[Federal Register Volume 76, Number 180 (Friday, September 16, 2011)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Page 57702]
[FR Doc No: 2011-23822]

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

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

40 CFR Part 300

[EPA-HQ-SFUND-1998-0007; FRL-9465-6]

National Oil and Hazardous Substances Pollution Contingency Plan
National Priorities List

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency.

ACTION: Withdrawal of proposed rule.

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

SUMMARY: On July 29, 2011, the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA)
published a Notice of Intent to Delete and a Direct Notice of Deletion
for the State Marine of Port Arthur (SMPA) Superfund Site from the
National Priorities List. The EPA is withdrawing the Notice of Intent
to Delete because the deletion notices were published in the Federal
Register without Headquarter's concurrence as required under the
Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act
Delegation of Authority. After appropriate Headquarters concurrence is
received on the Notice of Intent to Delete the SMPA Superfund Site from
the National Priorities List, the EPA will re-publish a Notice of
Intent to Delete in the Federal Register.

DATES: The proposed rule published on July 29, 2011, (76 FR 45483) is
withdrawn as of September 16, 2011.

ADDRESSES:
    Information Repositories: Comprehensive information on the SMPA
Superfund Site, as well as the comments that we received during the
comment period, are available in Docket EPA-HQ-SFUND-1998-0007,
accessed through the http://www.regulations.gov Web site. Although
listed in the docket index, some information is not publicly available
(e.g., CBI or other information whose disclosure is restricted by
statute). Certain other material, such as copyrighted material, will be
publicly available only in hard copy. Publicly available docket
materials are available either electronically in http://www.regulations.gov or in hard copy at:

    1. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Region 6, 1445 Ross
Avenue, Suite 700, Dallas, Texas 75202-2733; Hours of operation:
Monday thru Friday, 9 a.m. to 12 p.m. and 1 p.m. to 4 p.m. Contact:
Rafael A. Casanova<PHONE_NUMBER>.
    2. Port Arthur Public Library, 4615 9th Avenue, Port Arthur,
Texas 77642-5799; Hours of operation: Monday thru Thursday, 9 a.m.
to 9 p.m.; Friday, 9 a.m. to 6 p.m.; Saturday, 9 a.m. to 5 p.m.; and
Sunday, 2 p.m. to 5 p.m.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Rafael A. Casanova, Remedial Project
Manager, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Region 6, Superfund
Division (6SF-RA), 1445 Ross Avenue, Suite 1200, Dallas, Texas 75202-
2733; telephone number:<PHONE_NUMBER>; e-mail:
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 300

    Environmental protection, Air pollution control, Chemicals,
Hazardous waste, Hazardous substances, Intergovernmental relations,
Penalties, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements, Superfund, Water
pollution control, Water supply.

    Authority: 33 U.S.C. 1321(c)(2); 42 U.S.C. 9601-9657; E.O.
12777, 56 FR 54757, 3 CFR, 1991 Comp., p. 351; E.O. 12580, 52 FR
2923; 3 CFR, 1987 Comp., p. 193.

    Dated: September 6, 2011.
Al Armendariz,
Regional Administrator, Region 6.
[FR Doc. 2011-23822 Filed 9-15-11; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P


[Federal Register Volume 77, Number 141 (Monday, July 23, 2012)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 43032-43039]
[FR Doc No: 2012-17893]

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

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

40 CFR Part 52

[EPA-R04-OAR-2012-0081; FRL-9702-8]

Approval and Promulgation of Implementation Plans; Mississippi:
New Source Review-Prevention of Significant Deterioration; Fine
Particulate Matter (PM2.5)

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Proposed rule.

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

SUMMARY: EPA is proposing to approve a revision to the Mississippi
State Implementation Plan (SIP), submitted by the Mississippi
Department of Environmental Quality (MDEQ) through the Division of Air
Pollution Control to EPA on May 12, 2011. The SIP revision modifies
Mississippi's New Source Review (NSR) Prevention of Significant
Deterioration (PSD) program. The May 12, 2011, SIP revision
incorporates by reference the federal NSR PSD requirements for the fine
particulate matter (PM2.5) national ambient air quality
standards (NAAQS) as amended in EPA's 2008 NSR PM2.5
Implementation Rule (hereafter referred to as the ``NSR
PM2.5 Rule'') and the 2010 PM2.5 PSD Increment,
Significant Impact Levels (SILs) and Significant Monitoring
Concentration (SMC) Rule (hereafter referred to the ``PM2.5
PSD Increment-SILs-SMC Rule'') into the Mississippi SIP. EPA is
proposing to approve portions of Mississippi's SIP revision because the
Agency has preliminarily determined that the provisions proposed for
approval are consistent with section 110 of the Clean Air Act (CAA or
Act) and EPA regulations regarding NSR permitting.

DATES: Comments must be received on or before August 22, 2012.

ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, identified by Docket ID No. EPA-R04-
OAR-2012-0081 by one of the following methods:
    1. www.regulations.gov: Follow the on-line instructions for
submitting comments.
    2. Email<EMAIL_ADDRESS>    3. Fax:<PHONE_NUMBER>.
    4. Mail: EPA-R04-OAR-2012-0081, 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: Ms. Lynorae Benjamin, Chief,
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-
2012-0081.'' 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'' 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 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. 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 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: For information regarding the
Mississippi SIP, contact Ms. Twunjala Bradley, 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. Ms. Bradley's telephone number
is<PHONE_NUMBER>; email address<EMAIL_ADDRESS>For
information regarding NSR, contact Ms. Yolanda Adams, Air Permits
Section, at the same address above. Ms. Adams' telephone number is
(404) 562-9241; email address<EMAIL_ADDRESS>For information
regarding the PM2.5 NAAQS, contact Mr. Joel Huey, Regulatory
Development Section, at the same address above. Mr. Huey's telephone
number is<PHONE_NUMBER>; email address<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Table of Contents

I. What action is EPA proposing?
II. What is the background for EPA's proposed action?
III. What are the NSR implementation requirements for the
PM2.5 NAAQS?
IV. What is EPA's analysis of Mississippi's SIP revision?
V. Proposed Action
VI. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews

I. What action is EPA proposing?

    On May 12, 2011, MDEQ submitted a SIP revision to EPA for approval
into the Mississippi SIP to incorporate by

reference (IBR) \1\ federal NSR PSD permitting requirements.
Mississippi's SIP revision makes changes to its Air Quality Regulations
in Air Pollution Control, Section 5 (APC-S-5)--Regulations for the
Prevention of Significant Deterioration of Air Quality These rule
changes were provided to comply with federal NSR permitting provisions
related to the implementation of the PM2.5 NAAQS for the PSD
program as promulgated in the NSR PM2.5 Rule entitled
``Implementation of the New Source Review (NSR) Program for Particulate
Matter Less than 2.5 Micrometers (PM2.5), '' Final Rule, 73
FR 28321 (May 16, 2008) and the PM2.5 PSD Increment-SILs-SMC
Rule entitled ``Prevention of Significant Deterioration (PSD) for
Particulate Matter Less Than 2.5 Micrometers (PM2.5)--
Increments, Significant Impact Levels SILs and Significant Monitoring
Concentration (SMC),'' Final Rule,'' 75 FR 64864, (October 20, 2010).
Additionally, Mississippi's SIP revision requests that EPA remove from
the SIP the exclusion language at APC-S-5 (2.7) regarding the NSR
PM2.5 Rule provisions. Pursuant to section 110 of the CAA,
EPA is proposing to approve these changes, with the exception of the
two elements discussed below, into the Mississippi SIP.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ Throughout this document IBR means incorporate or
incorporates by reference.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The two elements of MDEQ's May 12, 2011, SIP revision which EPA is
not proposing to approve in this action are: (1) incorporation of the
SIL thresholds promulgated in EPA's PM2.5 PSD Increment-
SILs-SMC Rule, 75 FR 64864 (October 20, 2010); and (2) incorporation of
the provision regarding the applicability of the term ``particulate
matter emissions'' when accounting for condensable particles in
applicability determinations and in establishing emissions limitations
in PSD permits. More details are provided in Sections II-IV below.

II. What is the background for EPA's proposed action?

    Today's proposed action to revise the Mississippi SIP relates to
relates to EPA's NSR PM2.5 Rule and the PM2.5 PSD
Increment-SILs-SMC Rule. In the NSR PM2.5 Rule, EPA
finalized regulations to implement the NSR program for the
PM2.5 NAAQS. As a result of EPA's final NSR PM2.5
Rule, states were required to submit SIP revisions to EPA no later than
May 16, 2011, to address these requirements for both the PSD and
Nonattainment NSR (NNSR) programs. EPA's PM2.5 PSD
Increment-SILs-SMC Rule established PSD increments, SILs and SMC which
address additional components for making PSD permitting determinations
for PM2.5 NAAQS. These requirements address air quality
modeling and monitoring provisions for fine particle pollution in areas
protected by the PSD program (that is attainment or unclassifiable/
attainment areas for the NAAQS). EPA's October 20, 2010, final
rulemaking that approved the PM2.5 PSD Increment-SILs-SMC
Rule required states to submit SIP revisions to adopt the required PSD
increments by July 20, 2012. Together these two rules address the NSR
permitting requirements needed to implement the PM2.5 NAAQS.
Mississippi's May 12, 2011, SIP revision IBR into the Mississippi SIP
(at APC-S-5), the PSD requirements promulgated in these two rules to be
consistent with federal regulations for the PM2.5 NAAQS.
More detail on the NSR PM2.5 Rule and the PM2.5
PSD Increment-SILs-SMC Rule can be found in EPA's May 16, 2008, and
October 20, 2010, final rules respectively and are summarized below.

A. Fine Particulate Matter and the NAAQS

    Fine particles in the atmosphere are made up of a complex mixture
of components. Common constituents include sulfate; nitrate; ammonium;
elemental carbon; a great variety of organic compounds; and inorganic
material (including metals, dust, sea salt, and other trace elements)
generally referred to as ``crustal'' material, although it may contain
material from other sources. Airborne particulate matter (PM) with a
nominal aerodynamic diameter of 2.5 micrometers or less (a micrometer
is one-millionth of a meter, and 2.5 micrometers is less than one-
seventh the average width of a human hair) are considered to be ``fine
particles'' and are also known as PM2.5. ``Primary''
particles are emitted directly into the air as a solid or liquid
particle (e.g., elemental carbon from diesel engines or fire
activities, or condensable organic particles from gasoline engines).
``Secondary'' particles (e.g., sulfate and nitrate) form in the
atmosphere as a result of various chemical reactions.
    The health effects associated with exposure to PM2.5
include potential aggravation of respiratory and cardiovascular disease
(i.e., lung disease, decreased lung function asthma attacks and certain
cardiovascular issues). Epidemiological studies have indicated a
correlation between elevated PM2.5 levels and premature
mortality. Groups considered especially sensitive to PM2.5
exposure include older adults, children, and individuals with heart and
lung diseases. For more details regarding health effects and
PM2.5 see EPA's Web site at http://www.epa.gov/oar/particlepollution/ (See heading ``Health and Welfare'').
    On July 18, 1997, EPA revised the NAAQS for PM to add new standards
for fine particles, using PM2.5 as the indicator.
Previously, EPA used PM10 (inhalable particles smaller than
or equal to 10 micrometers in diameter) as the indicator for the PM
NAAQS. EPA established health-based (primary) annual and 24-hour
standards for PM2.5, setting an annual standard at a level
of 15 micrograms per cubic meter ([mu]g/m\3\) and a 24-hour standard at
a level of 65 [mu]g/m\3\. See 62 FR 38652. At the time the 1997 primary
standards were established, EPA also established welfare-based
(secondary) standards identical to the primary standards. The secondary
standards are designed to protect against major environmental effects
of PM2.5, such as visibility impairment, soiling, and
materials damage. On October 17, 2006, EPA revised the primary and
secondary 24-hour NAAQS for PM2.5 to 35 [mu]g/m\3\ and
retained the existing annual PM2.5 NAAQS of 15.0 [mu]g/m\3\.
See 71 FR 61236.

B. What is the NSR program?

    The CAA NSR program is a preconstruction review and permitting
program applicable to certain new and modified stationary sources of
air pollutants regulated under the CAA. The program includes a
combination of air quality planning and air pollution control
technology requirements. The CAA NSR program is composed of three
separate programs: PSD, NNSR, and Minor NSR. PSD is established in part
C of title I of the CAA and applies in areas that meet the NAAQS
(``attainment areas'') as well as areas where there is insufficient
information to determine if the area meets the NAAQS (``unclassifiable
areas''). The NNSR program is established in part D of title I of the
CAA and applies in areas that are not in attainment of the NAAQS
(``nonattainment areas''). The Minor NSR program addresses construction
or modification activities that do not qualify as ``major'' and applies
regardless of the designation of the area in which a source is located.
Together, these programs are referred to as the NSR program. EPA
regulations governing the implementation of these programs are
contained in 40 CFR sections 51.160-.166; 52.21, .24; and, part 51,
appendix S. Section 109 of the CAA requires EPA to promulgate a primary
NAAQS to protect public

health and a secondary NAAQS to protect public welfare. Once EPA sets
those standards, states must develop, adopt, and submit a SIP to EPA
for approval that includes emission limitations and other control
measures to attain and maintain the NAAQS. See CAA section 110. Each
SIP is also required to include a preconstruction review program for
the construction and modification of any stationary source of air
pollution to assure the maintenance of the NAAQS. The applicability of
the PSD program to a major stationary source must be determined in
advance of construction and is a pollutant-specific determination. Once
a major source is determined to be subject to the PSD program (and thus
is a ``PSD source''), among other requirements, it must undertake a
series of analyses to demonstrate that it will use the best available
control technology and will not cause or contribute to a violation of
any NAAQS or increment. Mississippi's May 12, 2011, SIP submittal
revises Mississippi's PSD program.

III. What are the NSR implementation requirements for the PM2.5 NAAQS?

A. NSR PM2.5 Rule

    On May 16, 2008, EPA finalized the NSR PM2.5 Rule to
implement the PM2.5 NAAQS, including changes to the NSR
program.\2\ See 73 FR 28321. The NSR PM2.5 Rule revised the
federal NSR program requirements to establish the framework for
implementing preconstruction permit review for the PM2.5
NAAQS in both attainment and nonattainment areas. Specifically, the NSR
PM2.5 Rule established NSR requirements to implement the
PM2.5 NAAQS that: (1) Require NSR permits to address
directly emitted PM2.5 and precursor pollutants; (2)
establish significant emission rates for direct PM2.5 and
precursor pollutants (including sulfur dioxide (SO2) and
nitrogen oxides (NOX)); (3) establish PM2.5
emission offsets; (4) provide exceptions to the PM10
grandfathering policy; and, (5) require states to account for gases
that condense to form particles (condensables) in PM2.5 and
PM10 emission limits in PSD or NNSR permits. Additionally,
the NSR PM2.5 Rule authorized states to adopt provisions in
their nonattainment NSR rules that would allow interpollutant offset
trading. Mississippi's May 12, 2011, SIP revision addresses the PSD
permitting requirements promulgated in EPA's May 16, 2008, NSR
PM2.5 Rule.\3\ A few key issues described in greater detail
below include: the PM10 surrogate and grandfathering policy,
the condensable provision and the NOX precursor
insignificance demonstration.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \2\ On November 1, 2005, EPA proposed a rule to implement the
1997 PM2.5 NAAQS, including proposed revisions to the NSR
program. See 70 FR 65984.
    \3\ Mississippi's May 12, 2011, SIP revision only addresses the
State's PSD permitting program and does not adopt the NNSR
permitting requirements for PM2.5 emission offsets,
condensable provision or the discretionary interpollutant trading
policy and ratios promulgated in the 2008 NSR PM2.5 Rule.
Moreover Mississippi is attainment for the 1997 annual and 2006 24-
hour PM2.5 NAAQS.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

1. PM10 Surrogate and Grandfathering Policy
    After EPA promulgated the NAAQS for PM2.5 in 1997 (62 FR
38652, July 18, 1997), the Agency issued a guidance document entitled
``Interim Implementation of New Source Review Requirements for
PM2.5.'' John S. Seitz, EPA, October 23, 1997 (the ``Seitz
memo''). The Seitz memo was designed to help states implement NSR
requirements pertaining to the new PM2.5 NAAQS in light of
technical difficulties posed by PM2.5 at that time.
Specifically, the Seitz memo stated: ``PM-10 may properly be used as a
surrogate for PM-2.5 in meeting NSR requirements until these
difficulties are resolved.'' EPA also issued a guidance document
entitled ``Implementation of New Source Review Requirements in PM-2.5
Nonattainment Areas'' (the ``2005 PM2.5 NNSR Guidance''), on
April 5, 2005, the date that EPA's PM2.5 nonattainment area
designations became effective for the 1997 NAAQS. The 2005
PM2.5 NNSR Guidance provided direction regarding
implementation of the nonattainment major NSR provisions in
PM2.5 nonattainment areas in the interim period between the
effective date of the PM2.5 nonattainment area designations
(April 5, 2005) and EPA's promulgation of final PM2.5 NNSR
regulations. Besides re-affirming the continuation of the
PM10 Surrogate Policy for PM2.5 attainment areas
set forth in the Seitz memo, the 2005 PM2.5 NNSR Guidance
recommended that until EPA promulgated the PM2.5 major NSR
regulations, ``States should use a PM10 nonattainment major
NSR program as a surrogate to address the requirements of nonattainment
major NSR for the PM2.5 NAAQS.''
    In the NSR PM2.5 Rule, EPA required that major
stationary sources seeking permits must begin directly satisfying the
PM2.5 requirements, as of the effective date of the rule,
rather than relying on PM10 as a surrogate, with two
exceptions. The first exception is the ``grandfathering'' provision in
the federal PSD program at 40 CFR 52.21(i)(1)(xi). This grandfathering
provision applied to sources that had applied for, but had not yet
received, a final and effective PSD permit before the July 15, 2008,
effective date of the May 16, 2008, final rule. The second exception
was that states with SIP-approved PSD programs could continue to
implement the Seitz Memo's PM10 Surrogate Policy for up to
three years (until May 2011) or until EPA approved the individual
revised state PSD programs for PM2.5, whichever came first.
See 73 FR 28321.\4\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \4\ Additional information on this issue can also be found in an
August 12, 2009, final order on a title V petition describing the
use of PM10 as a surrogate for PM2.5. In the
Matter of Louisville Gas & Electric Company, Petition No. IV-2008-3,
Order on Petition (August 12, 2009).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    On February 11, 2010, EPA proposed to repeal the grandfathering
provision for PM2.5 contained in the federal PSD program at
40 CFR 52.21(i)(1)(xi) and to end early the PM10 Surrogate
Policy applicable in states that have a SIP-approved PSD program. See
75 FR 6827. In support of this proposal, EPA explained that the
PM2.5 implementation issues that led to the adoption of the
PM10 Surrogate Policy in 1997 have been largely resolved to
a degree sufficient for sources and permitting authorities to conduct
meaningful permit-related PM2.5 analyses.
    On May 18, 2011 (76 FR 28646), EPA took final action to repeal the
PM2.5 grandfathering provision at 40 CFR 52.21(i)(1)(xi).
This final action ended the use of the 1997 PM10 Surrogate
Policy for PSD permits under the federal PSD program at 40 CFR 52.21.
In effect, any PSD permit applicant previously covered by the
grandfathering provision (for sources that completed and submitted a
permit application before July 15, 2008) \5\ that did not have a final
and effective PSD permit before the effective date of the repeal would
no longer be able to rely on the 1997 PM10 Surrogate Policy
to satisfy the PSD requirements for PM2.5 unless the
application included a valid surrogacy demonstration. See 76 FR 28646.
Mississippi's May 12, 2011, SIP revision, did not IBR the
grandfathering provision at 40 CFR 52.21(i)(1)(xi), in accordance with
the repeal of the PM2.5 grandfathering provision.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \5\ Sources that applied for a PSD permit under the federal PSD
program on or after July 15, 2008, are already excluded from using
the 1997 PM10 Surrogate Policy as a means of satisfying
the PSD requirements for PM2.5. See 76 FR 28321.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

2. ``Condensable'' Provision
    In the NSR PM2.5 Rule, EPA revised the definition of
``regulated NSR

pollutant'' for PSD to add a paragraph providing that ``particulate
matter (PM) emissions, PM2.5 emissions and PM10
emissions'' shall include gaseous emissions from a source or activity
which condense to form particulate matter at ambient temperatures and
that on or after January 1, 2011, such condensable particulate matter
shall be accounted for in applicability determinations and in
establishing emissions limitations for PM, PM2.5 and
PM10 in permits. See 40 CFR 51.166(b)(49)(vi),
52.21(b)(50)(vi) and ``Emissions Offset Interpretative Ruling'' (40 CFR
part 51, appendix S). A similar paragraph added to the NNSR rule does
not include ``particulate matter (PM) emissions.'' See 40 CFR
51.165(a)(1)(xxxvii)(D).
    On March 16, 2012, EPA proposed a rulemaking to amend the
definition of ``regulated NSR pollutant'' promulgated in the 2008 NSR
PM2.5 Rule regarding the PM condensable provision at 40 CFR
51.166(b)(49)(vi), 52.21(b)(50)(i) and EPA's Emissions Offset
Interpretative Ruling. See 77 FR 15656. The rulemaking proposes to
remove the inadvertent requirement in the NSR PM2.5 Rule
that the measurement of condensable ``particulate matter emissions'' be
included as part of the measurement and regulation of ``particulate
matter emissions.'' The term ``particulate matter emissions'' includes
particles that are larger than PM2.5 and PM10 and
is an indicator measured under various New Source Performance Standards
(NSPS) (40 CFR part 60).\6\ Mississippi's May 12, 2011, SIP revision
IBR EPA's definition for regulated NSR pollutant for condensables (at
APC-S-5) including the term ``particulate matter emissions,'' as
promulgated in the NSR PM2.5 Rule. EPA's review of
Mississippi's May 12, 2011, SIP revision with regard to the NSR
PM2.5 Rule condensable provision is provided below in
Section IV.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \6\ In addition to the NSPS for PM, states have regulated
``particulate matter emissions'' for many years in their SIPs for
PM, and the same indicator has been used as a surrogate for
determining compliance with certain standards contained in 40 CFR
part 63, regarding National Emission Standards for Hazardous Air
Pollutants.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

3. NOX Insignificance Determination
    Fine particles can be emitted directly from a facility or formed
secondarily in the atmosphere from emissions of other compounds
referred to as precursors. In addition to direct PM2.5
emissions, pollutants that can contribute to ambient PM2.5
concentrations (known as ``precursors'') include SO2,
NOX, volatile organic compounds (VOC) and ammonia (of which
all undergo chemical reactions to form secondary PM). In most areas of
the country, PM2.5 precursor emissions are major
contributors to ambient PM2.5 concentrations. The relative
contribution to ambient PM2.5 concentrations from each of
these pollutants varies by area. The relative effect of reducing
emissions of these pollutants is also highly variable. In the NSR
PM2.5 Rule, EPA established various approaches for
addressing the individual precursors to PM2.5 under the
CAA's NSR provisions. See 73 FR 28321.
    Based on scientific factors suggesting that nitrate concentrations
vary significantly across the country, EPA established a ``presumed-
in'' approach for NOX as a PM2.5 precursor. This
approach is warranted based on the well-known transformation of
NOX into nitrates, coupled with the fact that nitrate
concentrations vary significantly around the country. The final NSR
PM2.5 Rule requires that states treat NOX as a
PM2.5 precursor in all areas unless the state demonstrates
to the Administrator's satisfaction or EPA demonstrates that emissions
of NOX from sources in a specific area are not a significant
contributor to that area's ambient PM2.5 concentrations.\7\
See 40 CFR 51.166(b)(49)(i), 51.165(a)(1)(xxxvii) and 52.21(b)(50(i).
If EPA makes such a demonstration, or a state makes such a
demonstration and it is approved by EPA, NOX would not be
considered a PM2.5 precursor under the NSR program in that
area. If a State or EPA does not make such a demonstration,
NOX must be regulated as a precursor under the PSD, NNSR,
and minor source programs for PM2.5.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \7\ The NSR PM2.5 Rule presumes that VOC and ammonia
are not precursors to PM2.5 unless a state or EPA
demonstrates that these pollutants are significantly contributing to
the ambient PM2.5 concentrations in a specific area. The
rule requires that SO2 be treated as a precursor to
PM2.5 in all areas.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Mississippi's May 12, 2011, SIP revision IBR the provision that
NOX is presumed to be a precursor for PM2.5.
However, MDEQ also submitted to EPA a NOX insignificance
demonstration to show that NOX emissions in the state of
Mississippi are not contributing to ambient PM2.5
concentrations in the state. At this time, EPA is still considering
Mississippi's NOX insignificance demonstration and will take
action on this portion of the May 12, 2011, SIP revision in a separate
rulemaking. However, until EPA takes action on Mississippi's
insignificance demonstration, EPA is proposing to approve Mississippi's
incorporation into its SIP the federal regulatory provision providing
that NOX is a presumed PM2.5 precursor.

B. PM2.5 PSD Increment-SILs-SMC Rule

    As mentioned above, EPA finalized the PM2.5 PSD
Increment-SILs-SMC Rule to provide additional regulatory requirements
under the PSD program regarding the implementation of the
PM2.5 NAAQS for NSR.\8\ Specifically, the rule establishes
the following to implement the PM2.5 NAAQS for the PSD
program: (1) PM2.5 increments pursuant to section 166(a) of
the CAA to prevent significant deterioration of air quality in areas
meeting the NAAQS; (2) SILs used as a screening tool (by a major source
subject to PSD) to evaluate the impact a proposed major source or
modification may have on the NAAQS or PSD increment; and (3) a SMC,
(also a screening tool) used by a major source subject to PSD to
determine the subsequent level of data gathering required for a PSD
permit application for emissions of PM2.5. As part of the
response to comments on October 20, 2010 final rulemaking, EPA
explained that, the agency agrees that the SILs and SMCs used as de
minimis thresholds for the various pollutants are useful tools that
enable permitting authorities and PSD applicants to screen out
``insignificant'' activities; however, the fact remains that these
values are not required by the Act as part of an approvable SIP
program. EPA believes that most states are likely to adopt the SILs and
SMCs because of the useful purpose they serve regardless of our
position that the values are not mandatory. Alternatively, states may
develop more stringent values if they desire to do so. In any case,
states are not under any SIP-related deadline for revising their PSD
programs to add these screening tools. See 75 FR 64864, 64900.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \8\ EPA proposed approval of the PSD Increments-SILs-SMC Rule on
September 21, 2007. See 72 FR 54112.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Mississippi's May 12, 2011, SIP revision IBR the NSR changes
promulgated in the PM2.5 PSD Increment-SILs-SMC Rule to be
consistent with the federal NSR regulations and to appropriately
implement the State's NSR program for the PM2.5 NAAQS. More
detail on the PM2.5 PSD Increment-SILs-SMC Rule can be found
in EPA's October 20, 2010, final rule and is summarized below. See 75
FR 64864. EPA is not proposing to take action to approve the SILs
(promulgated in the PM2.5 PSD Increment-SILs-SMC Rule) into
the Mississippi SIP in this rulemaking. EPA's authority to implement
the SILs

and SMC for PSD purposes has been challenged by the Sierra Club. Sierra
Club v. EPA, Case No 10-1413 (D.C. Circuit Court).\9\ More details
regarding Mississippi's changes to its NSR regulations are also
summarized below in Section IV.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \9\ On April 6, 2012, EPA filed a brief with the D.C. Circuit
court defending the Agency's authority to implement SILs and SMC for
PSD purposes.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

1. What are PSD increments?
    As established in part C of title I of the CAA, EPA's PSD program
protects public health from adverse effects of air pollution by
ensuring that construction of new or modified sources in attainment or
unclassifiable areas does not lead to significant deterioration of air
quality while simultaneously ensuring that economic growth will occur
in a manner consistent with preservation of clean air resources. Under
section 165(a)(3) of the CAA, a PSD permit applicant must demonstrate
that emissions from the proposed construction and operation of a
facility ``will not cause, or contribute to, air pollution in excess of
any maximum allowable increase or allowable concentration for any
pollutant.'' In other words, when a source applies for a permit to emit
a regulated pollutant in an area that meets the NAAQS, the state and
EPA must determine if emissions of the regulated pollutant from the
source will cause significant deterioration in air quality. Significant
deterioration occurs when the amount of the new pollution exceeds the
applicable PSD increment, which is the ``maximum allowable increase''
of an air pollutant allowed to occur above the applicable baseline
concentration \10\ for that pollutant. PSD increments prevent air
quality in clean areas from deteriorating to the level set by the
NAAQS. Therefore an increment is the mechanism used to estimate
``significant deterioration'' of air quality for a pollutant in an
area.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \10\ Section 169(4) of the CAA provides that the baseline
concentration of a pollutant for a particular baseline area is
generally the air quality at the time of the first application for a
PSD permit in the area.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    For PSD baseline purposes, a baseline area for a particular
pollutant emitted from a source includes the attainment or
unclassifiable area in which the source is located as well as any other
attainment or unclassifiable area in which the source's emissions of
that pollutant are projected (by air quality modeling) to result in an
ambient pollutant increase of at least 1 [mu]g/m\3\ (annual average).
See 40 CFR 52.21(b)(15)(i). Under EPA's existing regulations, the
establishment of a baseline area for any PSD increment results from the
submission of the first complete PSD permit application and is based on
the location of the proposed source and its emissions impact on the
area. Once the baseline area is established, subsequent PSD sources
locating in that area need to consider that a portion of the available
increment may have already been consumed by previous emissions
increases. In general, the submittal date of the first complete PSD
permit application in a particular area is the operative ``baseline
date.'' \11\ On or before the date of the first complete PSD
application, emissions generally are considered to be part of the
baseline concentration, except for certain emissions from major
stationary sources. Most emissions increases that occur after the
baseline date will be counted toward the amount of increment consumed.
Similarly, emissions decreases after the baseline date restore or
expand the amount of increment that is available. See 75 FR 64864. As
described in the PM2.5 PSD Increment-SILs-SMC Rule, pursuant
to the authority under section 166(a) of the CAA, EPA promulgated
numerical increments for PM2.5 as a new pollutant \12\ for
which NAAQS were established after August 7, 1977,\13\ and derived 24-
hour and annual PM2.5 increments for the three area
classifications (Class I, II and III) using the ``contingent safe
harbor'' approach. See 75 FR 64864 at 64869 and table at 40 CFR
51.166(c)(1).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \11\ Baseline dates are pollutant specific. That is, a complete
PSD application establishes the baseline date only for those
regulated NSR pollutants that are projected to be emitted in
significant amounts (as defined in the regulations) by the
applicant's new source or modification. Thus, an area may have
different baseline dates for different pollutants.
    \12\ EPA generally characterized the PM2.5 NAAQS as a
NAAQS for a new indicator of PM. EPA did not replace the
PM10 NAAQs with the NAAQS for PM2.5 when the
PM2.5 NAAQS were promulgated in 1997. EPA rather retained
the annual and 24-hour NAAQS for PM2.5 as if
PM2.5 was a new pollutant even though EPA had already
developed air quality criteria for PM generally. See 75 FR 64864
(October 20, 2012).
    \13\ EPA interprets 166(a) to authorize EPA to promulgate
pollutant-specific PSD regulations meeting the requirements of
section 166(c) and 166(d) for any pollutant for which EPA
promulgates a NAAQS after 1977.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    In addition to PSD increments for the PM2.5 NAAQS, the
PM2.5 PSD Increment-SILs-SMC Rule amended the definition at
40 CFR 51.166 and 52.21 for ``major source baseline date'' and ``minor
source baseline date'' (including trigger dates) to establish the
PM2.5 NAAQS specific dates associated with the
implementation of PM2.5 PSD increments. See 75 FR 64864. In
accordance with section 166(b) of the CAA, EPA required the states to
submit revised implementation plans to EPA for approval (to adopt the
PM2.5 PSD increments) within 21 months from promulgation of
the final rule (by July 20, 2012). Each state was responsible for
determining how increment consumption and the setting of the minor
source baseline date for PM2.5 would occur under its own PSD
program. Regardless of when a State begins to require PM2.5
increment analysis and how it chooses to set the PM2.5 minor
source baseline date, the emissions from sources subject to PSD for
PM2.5 for which construction commenced after October 20,
2010 (major source baseline date) consume PM2.5 increment
and should be included in the increment analyses occurring after the
minor source baseline date is established for an area under the state's
revised PSD program. As discussed in detail in Section IV,
Mississippi's May 12, 2011, SIP revision IBR the PM2.5
increment permitting requirements promulgated in the PM2.5
PSD Increment-SILs-SMC Rule.
2. What are significant monitoring concentrations?
    Under the CAA and EPA regulations, an applicant for a PSD permit is
required to gather preconstruction monitoring data in certain
circumstances. Section 165(a)(7) calls for ``such monitoring as may be
necessary to determine the effect which emissions from any such
facility may have, or is having, on air quality in any areas which may
be affected by emissions from such source.'' In addition, section
165(e) requires an analysis of the air quality in areas affected by a
proposed major facility or major modification and calls for gathering
one year of monitoring data unless the reviewing authority determines
that a complete and adequate analysis may be accomplished in a shorter
period. These requirements are codified in EPA's PSD regulations at 40
CFR 51.166(m) and 40 CFR 52.21(m). In accordance with EPA's Guideline
for Air Quality Modeling (40 CFR part 51, appendix W), the
preconstruction monitoring data is primarily used to determine
background concentrations in modeling conducted to demonstrate that the
proposed source or modification will not cause or contribute to a
violation of the NAAQS. See 40 CFR part 51, appendix W, section 9.2.
SMC are numerical values that represent thresholds of insignificant
(i.e., de minimis \14\), monitored (ambient)

impacts on pollutant concentrations. In EPA's PM2.5 PSD
Increment-SILs-SMC Rule, EPA established a SMC of 4 [micro]g/m\3\ for
PM2.5 to be used as a screening tool by a major source
subject to PSD to determine the subsequent level of data gathering
required for a PSD permit application for emissions of
PM2.5. See 75 FR 64864.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \14\ The de minimis principle is grounded in the decision
described by the court case Alabama Power Co. v. Costle, 636 F.2d
323, 360 (D.C. Cir. 1980). In this case reviewing EPA's 1978 PSD
regulations, the court recognized that ``there is likely a basis for
an implication of de minimis authority to provide exemption when the
burdens of regulation yield a gain of trivial or no value.'' 636
F.2d at 360.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Using the SMC as a screening tool, sources may be able to
demonstrate that the modeled air quality impact of emissions from the
new source or modification, or the existing air quality level in the
area where the source would construct, is less than the SMC (i.e., de
minimis), and as such, may be allowed to forego the preconstruction
monitoring requirement for a particular pollutant at the discretion of
the reviewing authority. See 40 CFR 51.166(i)(5) and 52.21(i)(5). SMCs
are not minimum required elements of an approvable SIP under the CAA.
This de minimis value is widely considered to be a useful component for
implementing the PSD program, but is not absolutely necessary for the
states to implement PSD programs. States can satisfy the statutory
requirements for a PSD program by requiring each PSD applicant to
submit air quality monitoring data for PM2.5 without using
de minimis thresholds to exempt certain sources from such requirements.
See 75 FR 64864. The SMC became effective under the federal PSD program
on December 20, 2010. States with EPA-approved PSD programs that adopt
the SMC for PM2.5, however, may use the SMC, once it is part
of an approved SIP, to determine when it may be appropriate to exempt a
particular major stationary source or major modification from the
monitoring requirements under its state PSD program. Mississippi's May
12, 2011, revision IBR the SMC provision into the Mississippi SIP.
    Recently, the Sierra Club filed suit challenging EPA's authority to
implement the PM2.5 SILs \15\ as well as the SMC for PSD
purposes as promulgated in the October 20, 2012, rule. Sierra Club v.
EPA, Case No 10-1413, D.C. Circuit Court. Specifically regarding the
SMC, Sierra Club claims that the use of SMCs to exempt a source from
submitting a year's worth of monitoring data is inconsistent with the
CAA. EPA responded to Sierra Club's claims in a Brief dated April 6,
2012, which describes the Agency's authority to develop and promulgate
SMC.\16\ A copy of EPA's April 6, 2010 Brief can be found in the docket
for today's rulemaking at www.regulations.gov using docket ID: EPA-R04-
OAR-2012-0081.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \15\ As mentioned earlier, due to litigation by the Sierra Club,
EPA is not proposing to take action on the SILs portion of the
Mississippi May 12, 2011 SIP revision at this time but will take
action once the court case regarding SILs implementation is
resolved.
    \16\ Additional information on this issue can also be found in
an April 25, 2010 comment letter from EPA Region 6 to the Louisiana
Department of Environmental Quality regarding the SILs-SMC
litigation. A copy of this letter can be found in the docket for
today's rulemaking at www.regulations.gov using docket ID: EPA-R04-
OAR-2012-0081.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

IV. What is EPA's analysis of Mississippi's SIP revision?

    Mississippi currently has a SIP-approved NSR program for new and
modified stationary sources. MDEQ's PSD preconstruction rules are found
at rule APC-S-5--Regulation for the Prevention of Significant
Deterioration of Air Quality and apply to major stationary sources or
modifications constructed in areas designated attainment or
unclassifiable/attainment as required under part C of title I the CAA
with respect to the NAAQS. Mississippi's regulation APC-S-5 IBR the
federal NSR PSD regulations at 40 CFR 51.166 and 52.21 into the
Mississippi SIP. In effect, MDEQ's May 12, 2011, SIP revision updates
the State's IBR date for APC-S-5 to March 22, 2011, to include PSD
permitting regulations promulgated in the NSR PM2.5 Rule and
the PM2.5 PSD Increment-SILs-SMC Rule into the Mississippi
SIP. These changes to Mississippi's regulation APC-S-5 became state
effective on June 2, 2011. EPA is proposing to approve changes to
Mississippi's rules at APC-S-5 to update the State's existing SIP-
approved PSD program to be consistent with federal NSR regulations, (at
40 CFR 51.166 and 52.21) and the CAA.

A. NSR PM2.5 Implementation Rule

    Mississippi's May 12, 2011, SIP revision establishes that the
State's existing NSR permitting program requirements for PSD apply to
the PM2.5 NAAQS and its precursors. Specifically, the SIP
revision IBR the following NSR PM2.5 Rule provisions into
the Mississippi SIP at regulation APC-S-5: (1) The requirement for NSR
permits to address directly emitted PM2.5 and precursor
pollutants; (2) significant emission rates for direct PM2.5
and precursor pollutants (SO2 and NOX); and (3)
the requirement that condensable PM be addressed in enforceable
PM10 and PM2.5 emission limits included in PSD
permits.
    As mentioned above, Mississippi's May 12, 2011, SIP revision IBR
into the State's PSD program at APC-S-5 the requirement to address
condensable PM in applicability determinations and in establishing
enforceable emission limits in PSD and NNSR permits, as established in
the NSR PM2.5 Rule. As discussed in Section III.A.2, under a
separate action, EPA has proposed to correct the inadvertent inclusion
of ``particulate matter emissions'' in the definition of ``regulated
NSR pollutant'' as an indicator for which condensable emissions must be
addressed. See 77 FR 75656 (March 16, 2012). Further, on June 26, 2012,
the State of Mississippi provided a letter to EPA with clarification of
the State's intent in light of EPA's March 12, 2012, proposed
rulemaking. A copy of this letter can be found in the docket for
today's rulemaking at www.regulations.gov using docket ID: EPA-R04-OAR-
2012-0081. Specifically, Mississippi requested that EPA not approve the
term ``particulate matter emissions'' (at APC-S-5) as part of the
definition for ``regulated NSR pollutant'' regarding the inclusion of
condensable emissions in applicability determinations and in
establishing emissions limitations for PM. Therefore, given the State's
request and EPA's intention to amend the definition of ``regulated NSR
pollutant,'' EPA is not proposing action to approve the terminology
``particulate matter emissions'' into the Mississippi SIP for the
condensable provision in the definition of ``regulated NSR pollutant.''
EPA is, however, proposing to approve into the Mississippi SIP at APC-
S-5 the remaining condensable requirement at 40 CFR 51.166(b)(49)(vi),
which requires that condensable emissions be accounted for in
applicability determinations and in establishing emissions limitations
for PM2.5 and PM10. Regarding the grandfathering
provision, MDEQ's May 12, 2012 SIP revision included new language at
APC-S-5(2.7) that excluded the provision for PM2.5 (at 40
CFR 52.21(i)(1)(xi)) from the PSD program regulations in accordance
with the repeal of the PM2.5 grandfathering provision.
    EPA's NSR PM2.5 Rule identifies NOX as a
presumed PM2.5 precursor in all attainment and
unclassifiable areas unless the state demonstrates to the
Administrator's satisfaction or EPA demonstrates that emissions of
NOX from sources in a specific area are not a significant
contributor to that area's ambient PM2.5 concentrations.
Mississippi's May 12, 2011, SIP submittal included a technical

demonstration proposing that NOX sources in Mississippi do
not significantly contribute to PM2.5 ambient air
concentrations in the state. As stated in Mississippi's May 12, 2011,
SIP revision, NOX will be considered as a precursor to
PM2.5 in Mississippi until such time as EPA takes action on
the state's technical NOX insignificance demonstration or
upon plan disapproval. Currently, EPA is considering Mississippi's
NOX insignificance demonstration and will take action on
this portion of the May 12, 2011, SIP submission in a separate
rulemaking. Therefore, as part of MDEQ's May 12, 2011, revision to IBR
the federal regulations at 40 CFR 51.166 and 52.21, EPA is proposing at
this time to approve into the Mississippi SIP that NOX is a
presumed PM2.5 precursor. Lastly, Mississippi's May 12,
2011, SIP revision also requests that EPA remove from the SIP the
exclusion language at APC-S-5(2.7) regarding the NSR PM2.5
Rule provisions. In Mississippi's December 9, 2010 Greenhouse Gas
Tailoring Rule final SIP revision, MDEQ added specific language at APC-
S-5(2.7) excluding from the IBR of 40 CFR 52.21 the PSD NSR
PM2.5 Rule provisions promulgated in the May 16, 2008 rule
and stated they would submit a separate rulemaking to address those PSD
requirements. Mississippi's May 12, 2011, SIP submittal, the subject of
today's proposed rulemaking, addresses the PSD NSR PM2.5
Rule provisions that were excluded at APC-S-5(2.7). Therefore the
exclusion language for the NSR PM2.5 Rule provisions at APC-
S-5(2.7) is no longer necessary and EPA is today proposing to remove it
from the Mississippi SIP. EPA is proposing to approve the NSR
PM2.5 requirements mentioned above into the Mississippi SIP
because EPA has made the preliminary determination that this change is
consistent with federal regulations promulgated in the NSR
PM2.5 Rule and section 110 of the CAA.

B. PM2.5 PSD Increment-SILs-SMC Rule

    MDEQ's May 12, 2011, SIP revision IBR the following provisions into
the Mississippi SIP at regulation APC-S-5 as promulgated in the October
20, 2010, PM2.5 PSD Increment-SILs-SMC Rule: (1) PSD
increments for PM2.5 annual and 24-hour NAAQS pursuant to
section 166(a) of the CAA; (2) SILs used as a screening tool (used by a
major source subject to PSD) to evaluate the impact a proposed major
source or modification may have on the NAAQS or PSD increment; and (3)
SMC also used as a screening tool to determine the level of data
gathering required of a major source in support of its PSD permit
application for PM2.5 emissions.
    Specifically, Mississippi's May 12, 2011, SIP revision IBR into the
Mississippi SIP (at APC-S-5) the PM2.5 PSD increments
(established in the tables at 40 CFR 51.166(c)(1) and (p)(4); the
amendments to the ``major source baseline date'' (at 40 CFR
51.166(b)(14)(i)(c)) and 52.21(b)(14)(i)(c)); the ``minor source
baseline date'' and establishment of the ``trigger date'' (40 CFR
51.166(b)(14)(ii)(c) and 52.21(b)(14)(ii)(c)); and the definition of
``baseline area'' (at 40 CFR 51.166(b)(15)(i) and (ii) and
52.21(b)(15)(i) and (ii)). These changes, which are associated with the
implementation or consumption of the PSD increments for the
PM2.5 NAAQS, are needed to implement the state's NSR program
for the PM2.5 NAAQS consistent with the federal NSR
regulations. Also, Mississippi's SIP revision adds the SMC of 4
[micro]g/m\3\ for PM2.5 NAAQS to the existing monitoring
exemption at 40 CFR 51.166(i)(5)(i)(c) and 52.21(i)(5)(i)(c). In
today's action, EPA is proposing to approve Mississippi's May 12, 2011,
SIP revision to address PM2.5 PSD increments.
    Regarding the SILs and SMC established in the October 20, 2010,
PM2.5 PSD Increment-SILs-SMC Rule, the Sierra Club has
challenged EPA's authority to implement SILs and SMC. In a brief filed
in the D.C. Circuit on April 6, 2012, EPA described the Agency's
authority under the CAA to promulgate and implement the SMCs and SILs
de minimis thresholds. With respect to the SMCs submitted by
Mississippi in the May 12, 2011, SIP revision, EPA is proposing to
approve these promulgated thresholds into the Mississippi SIP as EPA
believes the SMC are a valid exercise of the Agency's de minimis
authority. Furthermore Mississippi's May 12, 2011, SIP revision is
consistent with EPA's current promulgated provisions in the October 20,
2011, rule. However, EPA notes that future Court action may require
subsequent rule revisions and SIP revisions from Mississippi.
    The May 12, 2012, SIP revision submitted by Mississippi to IBR the
new PSD requirements for PM2.5 pursuant to the
PM2.5 PSD Increment-SILs-SMC Rule also includes the new
regulatory text at 40 CFR 51.166(k)(2) and 52.21(k)(2), concerning the
implementation of SILs for PM2.5. EPA stated in the preamble
to the October 20, 2010 final rule that we do not consider the SILs to
be a mandatory SIP element, but regard them as discretionary on the
part of regulating authority for use in the PSD permitting process.
Nevertheless, the PM2.5 SILs are currently the subject of
litigation before the U.S. Court of Appeals. (Sierra Club v. EPA, Case
No 10-1413 D.C. Circuit). In response to that litigation, EPA has
requested that the Court remand and vacate the regulatory text in EPA's
PSD regulations at paragraph (k)(2) so that EPA can make necessary
rulemaking revisions to that text. In light of EPA's request for remand
and vacatur and our acknowledgement of the need to revise the
regulatory text presently contained at paragraph (k)(2) of sections
51.166 and 52.21, we do not believe that it is appropriate at this time
to approve that portion of the State's SIP revision that contains the
affected regulatory text in the State's PSD regulations, at APC-S-5.
Instead, we are taking no action at this time with regard to that
specific provision contained in the SIP revision. EPA will take action
on the SILs portion of Mississippi's May 12, 2011, SIP revision in a
separate rulemaking once the issue regarding the court case has been
resolved.
    The aforementioned amendments to Mississippi's SIP provide the
framework for implementation of PM2.5 NAAQS in the states
NSR permitting. Based on review and consideration of Mississippi's May
12, 2011, SIP revision, EPA has made the preliminary determination to
approve the aforementioned PSD permitting provisions promulgated in the
NSR PM2.5 Rule and PM2.5 PSD Increment-SILs-SMC
Rule into the Mississippi SIP to implement the NSR program for the
PM2.5 NAAQS.

V. Proposed Action

    EPA is proposing to approve portions of Mississippi's May 12, 2011,
SIP revision adopting federal regulations amended in the May 16, 2008,
NSR PM2.5 Rule and the October 20, 2010, PM2.5
PSD Increment-SILs-SMC rule into the Mississippi SIP with the exception
of the SIL thresholds and the provision regarding the applicability of
the term ``particulate matter emissions.'' EPA has made the preliminary
determination that this SIP revision, with regard to the aforementioned
proposed actions, is approvable because it is consistent with section
110 of the CAA and EPA regulations regarding NSR permitting.

VI. 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 F43255, 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 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, Intergovernmental
relations, Nitrogen oxides, Ozone, Particulate matter, Reporting and
recordkeeping requirements.

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

    Dated: July 12, 2012.
A. Stanley Meiburg,
Acting Regional Administrator, Region 4.
[FR Doc. 2012-17893 Filed 7-20-12; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P


[Federal Register Volume 77, Number 140 (Friday, July 20, 2012)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Page 42637]
[FR Doc No: 2012-17686]

=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------

DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY

Coast Guard

33 CFR Parts 84 and 115

[Docket No. USCG-2012-0306]
RIN 1625-AB86

Navigation and Navigable Waters; Technical, Organizational, and
Conforming Amendments; Corrections

AGENCY: Coast Guard, DHS.

ACTION: Correcting amendments.

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

SUMMARY: This document contains corrections to the final regulations,
which were published in the Federal Register of Thursday, June 21, 2012
(77 FR 37305). The regulations related to technical, organizational and
conforming amendments in Title 33 of the CFR. The Coast Guard discussed
changes to Part 84 and Part 115 in the Preamble of the final rule that
were not reflected in the regulatory text.

DATES: These amendments are effective July 20, 2012.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: If you have questions on this
rulemaking, please contact Mr. Leo Huott, CG-REG-2, U.S. Coast Guard,
telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>, email<EMAIL_ADDRESS>If you have
questions on viewing or submitting material to the docket, call Ms.
Renee V. Wright, Program Manager, Docket Operations, telephone 202-366-
9826.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Background

    On June 21, 2012 (77 FR 37305), the Coast Guard published a final
rule entitled ``Navigation and Navigable Waters; Technical,
Organizational, and Conforming Amendments.'' Subsequent to the
publication of that notice, the Coast Guard discovered that the changes
discussed in the Preamble to 33 CFR 84.15 and 33 CFR 115.60 were not
included in the regulatory text.

Need for Correction

    As published, the final regulations do not capture two changes to
Title 33 of the CFR and need to be corrected. In Sec.  84.15, there is
a formula for intensity of lights. This formula contains a legend
describing the variables which includes an equals sign without a hard
return for the definition. This formula instead should include a colon
after each letter representation and a hard return following each
colon. In Sec.  115.60, the word ``construction'' is in the heading.
The word ``construction'' should be removed because this section
focuses on applications for permits to construct, modify, or replace
bridges. Therefore, the word ``construction'' in the title does not
accurately indicate the breadth of the regulation so the word needs to
be removed.

List of Subjects

33 CFR Part 84

    Navigation (water), Waterways.

33 CFR Part 115

    Administrative practice and procedure, Bridges, Reporting and
recordkeeping requirements.

    Accordingly, 33 CFR part 84 and part 115 are corrected by making
the following correcting amendments:

PART 84--ANNEX I: POSITIONING AND TECHNICAL DETAILS OF LIGHTS AND
SHAPES

0
1. The authority citation for part 84 continues to read as follows:

    Authority:  33 U.S.C. 2071; Department of Homeland Security
Delegation No. 0170.1.

0
2. Revise Sec.  84.15(a) to read as follows:

Sec.  84.15  Intensity of lights.

    (a) The minimum luminous intensity of lights will be calculated by
using the formula:

I=3.43x10\6\ xTxD\2\ xK-D

    Where
I: Luminous intensity in candelas under service conditions,
T: Threshold factor 2x10-7 lux,
D: Range of visibility (luminous range) of the light in nautical
miles,
K: Atmospheric transmissivity. For prescribed lights the value of K
will be 0.8, corresponding to a meteorological visibility of
approximately 13 nautical miles.
* * * * *

PART 115--BRIDGE LOCATIONS AND CLEARANCES; ADMINISTRATIVE
PROCEDURES

0
3. The authority citation for part 115 is revised to read as follows:

    Authority:  c. 425, sec. 9, 30 Stat. 1151 (33 U.S.C. 401); c.
1130, sec. 1, 34 Stat. 84 (33 U.S.C. 491); sec. 5, 28 Stat. 362, as
amended (33 U.S.C. 499); sec. 11, 54 Stat. 501, as amended (33
U.S.C. 521); c. 753, Title V, sec. 502, 60 Stat. 847, as amended (33
U.S.C. 525); 86 Stat. 732 (33 U.S.C. 535); 14 U.S.C. 633.

0
4. Revise the section heading in Sec.  115.60 to read as follows:

Sec.  115.60  Procedures for handling applications for bridge permits.

* * * * *

    Dated: July 16, 2012.
Kathryn A. Sinniger,
Chief, Office of Regulations and Administrative Law, U.S. Coast Guard.
[FR Doc. 2012-17686 Filed 7-19-12; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 9110-04-P


[Federal Register Volume 85, Number 196 (Thursday, October 8, 2020)]
[Notices]
[Page 63641]
[FR Doc No: 2020-22352]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

[Docket No. FAA-2020-0936]

Agency Information Collection Activities: Requests for Comments;
Clearance of a New Approval of Information Collection: Survey of
Industry's Response to Safety Alert for Operators (SAFO) 17007

AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), DOT.

ACTION: Notice and request for comments.

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

SUMMARY: In accordance with the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995, FAA
invites public comments about our intention to request the Office of
Management and Budget (OMB) approval for a new information collection.
The collection involves survey responses from U.S. operator (Part 121
and Part 135) employees who lead departments responsible for Operations
and Standards, Training, and Safety to understand how industry has
addressed recommendations from SAFO 17007 and to inform future guidance
on manual flight skill proficiency in future en-route and terminal
environments. This information collection is necessary, as no other
information sources have been identified that would provide the
required information. Operator policies and procedures are not publicly
shared; therefore, this is the only reliable method to gather anonymous
information from a representative industry sample.

DATES: Written comments should be submitted by December 7, 2020.

ADDRESSES: Please send written comments:
    By Electronic Docket: www.regulations.gov (Enter docket number into
search field).

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Victor Quach by email at:
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>phone:<PHONE_NUMBER>.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
    Public Comments Invited: You are asked to comment on any aspect of
this information collection, including (a) Whether the proposed
collection of information is necessary for FAA's performance; (b) the
accuracy of the estimated burden; (c) ways for FAA to enhance the
quality, utility and clarity of the information collection; and (d)
ways that the burden could be minimized without reducing the quality of
the collected information. The agency will summarize and/or include
your comments in the request for OMB's clearance of this information
collection.
    OMB Control Number: 2120-XXXX.
    Title: Survey of Industry's Response to Safety Alert for Operators
(SAFO) 17007.
    Form Numbers: Not applicable.
    Type of Review: New information collection.
    Background: The Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) is developing
guidance materials on maintaining manual flight skill proficiency in
future en-route and terminal environments where pilots will have less
opportunities to practice manual flight knowledge, skills, and
abilities (KSAs) in a highly automated environment. The FAA is
conducting this survey of U.S. operators (Part 121 and Part 135) to
determine how the organizations have incorporated the recommendations
in SAFO 17007 into line operations and training. SAFO 17007 (linked
below) encourages the development of training and line-operations
policies to ensure that proficiency in manual flight operations is
developed and maintained for pilots. https://www.faa.gov/other_visit/aviation_industry/airline_operators/airline_safety/safo/all_safos/media/2017/SAFO17007.pdf.
    An invitation to complete a one-time electronic survey will be sent
to U.S operators (Part 121 and Part 135) employees who lead departments
responsible for Operations and Standards, Training, and Safety. These
personnel are responsible for implementing the SAFO's recommendations
into line operations and training. All data provided will be kept
private to the extent possible by law. To preclude the identification
of individual responses, all respondents will be given a participant
code that does not identify them or their organization. Only the
project leaders will have access to the coding key, which will be
destroyed after data analyses are complete. Only analyses and reports
of aggregate data will be produced and released.
    Failure to collect data on industry incorporation of SAFO 17007
recommendations will impact the quality of future FAA guidance provided
to address manual flight operations. As such, it may also jeopardize
future manual flight operations in an increasingly automated
environment. SAFO 17007 encourages operators to practice manual flight
in an operational environment; however, increased use of flight deck
automation from NextGen National Airspace improvements will limit
practice opportunities resulting in an increased need to make other
improvement, which may be addressed through future FAA guidance.
    Respondents: 1,224 U.S. Part 121 and Part 135 operator employees
who lead departments responsible for Operations and Standards,
Training, and Safety.
    Frequency: One time.
    Estimated Average Burden per Response: 30 minutes.
    Estimated Total Annual Burden: 30 minutes per respondent, 612 total
burden hours.

Victor K. Quach,
Scientific and Technical Advisor.
[FR Doc. 2020-22352 Filed 10-7-20; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-13-P