windpower
1B 1st A&R Generation Interconnection Agreement to be effective 6/3/
2022.
    Filed Date: 6/24/22.
    Accession Number: 20220624-5036.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. ET 7/15/22.

    Docket Numbers: ER22-2187-000.
    Applicants: Northwest Ohio Solar, LLC.
    Description: Baseline eTariff Filing: Application of Northwest Ohio
Solar, LLC for Market-Based Rate Authority to be effective 8/23/2022.
    Filed Date: 6/24/22.
    Accession Number: 20220624-5050.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. ET 7/15/22.

    Docket Numbers: ER22-2188-000.
    Applicants: Northwest Ohio IA, LLC.
    Description: Baseline eTariff Filing: Application of Northwest Ohio
IA, LLC for Market-Based Rate Authority to be effective 8/23/2022.
    Filed Date: 6/24/22.
    Accession Number: 20220624-5051.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. ET 7/15/22.

    Docket Numbers: ER22-2189-000.
    Applicants: Vermont Transco LLC.
    Description: Sec.  205(d) Rate Filing: Shared Structure
Participation Agreements Filing to be effective 1/1/2022.
    Filed Date: 6/24/22.
    Accession Number: 20220624-5064.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. ET 7/15/22.

    Docket Numbers: ER22-2190-000.
    Applicants: EDPR CA Solar Park LLC.
    Description: Baseline eTariff Filing: Market-Based Rate Application
to be effective 8/24/2022.
    Filed Date: 6/24/22.
    Accession Number: 20220624-5117.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. ET 7/15/22.

    Docket Numbers: ER22-2191-000.
    Applicants: EDPR CA Solar Park II LLC.
    Description: Baseline eTariff Filing: Market-Based Rate Application
to be effective 8/24/2022.
    Filed Date: 6/24/22.
    Accession Number: 20220624-5119.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. ET 7/15/22.

    Docket Numbers: ER22-2192-000.
    Applicants: EDPR Scarlet I LLC.
    Description: Baseline eTariff Filing: Market-Based Rate Application
to be effective 8/24/2022.
    Filed Date: 6/24/22.
    Accession Number: 20220624-5120.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. ET 7/15/22.

    Docket Numbers: ER22-2193-000.
    Applicants: Duke Energy Florida, LLC.
    Description: Sec.  205(d) Rate Filing: DEF-TECO Concurrence RS No.
379 to be effective 9/1/2022.
    Filed Date: 6/24/22.
    Accession Number: 20220624-5129.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. ET 7/15/22.

    Docket Numbers: ER22-2194-000.
    Applicants: Northern Indiana Public Service Company LLC.
    Description: Sec.  205(d) Rate Filing: Porter CIAC Agreement to be
effective 6/18/2022.
    Filed Date: 6/24/22.
    Accession Number: 20220624-5135.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. ET 7/15/22.

    Take notice that the Commission received the following PURPA
210(m)(3) filings:

    Docket Numbers: QM22-12-000.
    Applicants: PPL Electric Utilities Corporation.
    Description: Application of PPL Electric Utilities Corporation to
Terminate Its Mandatory Purchase Obligation under the Public Utility
Regulatory Policies Act of 1978.
    Filed Date: 6/23/22.
    Accession Number: 20220623-5173.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. ET 7/21/22.

    Docket Numbers: QM22-13-000.
    Applicants: Upper Michigan Energy Resources Corporation.
    Description: Application of Upper Michigan Energy Resources Group
to Terminate Its Mandatory Purchase Obligation under the Public Utility
Regulatory Policies Act of 1978.
    Filed Date: 6/24/22.
    Accession Number: 20220624-5151.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. ET 7/22/22.

    The filings are accessible in the Commission's eLibrary system
(https://elibrary.ferc.gov/idmws/search/fercgensearch.asp) by querying
the docket number.
    Any person desiring to intervene or protest in any of the above
proceedings must file in accordance with Rules 211 and 214 of the
Commission's Regulations (18 CFR 385.211 and 385.214) on or before 5:00
p.m. Eastern time on the specified comment date. Protests may be
considered, but intervention is necessary to become a party to the
proceeding.
    eFiling is encouraged. More detailed information relating to filing
requirements, interventions, protests, service, and qualifying
facilities filings can be found at: http://www.ferc.gov/docs-filing/efiling/filing-req.pdf. For other information, call<PHONE_NUMBER>
(toll free). For TTY, call<PHONE_NUMBER>.

    Dated: June 24, 2022.
Debbie-Anne A. Reese,
Deputy Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2022-14011 Filed 6-29-22; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6717-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 76, Number 52 (Thursday, March 17, 2011)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 14626-14631]
[FR Doc No: 2011-6260]

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

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

40 CFR Part 52

[EPA-R04-OAR-2009-0426-201030; FRL-9282-6]

Approval and Promulgation of Implementation Plans; Kentucky;
110(a)(1) and (2) Infrastructure Requirements for the 1997 8-Hour Ozone
National Ambient Air Quality Standards

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Proposed rule.

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

SUMMARY: EPA is proposing to approve the State Implementation Plan
(SIP), submitted by the Commonwealth of Kentucky, through the Division
of Air Quality (DAQ) of the Kentucky Environmental and Public
Protection Cabinet, now called the Energy and Environment Cabinet, as
demonstrating that the Commonwealth meets the requirements of sections
110(a)(1) and (2) of the Clean Air Act (CAA or Act) for the 1997 8-hour
ozone national ambient air quality standards (NAAQS). Section 110(a) of
the CAA requires that each state adopt and submit a SIP for the
implementation, maintenance and enforcement of each NAAQS promulgated
by the EPA and is commonly referred to as an ``infrastructure'' SIP.
Kentucky certified that the Kentucky SIP contains provisions that
ensure the 1997 8-hour ozone NAAQS are implemented, enforced, and
maintained in Kentucky (hereafter referred to as ``infrastructure
submission''). Kentucky's infrastructure submission, provided to EPA on
December 13, 2007, addressed all the required infrastructure elements
for the 1997 8-hour ozone NAAQS.

DATES: Written comments must be received on or before April 18, 2011.

ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, identified by Docket ID No. EPA-R04-
OAR-2009-0426, by one of the following methods:
    1. http://www.regulations.gov: Follow the on-line instructions for
submitting comments.
    2. E-mail<EMAIL_ADDRESS>    3. Fax:<PHONE_NUMBER>.
    4. Mail: ``EPA-R04-OAR-2009-0426,'' Regulatory Development Section,
Air Planning Branch, Air, Pesticides and Toxics Management Division,
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Region 4, 61 Forsyth Street, SW.,
Atlanta, Georgia 30303-8960.
    5. Hand Delivery or Courier: Lynorae Benjamin, Regulatory
Development Section, Air Planning Branch, Air, Pesticides and Toxics
Management Division, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Region 4, 61
Forsyth Street, SW., Atlanta, Georgia 30303-8960. 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 federal holidays.
    Instructions: Direct your comments to Docket ID No. EPA-R04-OAR-
2009-0426. EPA's policy is that all comments received will be included
in the public docket without change and may be made available online at
http://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 http://www.regulations.gov or e-mail, information that you consider to be CBI
or otherwise protected. The http://www.regulations.gov Web site is an
``anonymous access'' system, 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 e-mail comment directly to EPA without
going through http://www.regulations.gov, your e-mail 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. For additional information about EPA's public
docket visit the EPA Docket Center homepage at http://www.epa.gov/epahome/dockets.htm.
    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 http://www.regulations.gov or in hard copy at the Regulatory Development
Section, Air Planning Branch, Air, Pesticides and Toxics Management
Division, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Region 4, 61 Forsyth
Street, SW., Atlanta, Georgia 30303-8960. EPA requests that if at all
possible, you contact the person listed in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION
CONTACT section to schedule your inspection. The Regional Office's
official hours of business are Monday through Friday, 8:30 to 4:30,
excluding federal holidays.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Nacosta C. Ward, Regulatory
Development Section, Air Planning Branch, Air, Pesticides and Toxics
Management Division, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Region 4, 61
Forsyth Street, SW., Atlanta, Georgia 30303-8960. The telephone number
is<PHONE_NUMBER>. Ms. Ward can also be reached via electronic mail at
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
Table of Contents

I. Background
II. What elements are required under Sections 110(a)(1) and (2)?
III. What is EPA's analysis of how Kentucky addressed the elements
of Sections 110(a)(1) and (2) ``infrastructure'' provisions?
IV. Proposed Action
V. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews

I. Background

    On July 18, 1997, EPA promulgated a new NAAQS for ozone based on 8-
hour

average concentrations. The 8-hour averaging period replaced the
previous 1-hour averaging period, and the level of the NAAQS was
changed from 0.12 parts per million (ppm) to 0.08 ppm (see 62 FR
38856). Pursuant to section 110(a)(1) of the CAA, states are required
to submit SIPs meeting the requirements of section 110(a)(2) within
three years after promulgation of a new or revised NAAQS. Sections
110(a)(1) and (2) require states to address basic SIP requirements,
including emissions inventories, monitoring, and modeling to assure
attainment and maintenance of the NAAQS. States were required to submit
such SIPs for the 1997 8-hour ozone NAAQS to EPA no later than June
2000. However, intervening litigation over the 1997 8-hour ozone NAAQS
created uncertainty about how to proceed and many states did not
provide the required ``infrastructure'' SIP submission for these newly
promulgated NAAQS.
    On March 4, 2004, Earthjustice submitted a notice of intent to sue
related to EPA's failure to issue findings of failure to submit related
to the ``infrastructure'' requirements for the 1997 8-hour ozone NAAQS.
EPA entered into a consent decree with Earthjustice which required EPA,
among other things, to complete a Federal Register notice announcing
EPA's determinations pursuant to section 110(k)(1)(B) as to whether
each state had made complete submissions to meet the requirements of
section 110(a)(2) for the 1997 8-hour ozone NAAQS by December 15, 2007.
Subsequently, EPA received an extension of the date to complete this
Federal Register notice until March 17, 2008, based upon agreement to
make the findings with respect to submissions made by January 7, 2008.
In accordance with the consent decree, EPA made completeness findings
for each state based upon what the Agency received from each state as
of January 7, 2008.
    On March 27, 2008, EPA published a final rulemaking entitled,
``Completeness Findings for Section 110(a) State Implementation Plans;
8-Hour Ozone NAAQS,'' making a finding that each state had submitted or
failed to submit a complete SIP that provided the basic program
elements of section 110(a)(2) necessary to implement the 1997 8-hour
ozone NAAQS. See 73 FR 16205. For those states that did receive
findings, the findings of failure to submit for all or a portion of a
state's implementation plan established a 24-month deadline for EPA to
promulgate a Federal Implementation Plan (FIP) to address the
outstanding SIP elements unless, prior to that time, the affected
states submitted, and EPA approved, the required SIPs.
    The findings that all or portions of a state's submission are
complete establish a 12-month deadline for EPA to take action upon the
complete SIP elements in accordance with section 110(k). Kentucky's
infrastructure submission was received by EPA on December 13, 2007, and
was determined to be complete on March 27, 2008. Kentucky was among
other states that did not receive findings of failure to submit because
it provided a complete submission to EPA to address the infrastructure
elements for the 1997 8-hour ozone NAAQS by March 1, 2008. Today's
action is proposing to approve Kentucky's infrastructure submission for
which EPA made the completeness determination on March 27, 2008. This
action is not approving any specific rule, but rather proposing that
Alabama's already approved SIP meets certain CAA requirements.

II. What elements are required under Sections 110(a)(1) and (2)?

    Section 110(a) of the CAA requires states to submit SIPs to provide
for the implementation, maintenance, and enforcement of a new or
revised NAAQS within three years following the promulgation of such
NAAQS, or within such shorter period as EPA may prescribe. Section
110(a) imposes the obligation upon states to make a SIP submission to
EPA for a new or revised NAAQS, but the contents of that submission may
vary depending upon the facts and circumstances. In particular, the
data and analytical tools available at the time the state develops and
submits the SIP for a new or revised NAAQS affects the content of the
submission. The contents of such SIP submissions may also vary
depending upon what provisions the state's existing SIP already
contains. In the case of the 1997 8-hour ozone NAAQS, states typically
have met the basic program elements required in section 110(a)(2)
through earlier SIP submissions in connection with previous ozone
NAAQS.
    More specifically, section 110(a)(1) provides the procedural and
timing requirements for SIPs. Section 110(a)(2) lists specific elements
that states must meet for ``infrastructure'' SIP requirements related
to a newly established or revised NAAQS. As mentioned above, these
requirements include SIP infrastructure elements such as modeling,
monitoring, and emissions inventories that are designed to assure
attainment and maintenance of the NAAQS. The requirements that are the
subject of this proposed rulemaking are listed below \1\ and in EPA's
October 2, 2007, memorandum entitled ``Guidance on SIP Elements
Required Under Section 110(a)(1) and (2) for the 1997 8-Hour Ozone and
PM2.5 National Ambient Air Quality Standards.''
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ Two elements identified in section 110(a)(2) are not
governed by the three year submission deadline of section 110(a)(1)
because SIPs incorporating necessary local nonattainment area
controls are not due within three years after promulgation of a new
or revised NAAQS, but rather due at the time the nonattainment area
plan requirements are due pursuant to section 172. These
requirements are: (1) Submissions required by section 110(a)(2)(C)
to the extent that subsection refers to a permit program as required
in part D Title 1 of the CAA, and (2) submissions required by
section 110(a)(2)(1) which pertain to the nonattainment planning
requirements of part D, Title 1 of the CAA. Today's proposed
rulemaking does not address infrastructure elements related to
section 110(a)(2)(1) or the nonattainment planning requirements of
110(a)(2)(C).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

     110(a)(2)(A): Emission limits and other control measures.
     110(a)(2)(B): Ambient air quality monitoring/data system.
     110(a)(2)(C): Program for enforcement of control
measures.\2\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \2\ This rulemaking only addresses requirements for this element
as they relate to attainment areas.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

     110(a)(2)(D): Interstate transport.\3\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \3\ Today's proposed rule does not address element
110(a)(2)(D)(i) (Interstate Transport) for the 1997 8-hour ozone
NAAQS. Interstate transport requirements were formerly addressed by
Kentucky consistent with the Clean Air Interstate Rule (CAIR). On
December 23, 2008, CAIR was remanded by the DC Circuit Court of
Appeals, without vacatur, back to EPA. See North Carolina v. EPA,
531 F.3d 896 (DC Cir. 2008). Prior to this remand, EPA took final
action to approve Kentucky's SIP revision, which was submitted to
comply with CAIR. See 72 FR 56623 (October 4, 2007). In so doing,
Kentucky's CAIR SIP revision addressed the interstate transport
provisions in Section 110(a)(2)(D)(i) for the 1997 8-hour ozone
NAAQS. In response to the remand of CAIR, EPA has since proposed a
new rule to address the interstate transport of NOX and
SOX in the eastern United States. See 75 FR 45210 (Aug.
2, 2010) (``the Transport Rule''). However, because this rule has
yet to be finalized, EPA's action on element 110(a)(2)(D)(i) will be
addressed in a separate action.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

     110(a)(2)(E): Adequate resources.
     110(a)(2)(F): Stationary source monitoring system.
     110(a)(2)(G): Emergency power.
     110(a)(2)(H): Future SIP revisions.
     110(a)(2)(I): Areas designated nonattainment and meet the
applicable requirements of part D.\4\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \4\ This requirement was inadvertently omitted from EPA's
October 2, 2007, memorandum entitled ``Guidance on SIP Elements
Required Under Section 110(a)(1) and (2) for the 1997 8-Hour Ozone
and PM2.5 National Ambient Air Quality Standards,'' but
as mentioned above is not relevant to today's proposed rulemaking.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

     110(a)(2)(J): Consultation with government officials;
public notification; and PSD and visibility protection.
     110(a)(2)(K): Air quality modeling/data.

     110(a)(2)(L): Permitting fees.
     110(a)(2)(M): Consultation/participation by affected local
entities.

III. What is EPA's analysis of how Kentucky addressed the elements of
Sections 110(a)(1) and (2) ``infrastructure'' provisions?

    Kentucky's infrastructure submission addresses the provisions of
sections 110(a)(1) and (2) as described below.
    1. 110(a)(2)(A): Emission limits and other control measures:
Kentucky's infrastructure submission provides an overview of the
provisions of the Kentucky Air Regulations relevant to air quality
control regulations. The regulations described below have been
federally approved in the Kentucky SIP and include enforceable emission
limitations and other control measures. Chapter 50--Division for Air
Quality; General Administrative Procedures of the Kentucky Air
Regulations generally authorizes the Kentucky Environmental and Public
Protection Cabinet to adopt rules for the control of air pollution,
including those necessary to obtain EPA approval under section 110 of
the CAA. The most recent federally approved revision of this chapter
was on April 21, 2010 (75 FR 20780). Chapter 51--Attainment and
Maintenance of the National Ambient Air Quality Standards also includes
references to rules adopted by Kentucky to control air pollution,
including ozone precursors. The most recent federally approved revision
of Chapter 51 was on April 21, 2010 (75 FR 20780). EPA has made the
preliminary determination that the provisions contained in these
chapters and Kentucky's practices are adequate to protect the 1997 8-
hour ozone NAAQS in the Commonwealth.
    In this action, EPA is not proposing to approve or disapprove any
existing state provisions with regard to excess emissions during
startup, shutdown, or malfunction (SSM) of operations at a facility.
EPA believes that a number of states have SSM provisions which are
contrary to the CAA and existing EPA guidance, ``State Implementation
Plans: Policy Regarding Excess Emissions During Malfunctions, Startup,
and Shutdown'' (September 20, 1999), and the Agency plans to address
such state regulations in the future. In the meantime, EPA encourages
any state having deficient SSM provisions to take steps to correct them
as soon as possible.
    Additionally, in this action, EPA is not proposing to approve or
disapprove any existing state rules with regard to director's
discretion or variance provisions. EPA believes that a number of states
have such provisions which are contrary to the CAA and existing EPA
guidance (52 FR 45109 (November 24, 1987)), and the Agency plans to
take action in the future to address such state regulations. In the
meantime, EPA encourages any state having a director's discretion or
variance provision which is contrary to the CAA and EPA guidance to
take steps to correct the deficiency as soon as possible.
    2. 110(a)(2)(B) Ambient air quality monitoring/data system:
Kentucky's infrastructure submission provides information in Chapter
50:050--Monitoring, with regard to the organization and structure of
the monitoring program that includes the local air quality programs.
These entities collect air monitoring data, quality assure the results
and report the data. The most recent federally approved revision of
this chapter was on July 12, 1982 (47 FR 30059). Chapter 51:010--
Attainment status designations includes information indicating
Kentucky's ozone monitor locations. The most recent federally approved
revision of this chapter was on July 24, 1998 (63 FR 39739). Annually,
EPA approves the ambient air monitoring network plan for the state
agencies. On June 30, 2010, the Commonwealth of Kentucky submitted its
plan to EPA, which also included the Louisville-Jefferson County local
monitoring program. On October 8, 2010, EPA approved Kentucky's
monitoring network plan. Kentucky's approved monitoring network plan
can be accessed at http://www.regulations.gov using Docket ID No. EPA-
R04-OAR-2009-0426. EPA has made the preliminary determination that
Kentucky's SIP and practices are adequate for the ambient air quality
monitoring and data system related to the 1997 8-hour ozone NAAQS.
    3. 110(a)(2)(C) Program for enforcement of control measures
including review of proposed new sources: In Chapter 51:052--Review of
new sources in or impacting upon nonattainment areas of Kentucky's SIP,
a description of the compliance activities of the Commonwealth's
regional field offices and the one local agency in Jefferson County is
included. The most recent federally approved revision of this chapter
was on July 11, 2006 (71 FR 38990). It also includes a description of
the Commonwealth's statutory authority to enforce regulations relating
to attainment and maintenance of the 1997 8-hour ozone NAAQS.
Additionally, Kentucky submitted a SIP revision on February 4, 2010,
which addresses the Ozone Implementation New Source Review (NSR) Update
requirements to include nitrogen oxides (NOX) as an ozone
precursor for permitting purposes for prevention of significant
deterioration (PSD) and nonattainment NSR. Specifically, the Ozone
Implementation NSR Update requirements included changes to major source
thresholds for sources in certain classes of nonattainment areas,
changes to offset ratios for marginal, moderate, serious, severe, and
extreme ozone nonattainment areas, provisions addressing offset
requirements for facilities that shut down or curtail operation, and a
requirement stating that NOX emissions are ozone precursors.
EPA published a final action approving Kentucky's revisions which
incorporate NOX as an ozone precursor on September 15, 2010
(75 FR 55988). Chapter 52:030--Federally enforceable permits for non-
major sources describes how the Commonwealth's construction permits
program reviews proposed new major and minor sources of volatile
organic compounds (VOCs) and NOX for compliance with the 8-
hour ozone NAAQS.
    EPA published a final action revising Kentucky's greenhouse gas
(GHG) regulations on December 29, 2010 (75 FR 81868). The revisions
include two significant changes impacting the regulation of GHGs under
Kentucky's NSR/PSD program; (1) provides the Commonwealth with
authority to issue PSD permits governing GHGs, and (2) establishes
appropriate emission thresholds for determining which new stationary
sources and modification projects become subject to Kentucky's PSD
permitting requirements for its GHG emissions. EPA has made the
preliminary determination that Kentucky's SIP and practices are
adequate for program enforcement of control measures including review
of proposed new sources related to the 1997 8-hour ozone NAAQS.
    In this action, EPA is proposing to approve Kentucky's
infrastructure SIP for the 8-hour ozone NAAQS with respect to the
general requirement in section 110(a)(2)(C) to include a program in the
SIP that regulates the modification and construction of any stationary
source as necessary to assure that the NAAQS are achieved. EPA is not
proposing to approve or disapprove the state's existing minor NSR
program itself to the extent that it is inconsistent with EPA's
regulations governing this program. EPA believes that a number of
states may have minor NSR provisions that are contrary to the existing
EPA regulations for this program. EPA intends to work with states to
reconcile state minor NSR programs with EPA's regulatory provisions for
the program.

The statutory requirements of section 110(a)(2)(C) provide for
considerable flexibility in designing minor NSR programs, and EPA
believes it may be time to revisit the regulatory requirements for this
program to give the states an appropriate level of flexibility to
design a program that meets their particular air quality concerns,
while assuring reasonable consistency across the country in protecting
the NAAQS with respect to new and modified minor sources.
    EPA has made the preliminary determination that Kentucky's SIP and
practices are adequate for program enforcement of control measures
including review of proposed new sources related to the 1997 8-hour
ozone NAAQS.
    4. 110(a)(2)(D)(ii) Interstate and International transport
provisions: In Chapter 51:017--Prevention of significant deterioration
of air quality, Kentucky outlines how it will notify neighboring states
of potential impacts from new or modified sources. Kentucky does not
have any pending obligation under section 115 and 126. Additionally, it
has federally approved regulations in its SIP that satisfy the
requirements for the NOX SIP Call. See 67 FR 17624 (April
11, 2002). EPA has made the preliminary determination that Kentucky's
SIP and practices are adequate for insuring compliance with the
applicable requirements relating to interstate and international
pollution abatement for the 1997 8-hour ozone NAAQS.
    5. 110(a)(2)(E) Adequate resources: The Kentucky DAQ is responsible
for adopting air quality rules, revising SIPs, developing and tracking
the budget, establishing the title V fees, and other planning needs.
Additionally, Kentucky DAQ coordinates agreements with the local air
pollution control program for Jefferson County, the Louisville Metro
Air Pollution Control District. Annually, states update these grant
commitments based on current SIP requirements, air quality planning and
applicable requirements related NAAQS, including the 1997 8-hour ozone
NAAQS. On May 6, 2010, EPA submitted a letter to the Commonwealth
outlining 105 grant commitments and current status of those commitments
for fiscal year 2009. The letter EPA submitted to Kentucky can be
accessed at http://www.regulations.gov using Docket ID No. EPA-R04-OAR-
2009-0426. There were no outstanding issues, therefore the
Commonwealth's grants were finalized and closed out. EPA has made the
preliminary determination that Kentucky has adequate resources for
implementation of the 1997 8-hour ozone NAAQS.
    6. 110(a)(2)(F) Stationary source monitoring system: Kentucky's
infrastructure submission describes how the major source and minor
source emission inventory programs collect emission data throughout the
Commonwealth (including Jefferson County) and ensure the quality of
data. These programs generate data for ozone precursors (VOCs and
NOX) and summarize emissions from point, area, mobile, and
biogenic (natural) sources. Kentucky DAQ uses these data to track
progress towards maintaining the NAAQS, develop control and maintenance
strategies, identify sources and general emission levels, and determine
compliance with emission regulations and additional EPA requirements.
This is outlined in Chapter 50:050--Monitoring of the Kentucky Air
Regulations.
    Additionally, the National Emissions Inventory (NEI) is EPA's
central repository for air emissions data. EPA published the Air
Emissions Reporting Rule (AERR) on December 5, 2008, which modified the
requirements for collecting and reporting air emissions data (73 FR
76539). The AERR shortened the time states had to report emissions data
from 17 to 12 months, giving states one calendar year to submit
emissions data. All states are required to submit a comprehensive
emissions inventory every three years and report emissions for certain
larger sources annually through EPA's online Emissions Inventory System
(EIS). States report emissions data for the six criteria pollutants and
the precursors that form them--nitrogen oxides, sulfur dioxide,
ammonia, lead, carbon monoxide, particulate matter, and volatile
organic compounds. Many states also voluntarily report emissions of
hazardous air pollutants. Kentucky made its latest update to the NEI on
February 17, 2011. EPA compiles the emissions data, supplementing it
where necessary, and releases it to the general public through the Web
site http://www.epa.gov/ttn/chief/eiinformation.html. EPA has made the
preliminary determination that Kentucky's SIP and practices are
adequate for the stationary source monitoring systems related to the
1997 8-hour ozone NAAQS.
    7. 110(a)(2)(G) Emergency power: Kentucky's infrastructure
submission provides an overview of the Kentucky Air Regulations,
specifically Chapter 55--Emergency Episodes which identifies air
pollution emergency episodes and preplanned abatement strategies. The
episode criteria specified in this chapter for ozone are based on a 1-
hour average ozone level at a monitoring site. These criteria have
previously been approved by EPA. EPA has made the preliminary
determination that these criteria are adequate to address ozone
emergency episodes for the 1997 8-hour ozone NAAQS. As a result, EPA
has made the preliminary determination that Kentucky's SIP and
practices are adequate for emergency powers related to the 1997 8-hour
ozone NAAQS.
    8. 110(a)(2)(H) Future SIP revisions: As previously discussed,
Kentucky's DAQ is responsible for adopting air quality rules and
revising SIPs as needed to attain or maintain the NAAQS . Kentucky has
the ability and authority to respond to calls for SIP revisions, and
has provided a number of SIP revisions over the years for
implementation of the NAAQS. Specific to the 1997 8-hour ozone NAAQS,
Kentucky has provided the following submissions:
     May 20, 2005, SIP Revision (EPA approval, see 71 FR 4047,
January 25, 2006)--Redesignation request and 175A maintenance plan for
the Clarksville-Hopkinsville, TN-KY Area;
     September 29, 2006, SIP revision (EPA approval, see 72 FR
36601, July 5, 2007)--Redesignation request and 175A maintenance plan
for the Louisville Area;
     September 29, 2006, SIP revision (EPA approval, see 72 FR
43172, August 3, 2007)--Redesignation request and 175A maintenance plan
for the Huntington-Ashland, WV-KY Area;
     May 27, 2008, SIP revision--110(a)(1) Maintenance plans
for a portion of Greenup County, Lexington Area, Owensboro Area,
Edmonson County and the Paducah Area (EPA approval of the Paducah Area,
see 75 FR 52467, August 27, 2010);
     January 29, 2010, SIP revision (EPA approval, see 75 FR
47218, August 5, 2010)--Redesignation request and 175A maintenance plan
for the Northern Kentucky portion of the Cincinnati Area; and
     February 4, 2010, SIP revision (EPA approval, see 75 FR
55988, September 15, 2010) NOX as a precursor.
    In all of Kentucky's 175A maintenance plans, the Commonwealth
commits to provide additional SIP revisions for the 1997 8-hour ozone
NAAQS pursuant to 175(A)(b), and also commits to provide additional SIP
revisions to implement contingency measures should one of the areas
that was redesignated to attainment violate the 1997 8-hour ozone
NAAQS. EPA has made the preliminary determination that Kentucky's SIP
and practices

adequately demonstrate a commitment to provide future SIP revisions
related to the 1997 8-hour ozone NAAQS when necessary.
    9. 110(a)(2)(J) (121 consultation) Consultation with government
officials: Kentucky Air Regulations Chapter 50--Division for Air
Quality; General Administrative Procedures of the Kentucky Air
Regulations and Chapter 51--Attainment and Maintenance of the National
Ambient Air Quality Standards provide for consultation with government
officials whose jurisdictions might be affected by SIP development
activities. More specifically, Kentucky adopted state-wide consultation
procedures for the implementation of transportation conformity which
includes the consideration of the development of mobile inventories for
SIP development. Required partners covered by Kentucky's consultation
procedures include federal, state and local transportation and air
quality agency officials. EPA approved Kentucky's consultation
procedures on September 15, 2010 (75 FR 55988). Additionally, DAQ
submitted a regional haze plan which outlines its consultation
practices with Federal Land Managers. EPA has made the preliminary
determination that Kentucky's SIP and practices adequately demonstrate
consultation with government officials related to the 1997 8-hour ozone
NAAQS when necessary.
    10. 110(a)(2)(J) (127 public notification) Public notification: The
Commonwealth's emergency episode provisions provide for notification to
the public when the NAAQS, including the ozone NAAQS, are exceeded.
This is also discussed above in 110(a)(2)(G). Additionally, the
Commonwealth reports daily air quality information on its state Web
site at: http://air.ky.gov/Pages/AirQualityIndexMonitoring.aspx to
inform the public on the existing air quality within the Commonwealth.
EPA has made the preliminary determination that Kentucky's SIP and
practices adequately demonstrate the Commonwealth's ability to provide
public notification related to the 1997 8-hour ozone NAAQS when
necessary.
    11. 110(a)(2)(J) (PSD) PSD and visibility protection: Kentucky
demonstrates its authority to regulate new and modified sources of
ozone precursors (VOCs and NOX) to assist in the protection
of air quality in Kentucky Air Regulations Chapter 51:017--Prevention
of significant deterioration of air quality. Kentucky submitted a SIP
revision on February 4, 2010, which addresses the Ozone Implementation
NSR Update requirements to include NOX as an ozone precursor
for permitting purposes. Specifically, the Ozone Implementation NSR
Update requirements included changes to major source thresholds for
sources in certain classes of nonattainment areas, changes to offset
ratios for marginal, moderate, serious, severe, and extreme ozone
nonattainment areas, provisions addressing offset requirements for
facilities that shut down or curtail operation, and a requirement
stating that NOX emissions are ozone precursors. This SIP
revision incorporates changes to Chapter 51:052--Review of new sources
in or impacting upon nonattainment areas and Chapter 51:017--Prevention
of Significant Deterioration of air quality. This action was proposed
on April 1, 2010 (75 FR 16388). EPA published a final action approving
Kentucky's revisions to incorporate changes to Chapter 51:052 and
Chapter 51:017. September 15, 2010 (75 FR 55988).
    With regard to the applicable requirements for visibility
protection, EPA recognizes that states are subject to visibility and
regional haze program requirements under Part C of the Act (which
includes sections 169A and 169B). In the event of the establishment of
a new NAAQS; however, the visibility and regional haze program
requirements under part C do not change. Thus, EPA finds that there is
no new visibility obligation ``triggered'' under section 110(a)(2)(J)
when a new NAAQS becomes effective. This would be the case even in the
event a secondary PM2.5 NAAQS for visibility is established,
because this NAAQS would not affect visibility requirements under part
C. Kentucky has submitted a SIP revision for approval to satisfy the
requirements of the CAA Section 169A, and the regional haze and best
available retrofit technology rules contained in 40 CFR 51.308. This
SIP revision is currently under review and will be acted on in a
separate action. EPA has made the preliminary determination that
Kentucky's SIP and practices adequately demonstrate the Commonwealth's
ability to implement PSD programs and to provide for visibility
protection related to the 1997 8-hour ozone NAAQS when necessary.
    12. 110(a)(2)(K) Air quality and modeling/data: Kentucky conducts
air quality modeling and reports the results of such modeling to EPA,
as set forth in Kentucky Air Regulations Chapter 50:040--Air quality
models. This regulation shows that ambient ozone monitoring is used, in
conjunction with pre- and post-construction ambient air monitoring, to
track local and regional scale changes in ozone concentrations.
Additionally, Kentucky supports a regional effort to coordinate the
development of emissions inventories and conduct regional modeling for
several NAAQS, including the 1997 8-hour ozone NAAQS, for the
Southeastern states. Taken as a whole, the Commonwealth's air quality
regulations demonstrate that DAQ has the authority to provide relevant
data for the purpose of predicting the effect on ambient air quality of
the 8-hour ozone NAAQS. EPA has made the preliminary determination that
Kentucky's SIP and practices adequately demonstrate the Commonwealth's
ability to provide for air quality and modeling, along with analysis of
the associated data, related to the 1997 8-hour ozone NAAQS when
necessary.
    13. 110(a)(2)(L) Permitting fees: Kentucky addresses the review of
construction permits as previously discussed in 110(a)(2)(C) above.
Permitting fees are collected through the Commonwealth's title V fees
program, which has been federally approved. EPA has made the
preliminary determination that Kentucky's SIP and practices adequately
provide for permitting fees related to the 1997 8-hour ozone NAAQS when
necessary.
    14. 110(a)(2)(M) Consultation/participation by affected local
entities: The Kentucky DAQ coordinates with local governments affected
by the SIP. More specifically, Kentucky adopted state-wide consultation
procedures for the implementation of transportation conformity which
includes the consideration of the development of mobile inventories for
SIP development and the requirements that link transportation planning
and air quality planning in nonattainment and maintenance areas. EPA
approved these procedures in Chapter 50:066 Conformity of
transportation plans, programs, and projects (Amendment) on April 21,
2010 (75 FR 20180). Required partners covered by Kentucky's
consultation procedures include federal, state and local transportation
and air quality agency officials. The state and local transportation
agency officials are most directly impacted by transportation
conformity requirements and are required to provide public involvement
for their activities including the analysis of how the Commonwealth
meets transportation conformity requirements. Additionally, Chapter
65--Mobile Source-Related Emissions also discusses consultation related
activities specifically related to mobile sources. EPA has made the
preliminary determination that Kentucky's SIP and practices adequately
demonstrate consultation by affected

local entities related to the 1997 8-hour ozone NAAQS when necessary.

IV. Proposed Action

    As described above, the Commonwealth of Kentucky has addressed the
elements of the CAA 110(a)(1) and (2) SIP requirements pursuant to
EPA's October 2, 2007, guidance to ensure that the 1997 8-hour ozone
NAAQS are implemented, enforced, and maintained in Kentucky. EPA is
proposing to approve Kentucky's infrastructure submission for the 1997
8-hour ozone NAAQS because this submission is consistent with section
110 of the CAA.

V. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews

    Under the CAA, the Administrator is required to approve a SIP
submission that complies with the provisions of the Act and applicable
Federal regulations. 42 U.S.C. 7410(k); 40 CFR 52.02(a). Thus, in
reviewing SIP submissions, EPA's role is to approve state choices,
provided that they meet the criteria of the CAA. Accordingly, this
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 be inconsistent
with the CAA; and
     Does not provide EPA with the discretionary authority to
address, as appropriate, disproportionate human health or environmental
effects, using practicable and legally permissible methods, under
Executive Order 12898 (59 FR 7629, February 16, 1994).
    In addition, this proposed 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 Commonwealth, 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, Intergovernmental
relations, Nitrogen dioxide, Ozone, Particulate Matter, Reporting and
recordkeeping requirements, Volatile organic compounds.

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

    Dated: March 7, 2011.
A. Stanley Meiburg,
Acting Regional Administrator, Region 4.
[FR Doc. 2011-6260 Filed 3-16-11; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P