[Federal Register Volume 85, Number 27 (Monday, February 10, 2020)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 7496-7499]
[FR Doc No: 2020-02503]

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

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

40 CFR Part 52

[EPA-R03-OAR-2019-0694; FRL-10005-12-Region 3]

Approval and Promulgation of Air Quality Implementation Plans;
Virginia; Emissions Statement Certification for the 2015 Ozone National
Ambient Air Quality Standard

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Proposed rule.

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

SUMMARY: The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is proposing to
approve a state implementation plan (SIP) revision formally submitted
by the Commonwealth of Virginia (Virginia). Under the Clean Air Act
(CAA), a state's SIP must require stationary sources in ozone
nonattainment areas classified as marginal or above to report annual
emissions of nitrogen oxides (NOX) and volatile organic
compounds (VOC). The SIP revision provides Virginia's certification
that its existing emissions statement program satisfies the emissions
statement requirements of the CAA for the 2015 ozone National Ambient
Air Quality Standard (NAAQS). EPA is proposing to approve Virginia's
emissions statement program certification for the 2015 ozone NAAQS as a
SIP revision in accordance with the requirements of the CAA.

DATES: Written comments must be received on or before March 11, 2020.

ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, identified by Docket ID No. EPA-R03-
OAR-2019-0694 at https://www.regulations.gov, or via email to
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>For comments submitted at Regulations.gov,
follow the online instructions for submitting comments. Once submitted,
comments cannot be edited or removed from Regulations.gov. For either
manner of submission, EPA may publish any comment received to its
public docket. Do not submit electronically any information you
consider to be confidential business information (CBI) or other
information whose disclosure is restricted by statute. Multimedia
submissions (audio, video, etc.) must be accompanied by a written
comment. The written comment is considered the official comment and
should include discussion of all points you wish to make. EPA will
generally not consider comments or comment contents located outside of
the primary submission (i.e. on the web, cloud, or other file sharing
system). For additional submission methods, please contact the person
identified in the For Further Information Contact section. For the full
EPA public comment policy, information about CBI or multimedia
submissions, and general guidance on making effective comments, please
visit https://www.epa.gov/dockets/commenting-epa-dockets.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Erin Malone, Planning & Implementation
Branch (3AD30), Air & Radiation Division, U.S. Environmental Protection
Agency, Region III, 1650 Arch Street, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania 19103.
The telephone number is<PHONE_NUMBER>.

Ms. Malone can also be reached via electronic mail at
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

I. Background

    Under the CAA, EPA establishes NAAQS for criteria pollutants in
order to protect human health and the environment. In response to
scientific evidence linking ozone exposure to adverse health effects,
EPA promulgated the first ozone NAAQS, the 0.12 part per million (ppm)
1-hour ozone NAAQS, in 1979. See 44 FR 8202 (February 8, 1979). The CAA
requires EPA to review and reevaluate the NAAQS every five years in
order to consider updated information regarding the effects of the
criteria pollutants on human health and the environment. On July 18,
1997, EPA promulgated a revised ozone NAAQS, referred to as the 1997
ozone NAAQS, of 0.08 ppm averaged over eight hours. 62 FR 38855. This
8-hour ozone NAAQS was determined to be more protective of public
health than the previous 1979 1-hour ozone NAAQS. In 2008, EPA
strengthened the 8-hour ozone NAAQS from 0.08 to 0.075 ppm. See 73 FR
16436 (March 27, 2008). In 2015, EPA further refined the 8-hour ozone
NAAQS from 0.075 ppm to 0.070 ppm. The 0.070 ppm standard is referred
to as the 2015 ozone NAAQS. See 80 FR 65452 (October 26, 2015).
    On June 4, 2018 and July 25, 2018, EPA designated nonattainment
areas for the 2015 ozone NAAQS. 83 FR 25776 and 83 FR 35136. Effective
August 3, 2018, the Washington, DC-MD-VA area was designated as
marginal nonattainment for the 2015 ozone NAAQS. The Virginia portion
of the Washington, DC-MD-VA nonattainment area comprises Arlington
County, Fairfax County, Loudoun County, Prince William County,
Alexandria City, Fairfax City, Falls Church City, Manassas City, and
Manassas Park City, Virginia. See 40 CFR 81.347.
    Section 182 of the CAA identifies plan submissions and requirements
for ozone nonattainment areas. Specifically, section 182(a)(3)(B)
requires that states develop and submit, as a revision to their SIP,
rules which establish annual reporting requirements for certain
stationary sources. Sources that are within ozone nonattainment areas
must annually report the actual emissions of NOX and VOC to
the state. However, states may waive this requirement for sources that
emit under 25 tons per year (tpy) of NOX and VOC if the
state provides an inventory of emissions from such class or category of
sources as required by CAA sections 172 and 182. See CAA section
182(a)(3)(B)(ii).
    EPA published guidance on source emissions statements in a July
1992 memorandum titled, ``Guidance on the Implementation of an Emission
Statement Program'' and in a March 14, 2006 memorandum titled,
``Emission Statement Requirements Under 8-hour Ozone NAAQS
Implementation'' (2006 memorandum). In addition, on December 6, 2018,
EPA issued a final rule addressing a range of nonattainment area SIP
requirements for the 2015 ozone NAAQS, including the emission statement
requirements of CAA section 182(a)(3)(B) (2018 final rule). 83 FR
62998, codified at 40 CFR part 51, subpart CC. The 2006 memorandum
clarified that the source emissions statement requirement of CAA
section 182(a)(3)(B) was applicable to all areas designated
nonattainment for the 1997 ozone NAAQS and classified as marginal or
above under subpart 2, part D, title I of the CAA. Per EPA's 2018 final
rule, the source emissions statement requirement also applies to all
areas designated nonattainment for the 2015 ozone NAAQS. 83 FR 62998,
63023.
    According to the preamble to EPA's 2018 final rule, most areas that
are required to have an emissions statement program for the 2015 ozone
NAAQS already have one in place due to a nonattainment designation for
an earlier ozone NAAQS. 83 FR 62998, 63001. EPA's 2018 final rule
states that, ``Many air agencies already have regulations in place to
address certain nonattainment area planning requirements due to
nonattainment designations for a prior ozone NAAQS. Air agencies should
review any existing regulation that was previously approved by the EPA
to determine whether it is sufficient to fulfill obligations triggered
by the revised ozone NAAQS.'' Id. In cases where an existing emissions
statement rule is still adequate to meet the emissions statement
requirement under the 2015 ozone NAAQS, states may provide the
rationale for that determination to EPA in a written statement for
approval in the SIP to meet the requirements of CAA section
182(a)(3)(B). 83 FR 62998, 63002. In this statement, states should
identify how the emissions statement requirements of CAA section
182(a)(3)(B) are met by their existing emissions statement rule. Id.
    In summary, the Commonwealth of Virginia is required to submit, as
a formal revision to its SIP, a statement certifying that Virginia's
existing emissions statement program satisfies the requirements of CAA
section 182(a)(3)(B) and covers Virginia's portion of the Washington,
DC-MD-VA nonattainment area for the 2015 ozone NAAQS.

II. Summary of SIP Revision and EPA Analysis

    On July 30, 2019, the Commonwealth of Virginia, through the
Virginia Department of Environmental Quality (VADEQ), submitted, as a
formal revision to its SIP, a statement certifying that Virginia's
existing SIP-approved emissions statement program covers the Virginia
portion of the Washington, DC-MD-VA nonattainment area for the 2015
ozone NAAQS and is at least as stringent as the requirements of CAA
section 182(a)(3)(B). In its submittal, Virginia states that the
emissions statement requirements of CAA section 182(a)(3)(B) are
contained under 9VAC5-20-160 (Registration) of the Virginia
Administrative Code and are SIP-approved under 40 CFR 52.2420(c).
According to Virginia, these provisions mandate that facilities
emitting more than 25 tpy of NOX or VOC must submit emission
statements to Virginia while those emitting less than 25 tpy must
comply with inventory requirements.
    The provisions under 9VAC5-20-160 that implement Virginia's
emissions statement program were approved into the Virginia SIP on May
2, 1995 (60 FR 21451).\1\ These provisions require the owner of any
stationary source that emits 25 tpy or more of VOC or NOX
and is located in an emissions control area designated under 9VAC5-20-
206 (Volatile Organic Compound and Nitrogen Oxides Emissions Control
Areas) to submit an emissions statement to the Virginia State Air
Pollution Control Board by April 15 of each year for the emissions
discharged during the

previous calendar year.\2\ Emissions statements are required to be
prepared and submitted in accordance with 9VAC5-20-121 (Air Quality
Program Policies and Procedures), which references Virginia's January
1, 1993 document AQP- 8 titled, ``Procedures for Preparing and
Submitting Emission Statements for Stationary Sources.'' The provisions
under 9VAC5-20-121 were also approved into the Virginia SIP on May 2,
1995 (60 FR 21451).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ The provisions under 9VAC5-20-160 were derived from VR120-
02-31. EPA's May 2, 1995 direct final rulemaking (DFR) approved a
SIP revision submitted by the Commonwealth of Virginia requesting
the addition of provisions under VR120-02-31 paragraph B, which
established Virginia's emissions statement program, and Appendix S
(Air Quality Program Policies and Procedures), which described the
procedure for preparing and submitting emissions statements for
stationary sources, to the Virginia SIP. See 60 FR 21451. On March
6, 1992, the Virginia State Assembly enacted Chapter 216--an act to
amend Section 9-77.7, Code of Virginia, which authorized
reorganization of the Virginia Administrative Code, including
reorganization of the air pollution control regulations, effective
July 1, 1992. Beginning April 17, 1995, Virginia began publication
of its air quality control regulations in the new format. On April
21, 2000, EPA approved a SIP revision from Virginia requesting the
reorganization and renumbering of the Virginia SIP to match the
recodification of Virginia's air pollution control regulations under
the Virginia Administrative Code. See 65 FR 21315. As a result, the
SIP approved provisions under VR120-02-31 and Appendix S are now
under 9VAC5-20-160 and 9VAC5-20-121, respectively.
    \2\ The emissions control areas defined under 9VAC5-20-206
include the Northern Virginia Emissions Control Area, the
Fredericksburg Emissions Control Area, the Richmond Emissions
Control Area, the Hampton Roads Emissions Control Area, and the
Western Virginia Emissions Control Area. The Northern Virginia
Emissions Control Area consists of the localities of Arlington
County, Fairfax County, Loudoun County, Prince William County,
Stafford County, Alexandra City, Fairfax City, Falls Church City,
Manassas City, and Manassas Park City.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    EPA's review of the Commonwealth of Virginia's submittal finds that
Virginia's existing, SIP-approved emissions statement program under
9VAC5-20-160 satisfies the emission statements requirements of CAA
section 182(a)(3)(B) for stationary sources located in nonattainment
areas in Virginia, including such sources in the Virginia portion of
the Washington, DC-MD-VA nonattainment area, for the 2015 ozone NAAQS.
Pursuant to CAA section 182, Virginia is required to have an emissions
statement program for sources located in nonattainment areas. EPA finds
the provisions under 9VAC5-20-160 satisfy the requirements of CAA
section 182(a)(3)(B) for the 2015 ozone NAAQS because they apply to the
Northern Virginia Emissions Control Area, which includes the Virginia
portion of the Washington, DC-MD-VA 2015 ozone NAAQS nonattainment area
(i.e. Arlington County, Fairfax County, Loudoun County, Prince William
County, Alexandria City, Fairfax City, Falls Church City, Manassas
City, and Manassas Park City). EPA also finds Virginia's emissions
thresholds for sources that are required to submit an emissions
statement meet the requirements of CAA section 182(a)(3)(B)(ii). As
stated above, 9VAC5-20-160 requires the owner of any stationary source
located in an emissions control area that emits 25 tpy or more of VOC
or NOX to annually submit an emissions statement. This 25
tpy threshold is equivalent to the threshold required by CAA section
182(a)(3)(B)(ii). As previously mentioned, per CAA section
182(a)(3)(B)(ii), states may waive this requirement for sources that
emit less than 25 tpy of NOX or VOC if the state provides an
inventory of emissions from such class or category of sources as
required by CAA sections 172 and 182. Virginia provides emissions
inventories for nonattainment areas as required by CAA section
172(c)(3).\3\ Therefore, EPA has determined that 9VAC5-20-160, which is
currently in the Virginia SIP, is appropriate to address the emissions
statement requirements in section 182(a)(3)(B) for the 2015 ozone
NAAQS. EPA is proposing to approve, as a SIP revision, the Commonwealth
of Virginia's July 30, 2019 emissions statement program certification
for the 2015 ozone NAAQS as approvable under CAA section 182(a)(3)(B).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \3\ See e.g., ``Approval and Promulgation of Air Quality
Implementation Plans; District of Columbia, Maryland, and Virginia;
2011 Base Year Emissions Inventories for the Washington DC-MD-VA
Nonattainment Area for the 2008 Ozone National Ambient Air Quality
Standard,'' 80 FR 27255 (May 13, 2015).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

III. Proposed Action

    EPA is proposing to approve the Commonwealth of Virginia's SIP
revision submitted on July 30, 2019, which certifies that Virginia's
existing SIP-approved emissions statement program under 9VAC5-20-160
satisfies the requirements of the CAA section 182(a)(3)(B) for the 2015
ozone NAAQS. EPA is soliciting public comments on the issues discussed
in this document. These comments will be considered before taking final
action.

IV. General Information Pertaining to SIP Submittals From the
Commonwealth of Virginia

    In 1995, Virginia adopted legislation that provides, subject to
certain conditions, for an environmental assessment (audit)
``privilege'' for voluntary compliance evaluations performed by a
regulated entity. The legislation further addresses the relative burden
of proof for parties either asserting the privilege or seeking
disclosure of documents for which the privilege is claimed. Virginia's
legislation also provides, subject to certain conditions, for a penalty
waiver for violations of environmental laws when a regulated entity
discovers such violations pursuant to a voluntary compliance evaluation
and voluntarily discloses such violations to the Commonwealth and takes
prompt and appropriate measures to remedy the violations. Virginia's
Voluntary Environmental Assessment Privilege Law, Va. Code Sec. 10.1-
1198, provides a privilege that protects from disclosure documents and
information about the content of those documents that are the product
of a voluntary environmental assessment. The Privilege Law does not
extend to documents or information that: (1) Are generated or developed
before the commencement of a voluntary environmental assessment; (2)
are prepared independently of the assessment process; (3) demonstrate a
clear, imminent and substantial danger to the public health or
environment; or (4) are required by law.
    On January 12, 1998, the Commonwealth of Virginia Office of the
Attorney General provided a legal opinion that states that the
Privilege Law, Va. Code Sec. 10.1-1198, precludes granting a privilege
to documents and information ``required by law,'' including documents
and information ``required by Federal law to maintain program
delegation, authorization or approval,'' since Virginia must ``enforce
Federally authorized environmental programs in a manner that is no less
stringent than their Federal counterparts. . . .'' The opinion
concludes that ``[r]egarding Sec.  10.1-1198, therefore, documents or
other information needed for civil or criminal enforcement under one of
these programs could not be privileged because such documents and
information are essential to pursuing enforcement in a manner required
by Federal law to maintain program delegation, authorization or
approval.''
    Virginia's Immunity law, Va. Code Sec. 10.1-1199, provides that
``[t]o the extent consistent with requirements imposed by Federal
law,'' any person making a voluntary disclosure of information to a
state agency regarding a violation of an environmental statute,
regulation, permit, or administrative order is granted immunity from
administrative or civil penalty. The Attorney General's January 12,
1998 opinion states that the quoted language renders this statute
inapplicable to enforcement of any Federally authorized programs, since
``no immunity could be afforded from administrative, civil, or criminal
penalties because granting such immunity would not be consistent with
Federal law, which is one of the criteria for immunity.''
    Therefore, EPA has determined that Virginia's Privilege and
Immunity statutes will not preclude the Commonwealth from enforcing its
program consistent with the Federal requirements. In any event, because
EPA has also determined that a state audit privilege and immunity law
can affect only state enforcement and cannot have any impact on Federal
enforcement authorities, EPA may at any time invoke its authority under
the CAA, including, for example, sections 113, 167, 205, 211 or 213, to
enforce the requirements or prohibitions of the state

plan, independently of any state enforcement effort. In addition,
citizen enforcement under section 304 of the CAA is likewise unaffected
by this, or any, state audit privilege or immunity law.

V. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews

    Under the CAA, the EPA Administrator is required to approve a SIP
submission that complies with the provisions of the CAA 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
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 Orders
12866 (58 FR 51735, October 4, 1993) and 13563 (76 FR 3821, January 21,
2011);
     Is not an Executive Order 13771 (82 FR 9339, February 2,
2017) regulatory action because SIP approvals are exempted under
Executive Order 12866.
     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).
    The SIP is not approved to apply on any Indian reservation land as
defined in 18 U.S.C. 1151 or in any other area where EPA or an Indian
tribe has demonstrated that a tribe has jurisdiction. In those areas of
Indian country, the rule consisting of Virginia's certification that
its existing SIP-approved emissions statement program under 9VAC5-20-
160 satisfies the requirements of CAA section 182(a)(3)(B) for the 2015
ozone NAAQS does not have tribal implications and will not impose
substantial direct costs on tribal governments or preempt tribal law as
specified by Executive Order 13175 (65 FR 67249, November 9, 2000).

List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52

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

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

    Dated: January 28, 2020.
Cosmo Servidio,
Regional Administrator, Region III.
[FR Doc. 2020-02503 Filed 2-7-20; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 6560-50-P


[Federal Register Volume 78, Number 115 (Friday, June 14, 2013)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 35764-35765]
[FR Doc No: 2013-14071]

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

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

40 CFR Part 52

[EPA-R02-OAR-2013-0130, FRL-9824-1]

Approval and Promulgation of Implementation Plans; New Jersey;
Infrastructure SIP for the 1997 8-Hour Ozone and the 1997 and 2006 Fine
Particulate Matter Standards

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Final rule.

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

SUMMARY: The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is approving most
elements of New Jersey's State Implementation Plan (SIP) revisions
submitted to demonstrate that the State meets the requirements of
section 110(a)(1) and (2) of the Clean Air Act (CAA) for the 1997 8-
hour ozone and the 1997 and 2006 fine particulate matter
(PM2.5) National Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS). EPA
is conditionally approving certain elements of the submittals, as well
as determining that certain elements of New Jersey's submittals do not
meet section 110(a)(2) requirements with existing State rules. 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.

DATES: Effective Date: This rule is effective on July 15, 2013.

ADDRESSES: EPA has established a docket for this action under Docket ID
No. EPA-R02-OAR-2013-0130. All documents in the docket are listed on
the www.regulations.gov Web site. Although listed in the 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, is not placed on the Internet and will be
publicly available only in hard copy form. Publicly available docket
materials are available either electronically through
www.regulations.gov or in hard copy at the Environmental Protection
Agency, Region II Office, Air Programs Branch, 290 Broadway, 25th
Floor, New York, New York 10007-1866. The Air Programs Branch dockets
are available from 8:30 a.m. to 4:30 p.m., Monday through Friday,
excluding legal holidays. The Air Programs Branch telephone number is
212-637-4249.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Paul Truchan, Air Programs Branch,
Environmental Protection Agency, 290 Broadway, 25th Floor, New York,
New York 10007-1866,<PHONE_NUMBER>, or by email at
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

I. Background and Purpose

    Under CAA section 110(a)(1), states are required to submit plans
called state implementation plans (SIPs) that provide for the
implementation, maintenance and enforcement of each NAAQS and are
referred to as infrastructure SIPs. 42 U.S.C. 7410(a)(1). On July 18,
1997, EPA promulgated new and revised NAAQS for 8-hour ozone (62 FR
38856) and PM2.5 (62 FR 38652). EPA strengthened the 24-hour
PM2.5 NAAQS on October 17, 2006 (71 FR 61144). The 14
elements required to be addressed in infrastructure SIPs are as
follows: (1) Emission limits and other control measures; (2) ambient
air quality monitoring/data system; (3) program for enforcement of
control measures; (4) interstate transport; (5) adequate resources; (6)
stationary source monitoring system; (7) emergency power; (8) future
SIP revisions; (9) consultation with government officials; (10) public
notification; (11) prevention of significant deterioration (PSD) and
visibility protection; (12) air quality modeling/data; (13) permitting
fees, and (14) consultation/participation by affected local entities.
    EPA is acting on two New Jersey SIP submittals, dated February 25,
2008 and January 15, 2010, which address the section 110 infrastructure
requirements for the three NAAQS: The 1997 8-hour ozone NAAQS, the 1997
annual and 24-hour PM2.5 NAAQS, and the 2006 24-hour
PM2.5 NAAQS. This action does not address the requirements
of section 110(a)(2)(D)(i) for the 1997 ozone and 1997 PM2.5
NAAQS, since they were addressed in previous rulemakings. See October
1, 2007 (72 FR 55666). Additionally, this action does not address the
requirements of section 110(a)(2)(D)(i)(I) for the 2006
PM2.5 NAAQS, which was addressed in a previous EPA
rulemaking. See July 20, 2011 (76 FR 43153). 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 that
the nonattainment area plan requirements are due pursuant to section
172. See 77 FR 46352, 46354 (August 3, 2012) (footnote 3); 77 FR 60307,
60308 (October 3, 2012) (footnote 1). 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 I of
the CAA, and (2) submissions required by section 110(a)(2)(I) which
pertain to the nonattainment planning requirements of part D, Title I
of the CAA. As a result, this action does not address the above
infrastructure elements related to section 110(a)(2)(C) or
110(a)(2)(I).
    EPA proposed action on the two SIP revisions on April 10, 2013 (78
FR 21296) and no comments were received on the proposal. The reader is
referred to the April 10, 2013 proposed rulemaking for a detailed
discussion of New Jersey's submittals and EPA's review and proposed
actions.
    In a letter dated May 2, 2013, New Jersey committed to address the
following 110(a)(2) elements and sub-elements which EPA proposed to
conditionally approve: E(ii) (conflict of interest provisions), E(iii)
(delegations), and for the 1997 8-hour ozone element (G) (emergency
powers) with a SIP submittal within one year of EPA taking final
action.

II. What action is EPA taking?

    EPA is approving New Jersey's submittals as fully meeting the
infrastructure requirements for the 1997 8-hour ozone and the 1997 and
2006 PM2.5 NAAQS for the following section 110(a)(2)
elements and sub-elements: (A), (B), (C) (as it relates to the
enforcement of SIPs), (D)(i)(II) prong 4 (visibility), (E)(i), (F),
(H), (J) (consultation), (J) (public notification), (K), (L), and (M).
With the full approval of section 110(a)(2)(F), 40 CFR 52.1574 and 40
CFR 52.1575 have been satisfied and EPA is removing them from the CFR.
    EPA is conditionally approving New Jersey's submittals for the 1997
8-hour ozone and 1997 and 2006 PM2.5 NAAQS for the following
110(a)(2) elements and sub-elements: E(ii) (conflict of interest
provisions), E(iii) (delegations), and for the 1997 8-hour ozone
element (G) (emergency powers). New Jersey committed in a May 2, 2013
letter to correct the deficiencies and submit them to EPA within one
year of this action.
    New Jersey has elected to comply with the Federal PSD requirements
by accepting delegation of the Federal rules and has been successfully
implementing this program for many years. However, EPA does not
recognize a delegated PSD program as satisfying the Infrastructure SIP
requirements. Therefore, EPA is disapproving New Jersey's submittals
for the 1997 8-hour ozone and 1997 and 2006 PM2.5 NAAQS
section 110(a)(2)

sub-elements: (C), prong 3 of (D)(i)(II), and (J) as they relate to the
State's lack of a State adopted PSD program, as well as (D)(ii), which
relates to interstate and international pollution abatement and PSD.
However, these disapprovals will not trigger any sanctions or
additional Federal Implementation Plan obligation since a PSD Federal
Implementation Plan is already in place.

III. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews

    Under the Clean Air Act, the Administrator is required to approve a
SIP submission that complies with the provisions of the Act and
applicable Federal regulations. 42 U.S.C. 7410(k); 40 CFR 52.02(a).
Thus, in reviewing SIP submissions, EPA's role is to approve state
choices, provided that they meet the criteria of the Clean Air Act.
Accordingly, this 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 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 Clean Air Act; and
     does not provide EPA with the discretionary authority to
address, as appropriate, disproportionate human health or environmental
effects, using practicable and legally permissible methods, under
Executive Order 12898 (59 FR 7629, February 16, 1994).
In addition, this rule does not have tribal implications as specified
by Executive Order 13175 (65 FR 67249, November 9, 2000), because the
SIP is not approved to apply in Indian country located in the state,
and EPA notes that it will not impose substantial direct costs on
tribal governments or preempt tribal law.
    The Congressional Review Act, 5 U.S.C. 801 et seq., as added by the
Small Business Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act of 1996, generally
provides that before a rule may take effect, the agency promulgating
the rule must submit a rule report, which includes a copy of the rule,
to each House of the Congress and to the Comptroller General of the
United States. EPA will submit a report containing this action and
other required information to the U.S. Senate, the U.S. House of
Representatives, and the Comptroller General of the United States prior
to publication of the rule in the Federal Register. A major rule cannot
take effect until 60 days after it is published in the Federal
Register. This action is not a ``major rule'' as defined by 5 U.S.C.
804(2).
    Under section 307(b)(1) of the Clean Air Act, petitions for
judicial review of this action must be filed in the United States Court
of Appeals for the appropriate circuit by August 13, 2013. Filing a
petition for reconsideration by the Administrator of this final rule
does not affect the finality of this action for the purposes of
judicial review nor does it extend the time within which a petition for
judicial review may be filed, and shall not postpone the effectiveness
of such rule or action. This action may not be challenged later in
proceedings to enforce its requirements. (See section 307(b)(2).)

List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52

    Environmental protection, Air pollution control, Incorporation by
reference, Intergovernmental relations, Nitrogen dioxide, Ozone,
Particulate matter, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements, Volatile
organic compounds.

    Dated: June 5, 2013.
Judith A. Enck,
Regional Administrator, Region 2.

    Part 52, chapter I, title 40 of the Code of Federal Regulations is
amended as follows:

PART 52--[AMENDED]

0
1. The authority citation for part 52 continues to read as follows:

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

Subpart FF--New Jersey

Sec.  52.1574  [Removed and Reserved]

0
2. Section 52.1574 is removed and reserved.

Sec.  52.1575  [Removed and Reserved]

0
3. Section 52.1575 is removed and reserved.
0
4. Section 52.1586 is added to read as follows:

Sec.  52.1586  Section 110(a)(2) infrastructure requirements.

    (a) 1997 8-hour ozone and the 1997 and 2006 PM2.5 NAAQS. (1)
Approval. In a February 25, 2008 submittal and supplemented on January
15, 2010, New Jersey certified that the State has satisfied the Clean
Air Act (CAA) infrastructure requirements of section 110(a)(2) for the
1997 8-hour ozone and the 1997 and 2006 PM2.5 NAAQS. These
submittals satisfy the 1997 8-hour ozone and the 1997 and 2006
PM2.5 NAAQS requirements of CAA sections 110(a)(2)(A), (B),
(C) (enforcement program only), (D)(i)(II) prong 4 (visibility),
(E)(i), (F), (H), (J) (consultation and public notification only), (K),
(L), and (M).
    (2) Disapproval. Submittal from New Jersey dated February 25, 2008
and supplement dated January 15, 2010 to address the CAA infrastructure
requirements for the 1997 8-hour ozone and the 1997 and 2006
PM2.5 NAAQS are disapproved for the following sections
110(a)(2)(C) (PSD program only), (D)(i)(II) (PSD program only),
(D)(ii), and (J) (PSD program only). These requirements are being
addressed by 40 CFR 52.1603 which has been delegated to New Jersey to
implement.
    (3) Conditional approval. Submittal from New Jersey dated February
25, 2008 and supplement dated January 15, 2010 to address the CAA
infrastructure requirements for the 1997 8-hour ozone and the 1997 and
2006 PM2.5 NAAQS are conditionally approved for the
following sections 110(a)(2)(E)(ii) (conflict of interest provisions),
(E)(iii) (delegations), and for the 1997 8-hour ozone element section
110(a)(2)(G)(emergency powers). This conditional approval is contingent
upon New Jersey taking actions to meet requirements of these elements
within one year of conditional approval, as committed to in a letter
from the State to EPA Region 2 dated May 2, 2013.
    (b) [Reserved]

[FR Doc. 2013-14071 Filed 6-13-13; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P


[Federal Register: September 8, 2009 (Volume 74, Number 172)]
[Notices]
[Page 46266-46267]
[DOCID:fr08se09-139]

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

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

[Release No. 34-60603; File No. SR-BX-2009-049]

Self-Regulatory Organizations; NASDAQ OMX BX, Inc.; Notice of
Filing and Immediate Effectiveness of Proposed Rule Change To Correct
an Error in Rule 7018

September 1, 2009
    Pursuant to Section 19(b)(1) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934
(``Act''),\1\ and Rule 19b-4 thereunder,\2\ notice is hereby given that
on August 17, 2009, NASDAQ OMX BX, Inc. (``BX'') filed with the
Securities and Exchange Commission (``Commission'') the proposed rule
change as described in Items I, II, and III below, which Items have
been prepared by the Exchange. The Commission is publishing this notice
to solicit comments on the proposed rule from interested persons.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(1).
    \2\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

I. Self-Regulatory Organization's Statement of the Terms of Substance
of the Proposed Rule Change

    BX is filing a proposed rule change to correct a typographical
error in Rule 7018. The text of the proposed rule change is attached as
Exhibit 5 \3\ and is available at http://nasdaqomxbx.cchwallstreet.com.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \3\ The Commission notes that Exhibit 5 is attached to the
filing, but is not attached to this Notice.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

II. Self-Regulatory Organization's Statement of the Purpose of, and
Statutory Basis for, the Proposed Rule Change

    In its filing with the Commission, BX included statements
concerning the purpose of, and basis for, the proposed rule change and
discussed any comments it received on the proposed rule change. The
text of these statements may be examined at the places specified in
Item IV below. BX has prepared summaries, set forth in Sections A, B,
and C below, of the most significant aspects of such statements.

A. Self-Regulatory Organization's Statement of the Purpose of, and
Statutory Basis for, the Proposed Rule Change

1. Purpose
    BX is submitting this filing to correct a typographical error in
Rule 7018.\4\ In SR-BX-2009-018,\5\ BX modified its pricing for
execution of orders in securities listed on The NASDAQ Stock Market
(``NASDAQ'') and the New York Stock Exchange (``NYSE'') by, among other
things, replacing a charge to access liquidity of $0.0014 per share
executed with a credit of $0.0006 per share executed. This change was
accurately described in the ``Purpose'' section of BX's Form 19b-4
filing,\6\ in the Commission's notice of the filing on the SEC Web site
\7\ and in the Federal Register,\8\ in widely disseminated
announcements of the pricing change,\9\ and in the pricing schedule
that appears on BX's market Web site.\10\ However, due to a
typographical error, the credit incorrectly appeared as ``$0.006'' in
Exhibit 5 to the filing. Accordingly, BX is submitting this filing to
correct the typographical error. BX has been billing members in
accordance with the correct fee since the effective date of the change
in April 2009, and accordingly believes that all of its members that
trade on the NASDAQ OMX BX Equities System are cognizant of the correct
fee.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \4\ The Commission notes that, as with all filings submitted
under Section 19(b)(3)(A) of the Act, the filing is effective on the
date it was filed, in this case August 17, 2009.
    \5\ Securities Exchange Act Release No. 59682 (April 1, 2009),
74 FR 16015 (April 8, 2009) (SR-BX-2009-018).
    \6\ See http://nasdaqomxbx.cchwallstreet.com/NASDAQOMXBX/pdf/bx-
filings/2009/SR-BX-2009-018.pdf.
    \7\ See http://www.sec.gov/rules/sro/bx/2009/34-59682.pdf.
    \8\ See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 59682 (April 1,
2009), 74 FR 16015 (April 8, 2009) (SR-BX-2009-018).
    \9\ See http://www.nasdaqtrader.com/TraderNews.aspx?id=ETA2009-
16.
    \10\ See http://www.nasdaqtrader.com/Trader.aspx?id=bx_pricing.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

2. Statutory Basis
    BX believes that the proposed rule change is consistent with the
provisions of Section 6 of the Act,\11\ in general, and with Section
6(b)(5) of the Act,\12\ in particular, in that it is designed to remove
impediments to and perfect the mechanism of a fee [sic] and open market
and a national market system. The proposed rule change corrects a
typographical error in BX Rule 7018.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \11\ 15 U.S.C. 78f.
    \12\ 15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(5).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

B. Self-Regulatory Organization's Statement on Burden on Competition

    BX does not believe that the proposed rule change will result in
any burden on competition that is not necessary or appropriate in
furtherance of the purposes of the Act, as amended.

C. Self-Regulatory Organization's Statement on Comments on the Proposed
Rule Change Received From Members, Participants or Others

    Written comments were neither solicited nor received.

III. Date of Effectiveness of the Proposed Rule Change and Timing for
Commission Action

    The foregoing rule change has become effective pursuant to Section
19(b)(3)(A)(iii) of the Act \13\ and subparagraph (f)(3) of Rule 19b-4
thereunder.\14\ At any time within 60 days of the filing of the
proposed rule change, the Commission may summarily abrogate such rule
change if it appears to the Commission that such action is necessary or
appropriate in the public interest, for the protection of investors, or
otherwise in furtherance of the purposes of the Act.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \13\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(3)(a)(iii).
    \14\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4(f)(3).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

IV. Solicitation of Comments

    Interested persons are invited to submit written data, views, and
arguments concerning the foregoing, including whether the proposed rule
change is consistent with the Act. Comments may be submitted by any of
the following methods:

Electronic Comments

     Use the Commission's Internet comment form (http://
www.sec.gov/rules/sro.shtml ); or
     Send an e-mail to<EMAIL_ADDRESS>Please include
File Number SR-BX-2009-049 on the subject line.

Paper Comments

     Send paper comments in triplicate to Elizabeth M. Murphy,
Secretary, Securities and Exchange Commission, 100 F Street, NE.,
Washington, DC 20549-1090.
All submissions should refer to File Number SR-BX-2009-049. This file
number should be included on the subject line if e-mail is used. To
help the Commission process and review your comments more efficiently,
please use only one method. The Commission will post all comments on
the Commission's Internet Web site (http://www.sec.gov/rules/
sro.shtml). Copies of the submission, all subsequent amendments, all
written statements with respect to the proposed rule change that are
filed with the Commission, and all written communications relating to
the proposed rule change between the Commission and any person, other
than those that may be withheld from the public in accordance with the
provisions of 5 U.S.C. 552, will be available for inspection and
copying in the Commission's Public Reference Room, 100 F Street, NE.,
Washington, DC 20549, on official business days between the hours of 10
a.m. and 3 p.m. Copies of such filing also will be available for
inspection and copying at the principal office of the Exchange. All
comments received will be posted without change; the Commission does
not edit personal identifying information from submissions. You should
submit only information that you wish to make publicly available. All
submissions should refer to File Number SR-BX-2009-049 and should be
submitted on or before September 29, 2009.

    For the Commission, by the Division of Trading and Markets,
pursuant to delegated authority.\15\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \15\ 17 CFR 200.30-3(a)(12).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Florence E. Harmon,
Deputy Secretary.
[FR Doc. E9-21667 Filed 9-4-09; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 8010-01-P


The Motor Vehicle Manufacturing Industry Applying Aluminum Parts --

Leachable Xylenes Data

Facility Name	City	State	Sample Date	Sample ID	Duplicate Indicator Constituent Name	Leachable Actual or Calculated	Analytical Method Leachable Result	Units	Leachable Non-Detect Indicator	Leachable Detection Limit mg/L	Leachable Detection Limit Data Qualifier Description

BMW Manufacturing Corporation	SPARTANBURG	SC

Dup-00101 (Comp-2)	Y	xylenes	actual

0.0038	mg/L

	?	Unknown

DaimlerChrysler Jefferson North Assembly Plant	DETROIT	MI

JN-7	N	xylenes	actual

0.057	mg/L

Ford MI Truck/Wayne Integrated Stamping & Assembly	WAYNE	MI

Drum #4	N	xylenes	actual

0.096	mg/L

0.05

Ford Wixom Assembly Plant	WIXOM	MI

Drum #1	N	xylenes	actual

0.17	mg/L

0.05

Ford Wixom Assembly Plant	WIXOM	MI

Drum #2	N	xylenes	actual

0.059	mg/L

0.05

Ford Wixom Assembly Plant	WIXOM	MI

Drum #2 Duplicate	Y	xylenes	actual

0.06	mg/L

0.05

Ford Wixom Assembly Plant	WIXOM	MI

Drum #4	N	xylenes	actual

0.052	mg/L

0.05

Ford Wixom Assembly Plant	WIXOM	MI

Drum #5	N	xylenes	actual

0.15	mg/L

0.05

Ford Wixom Assembly Plant	WIXOM	MI

Drum #6	N	xylenes	actual

0.4	mg/L

0.05

GM Hamtramck Plant	DETROIT	MI

H1-1	N	xylenes	actual

0.052	mg/L

GM Hamtramck Plant	DETROIT	MI

H1-2	N	xylenes	actual

0.089	mg/L

GM Hamtramck Plant	DETROIT	MI

H2-1	N	xylenes	actual

0.13	mg/L

GM Hamtramck Plant	DETROIT	MI

H2-2	N	xylenes	actual

0.11	mg/L

GM Hamtramck Plant	DETROIT	MI

H2-4	N	xylenes	actual

0.059	mg/L

GM Hamtramck Plant	DETROIT	MI

H2-5	N	xylenes	actual

0.23	mg/L

GM Hamtramck Plant	DETROIT	MI

H2-7	N	xylenes	actual

0.19	mg/L

GM Lansing Assembly Center	LANSING	MI	12/19/1997	LAN-S01-01	N	xylenes actual

0.02	mg/L

GM Lansing Assembly Center	LANSING	MI	12/19/1997	LAN-S01-02	N	xylenes actual

0.02	mg/L

GM Lansing Assembly Center	LANSING	MI	12/19/1997	LAN-S01-03	N	xylenes actual

0.024	mg/L

GM Lansing Assembly Center	LANSING	MI	1/29/1998	LAN-S02-01	N	xylenes actual

0.0217	mg/L

GM Lansing Assembly Center	LANSING	MI	1/29/1998	LAN-S02-02	N	xylenes actual

0.0328	mg/L

GM Lansing Assembly Center	LANSING	MI	1/29/1998	LAN-S02-03	N	xylenes actual

0.0399	mg/L

GM Lansing Assembly Center	LANSING	MI	11/16/2000	3880.01	N	xylene, o- actual

0.003	mg/L

0.001

GM Lansing Assembly Center	LANSING	MI	11/16/2000	3880.05 (Dup of 3880.01)	Y	xylene, o-	actual

0.003	mg/L

0.001

GM Lansing Assembly Center	LANSING	MI	10/15/2002	10738.01	N	xylene, m- actual

0.03	mg/L

0.02

GM Lansing Assembly Center	LANSING	MI	10/15/2002	10738.01	N	xylene, o- actual

0.17	mg/L

0.02

GM Lansing Assembly Center	LANSING	MI	10/15/2002	10738.01	N	xylene, p- actual

0.03	mg/L

0.02

GM Lordstown Assembly Plant	LORDSTOWN	OH	12/16/1997	LOR-S01-01	N	xylenes actual

0.0058	mg/L

	J	Estimate

GM Lordstown Assembly Plant	LORDSTOWN	OH	12/16/1997	LOR-S01-02	N	xylenes actual

0.002	mg/L

	J	Estimate

GM Lordstown Assembly Plant	LORDSTOWN	OH	12/16/1997	LOR-S01-04	N	xylenes actual

0.002	mg/L

	J	Estimate

GM Orion Assembly Center	LAKE ORION	MI	2/20/1995	UPCU 4103788/255-008 - RB-4	N	xylenes	actual

0.005	mg/L

	J	Estimate

GM Orion Assembly Center	LAKE ORION	MI	2/20/1995	UPCU<PHONE_NUMBER>-007 - RB-3	N	xylenes	actual

0.009	mg/L

	J	Estimate

GM Orion Assembly Center	LAKE ORION	MI	2/20/1995	UPCU 4108183/255-003 - RB-1	N	xylenes	actual

0.008	mg/L

	J	Estimate

GM Orion Assembly Center	LAKE ORION	MI	2/20/1995	UPCU 4117098/255-004 - RB-2	N	xylenes	actual

0.004	mg/L

	J	Estimate

GM Orion Assembly Center	LAKE ORION	MI	9/20/1999	99-20 WWTP #3	N	xylene, m-	actual

0.8	mg/L

	as m & p xylene	as m & p xylene

GM Orion Assembly Center	LAKE ORION	MI	9/20/1999	99-20 WWTP #3	N	xylene, o-	actual

0.2	mg/L

0.1

GM Orion Assembly Center	LAKE ORION	MI	9/20/1999	99-20 WWTP #3	N	xylene, p-	actual

0.8	mg/L

	as m & p xylene	as m & p xylene

GM Orion Assembly Center	LAKE ORION	MI	9/20/1999	99-21 WWTP #4	N	xylene, m-	actual

3.7	mg/L

	as m & p xylene	as m & p xylene

GM Orion Assembly Center	LAKE ORION	MI	9/20/1999	99-21 WWTP #4	N	xylene, o-	actual

0.8	mg/L

0.1

GM Orion Assembly Center	LAKE ORION	MI	9/20/1999	99-21 WWTP #4	N	xylene, p-	actual

3.7	mg/L

	as m & p xylene	as m & p xylene

GM Orion Assembly Center	LAKE ORION	MI	8/1/2000	COMPOSITE	N	xylenes actual

0.038	mg/L

GM Orion Assembly Center	LAKE ORION	MI	12/21/2000	COMPOSITE	N	xylenes actual

0.055	mg/L

GM Orion Assembly Center	LAKE ORION	MI	12/28/2000	COMPOSITE	N	xylenes actual

0.016	mg/L

GM Orion Assembly Center	LAKE ORION	MI	2/22/2001	2001 Verification 3	N xylenes	actual

0.153	mg/L

GM Orion Assembly Center	LAKE ORION	MI	2/22/2001	2001 Verification 4 Composite	N	xylenes	actual

0.212	mg/L

GM Orion Assembly Center	LAKE ORION	MI	3/29/2001	2001 Verification 5	N xylenes	actual

0.058	mg/L

GM Orion Assembly Center	LAKE ORION	MI	3/29/2001	2001 Verification 6	N xylenes	actual

0.025	mg/L

GM Orion Assembly Center	LAKE ORION	MI	8/7/2002	2002 Verification 4	N xylenes	actual

0.062	mg/L

GM Orion Assembly Center	LAKE ORION	MI	3/7/2003	2003 Verification 1	N xylenes	actual

0.304	mg/L

GM Orion Assembly Center	LAKE ORION	MI	6/6/2003	2003 Verification 2	N xylenes	actual

0.027	mg/L

NOTE:  For xylene, some facilities analyzed samples for m-, o-, and p- isomers.

The results from m-xylene and p-xylene analyses are expressed as m & p xylene.

The total level of xylene for those samples is the summation of the m- or p-xylene

concentration and the o-xylene concentration.  Therefore, the above xylene data

should be adjusted as follows:

	Sample ID	Xylene (Total)

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

	Dup-00101 (Comp-2)	0.0038	mg/L

JN-7	0.057	mg/L

Drum #4	0.096	mg/L

Drum #1	0.17	mg/L

Drum #2	0.059	mg/L

Drum #2 Duplicate	0.06	mg/L

Drum #4	0.052	mg/L

Drum #5	0.15	mg/L

Drum #6	0.4	mg/L

H1-1	0.052	mg/L

H1-2	0.089	mg/L

H2-1	0.13	mg/L

H2-2	0.11	mg/L

H2-4	0.059	mg/L

H2-5	0.23	mg/L

H2-7	0.19	mg/L

LAN-S01-01	0.02	mg/L

LAN-S01-02	0.02	mg/L

LAN-S01-03	0.024	mg/L

LAN-S02-01	0.0217	mg/L

LAN-S02-02	0.0328	mg/L

LAN-S02-03	0.0399	mg/L

3880.01	0.003	mg/L

3880.05 (Dup of 3880.01)	0.003	mg/L

10738.01	0.2	mg/L

LOR-S01-01	0.0058	mg/L

	J	Estimate

LOR-S01-02	0.002	mg/L

	J	Estimate

LOR-S01-04	0.002	mg/L

	J	Estimate

UPCU 4103788/255-008 - RB-4	0.005	mg/L

	J	Estimate

UPCU<PHONE_NUMBER>-007 - RB-3	0.009	mg/L

	J	Estimate

UPCU 4108183/255-003 - RB-1	0.008	mg/L

	J	Estimate

UPCU 4117098/255-004 - RB-2	0.004	mg/L

	J	Estimate

99-20 WWTP #3	1	mg/L

	as m & p xylene	as m & p xylene

99-21 WWTP #4	4.5	mg/L

	as m & p xylene	as m & p xylene

COMPOSITE	0.038	mg/L

COMPOSITE	0.055	mg/L

COMPOSITE	0.016	mg/L

2001 Verification 3	0.153	mg/L

2001 Verification 4 Composite	0.212	mg/L

2001 Verification 5	0.058	mg/L

2001 Verification 6	0.025	mg/L

2002 Verification 4	0.062	mg/L

2003 Verification 1	0.304	mg/L

2003 Verification 2	0.027	mg/L

n 	44

	MAXIMUM	4.5

	MEAN	0.1990455

	MEDIAN	0.0535

	Std. Dev.	0.68355

	90th Percentile	0.2246

	50th Percentile	0.0535