[Federal Register Volume 83, Number 221 (Thursday, November 15, 2018)]
[Notices]
[Pages 57470-57471]
[FR Doc No: 2018-24882]

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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

Combined Notice of Filings #1

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

    Docket Numbers: EC18-122-000.
    Applicants: GridLiance High Plains LLC.
    Description: Response to October 11, 2018 Deficiency Letter of
GridLiance High Plains LLC.
    Filed Date: 11/7/18.
    Accession Number: 20181107-5128.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 11/28/18.

    Docket Numbers: EC19-24-000.
    Applicants: Northern Iowa Windpower LLC, Black Hills Electric
Generation, LLC, Black Hills Corporation, Top Deer Wind Ventures, LLC.
    Description: Joint Application for Authorization Under Section 203
of the Federal Power Act, et al. of Northern Iowa Windpower LLC, et al.
    Filed Date: 11/7/18.
    Accession Number: 20181107-5130.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 11/28/18.

    Take notice that the Commission received the following electric
rate filings:
    Docket Numbers: ER19-115-000.
    Applicants: FL Solar 5, LLC.
    Description: Supplement to October 16, 2018 FL Solar 5, LLC tariff
filing.
    Filed Date: 11/7/18.
    Accession Number: 20181107-5140.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 11/21/18.

    Docket Numbers: ER19-302-000.
    Applicants: NTE Southeast Electric Company, LLC.
    Description: Baseline eTariff Filing: Baseline new to be effective
1/1/2019.
    Filed Date: 11/7/18.
    Accession Number: 20181107-5114.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 11/28/18.

    Docket Numbers: ER19-303-000.
    Applicants: Duquesne Light Company.
    Description: Application for Incentive Rate Treatment, et al. of
Duquesne Light Company.
    Filed Date: 11/7/18.

    Accession Number: 20181107-5132.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 11/28/18.

    Docket Numbers: ER19-304-000.
    Applicants: Mid-Atlantic Interstate Transmission, LLC, PJM
Interconnection, L.L.C.
    Description: Sec.  205(d) Rate Filing: MAIT submits an ECSA,
Service Agreement No. 5195 with MetEd to be effective 1/8/2019.
    Filed Date: 11/8/18.
    Accession Number: 20181108-5026.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 11/29/18.

    Docket Numbers: ER19-305-000.
    Applicants: PJM Interconnection, L.L.C.
    Description: Sec.  205(d) Rate Filing: Rev to Day-ahead Energy Mrkt
Timeline Expedited Action Shortened Comment Period to be effective 12/
31/9998.
    Filed Date: 11/8/18.
    Accession Number: 20181108-5032.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 11/15/18.

    Docket Numbers: ER19-306-000.
    Applicants: Duke Energy Carolinas, LLC.
    Description: Sec.  205(d) Rate Filing: DEC-NCEMC NITSA (SA No. 210)
Amendment to be effective 1/1/2019.
    Filed Date: 11/8/18.
    Accession Number: 20181108-5099.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 11/29/18.

    Docket Numbers: ER19-307-000.
    Applicants: Hudson Shore Energy Partners LLC.
    Description: Sec.  205(d) Rate Filing: Notice of Succssion to be
effective 11/9/2018.
    Filed Date: 11/8/18.
    Accession Number: 20181108-5111.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 11/29/18.

    Docket Numbers: ER19-308-000.
    Applicants: California Independent System Operator Corporation.
    Description: Petition for Approval of Disposition of Proceeds of
Penalty Assessments of California Independent System Operator
Corporation.
    Filed Date: 11/8/18.
    Accession Number: 20181108-5116.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 11/29/18.

    Docket Numbers: ER19-309-000.
    Applicants: ISO New England Inc., NSTAR Electric Company.
    Description: Sec.  205(d) Rate Filing: ISO-NE and NSTAR; Original
Service Agreement under Schedule 21-ES of the OATT to be effective 1/7/
2019.
    Filed Date: 11/8/18.
    Accession Number: 20181108-5122.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 11/29/18.

    Docket Numbers: ER19-310-000.
    Applicants: Midcontinent Independent System Operator, Inc.
    Description: Sec.  205(d) Rate Filing: 2018-11-08_SA 3200 Sholes
Wind-MidAmerican FCA (C027) to be effective 10/25/2018.
    Filed Date: 11/8/18.
    Accession Number: 20181108-5124.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 11/29/18.

    Docket Numbers: ER19-311-000.
    Applicants: Midcontinent Independent System Operator, Inc.
    Description: Sec.  205(d) Rate Filing: 2018-11-08_SA 3201
Shiawassee Wind-METC GIA (J602) to be effective 10/25/2018.
    Filed Date: 11/8/18.
    Accession Number: 20181108-5155.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 11/29/18.

    Docket Numbers: ER19-312-000.
    Applicants: Cedar Creek Wind Energy, LLC.
    Description: Sec.  205(d) Rate Filing: Category 2 Notice for NW
Region and Revised Market-Based Rate Tariff to be effective 11/9/2018.
    Filed Date: 11/8/18.
    Accession Number: 20181108-5161.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 11/29/18.

    Take notice that the Commission received the following foreign
utility company status filings:

    Docket Numbers: FC19-1-000.
    Applicants: I Squared Capital.
    Description: Notification of Self-Certification of Foreign Utility
Company Status of the Ibereolica Solar Companies.
    Filed Date: 11/8/18.
    Accession Number: 20181108-5081.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 11/29/18.

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

    Dated: November 8, 2018.
Nathaniel J. Davis, Sr.,
Deputy Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2018-24882 Filed 11-14-18; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 6717-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 78, Number 207 (Friday, October 25, 2013)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Page 63869]
[FR Doc No: 2013-25207]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

14 CFR Part 73

[Docket No. FAA-2013-0803; Airspace Docket No. 13-ASO-20]
RIN 2120-AA66

Change of Using Agency for Restricted Areas R-2916, FL and R-
7105, PR

AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), DOT.

ACTION: Final rule.

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

SUMMARY: This action updates the name of the using agencies for
Restricted Areas R-2916, FL and R-7105, PR, at the request of the
Department of the Air Force. This is an administrative change only and
does not affect the boundaries; designated altitudes; time of
designation; or activities conducted within the affected restricted
areas.

DATES: Effective date: 0901 UTC, December 12, 2013.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Paul Gallant, Airspace Policy and ATC
Procedures Group, Office of Airspace Services, Federal Aviation
Administration, 800 Independence Avenue SW., Washington, DC 20591;
telephone:<PHONE_NUMBER>.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Background

    As a result of the realignment of organizational responsibilities
between federal agencies, U.S. Customs and Border Protection has been
assigned the function of using agency for restricted areas R-2916 in
Florida and R-7105 in Puerto Rico. This is an administrative name
change only and does not affect the current dimensions or use of the
restricted areas.

The Rule

    This action amends Title 14 Code of Federal Regulations (14 CFR)
part 73 by amending the using agency name for Restricted Areas R-2916
Cudjoe Key, FL and R-7105 Lajas, PR. The using agency for R-2916 is
changed from ``USAF, Southeast Air Defense Sector/Director of
Operations, Tyndall AFB, FL,'' to ``U.S. Customs and Border Protection,
Air and Marine Operations Center, March ARB, CA.'' The using agency for
R-7105 is changed from ``Puerto Rico Police Department'' to ``U.S.
Customs and Border Protection, Caribbean Air and Marine Operations
Center, Punta Salinas, PR.''
    This is an administrative change to update the title of the using
agencies. It does not affect the boundaries, designated altitudes, or
activities conducted within the restricted areas; therefore, notice and
public procedures under 5 U.S.C. 553(b) are unnecessary.
    The FAA has determined that this action only involves an
established body of technical regulations for which frequent and
routine amendments are necessary to keep them operationally current.
Therefore, this regulation: (1) is not a ``significant regulatory
action'' under Executive Order 12866; (2) is not a ``significant rule''
under DOT Regulatory Policies and Procedures (44 FR 11034; February 26,
1979); and (3) does not warrant preparation of a regulatory evaluation
as the anticipated impact is so minimal. Since this is a routine matter
that only affects air traffic procedures and air navigation, it is
certified that this rule, when promulgated, does not have a significant
economic impact on a substantial number of small entities under the
criteria of the Regulatory Flexibility Act.
    The FAA's authority to issue rules regarding aviation safety is
found in Title 49 of the United States Code. Subtitle I, Section 106
describes the authority of the FAA Administrator. Subtitle VII,
Aviation Programs, describes in more detail the scope of the agency's
authority.
    This rulemaking is promulgated under the authority described in
Subtitle VII, Part A, Subpart I, Section 40103. Under that section, the
FAA is charged with prescribing regulations to assign the use of the
airspace necessary to ensure the safety of aircraft and the efficient
use of airspace. This regulation is within the scope of that authority
as it amends the descriptions of restricted areas to reflect current
organizational responsibilities.

Environmental Review

    The FAA has determined that this action qualifies for categorical
exclusion under the National Environmental Policy Act in accordance
with FAA Order 1050.1E, Environmental Impacts: Policies and Procedures,
paragraph 311d. This airspace action is an administrative change to the
descriptions of the affected restricted areas to update the using
agency name. It does not alter the dimensions, altitudes, or times of
designation of the airspace; therefore, it is not expected to cause any
potentially significant environmental impacts, and no extraordinary
circumstances exists that warrant preparation of an environmental
assessment.

List of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 73

    Airspace, Prohibited areas, Restricted areas.

Adoption of the Amendment

    In consideration of the foregoing, the Federal Aviation
Administration amends 14 CFR part 73, as follows:

PART 73--SPECIAL USE AIRSPACE

0
1. The authority citation for part 73 continues to read as follows:

    Authority: 49 U.S.C. 106(g), 40103, 40113, 40120; E.O. 10854, 24
FR 9565, 3 CFR, 1959-1963 Comp., p. 389.

Sec.  73.29  [Amended]

0
2. Section 73.29 is amended as follows:
* * * * *

R-2916 Cudjoe Key, FL [Amended]

    Under Using agency, remove ``USAF, Southeast Air Defense Sector/
Director of Operations, Tyndall AFB, FL'' and insert ``U.S. Customs and
Border Protection, Air and Marine Operations Center, March ARB, CA.''

Sec.  73.71  [Amended]

0
3. Section 73.71 is amended as follows:
* * * * *

R-7105 Lajas, PR [Amended]

    Under Using agency, remove `Puerto Rico Police Department'' and
insert ``U.S. Customs and Border Protection, Caribbean Air and Marine
Operations Center, Punta Salinas, PR.''

    Issued in Washington, DC on October 21, 2013.
Gary A. Norek,
Manager, Airspace Policy and ATC Procedures Group.
[FR Doc. 2013-25207 Filed 10-24-13; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-13-P


[Federal Register Volume 87, Number 189 (Friday, September 30, 2022)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 59373-59376]
[FR Doc No: 2022-21246]

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

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

40 CFR Part 52

[EPA-R06-OAR-2016-0676; FRL-10186-01-R6]

Air Plan Approval; New Mexico; Excess Emissions

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Proposed rule.

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

SUMMARY: Pursuant to the Federal Clean Air Act (CAA, the Act), the
Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is proposing to approve a State
Implementation Plan (SIP) revision from the New Mexico Environment
Department (NMED) submitted on October 13, 2016. The submittal is in
response to EPA's national SIP call on June 12, 2015, concerning excess
emissions during periods of Startup, Shutdown, and Malfunction (SSM).
The submittal requests the removal of the provisions identified in the
2015 SIP call from the New Mexico SIP. EPA is proposing to approve the
SIP revision and proposing to determine that such SIP revision corrects
the deficiency identified in the June 12, 2015 SIP call.

DATES: Comments must be received on or before October 31, 2022.

ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, identified by Docket No. EPA-R06-OAR-
2016-0676 at https://www.regulations.gov or via email to
[email protected]. Follow the online instructions for submitting
comments. Once submitted, comments cannot be edited or removed from
Regulations.gov. 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. The 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 Mr. Alan Shar, (214) 665-
6691, [email protected]. 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.
    Docket: The index to the docket for this action is available
electronically at www.regulations.gov and in hard copy at the EPA
Region 6 Office, 1201 Elm Street, Suite 500, Dallas, Texas 75270. While
all documents in the docket are listed in the index, some information
may be publicly available only at the hard copy location (e.g.,
copyrighted material), and some may not be publicly available at either
location (e.g., CBI).

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Mr. Alan Shar, Regional Haze and
SO2 Section, EPA Region 6 Office, 1201 Elm Street, Suite
500, Dallas, Texas 75270,<PHONE_NUMBER>, [email protected]. Out of an
abundance of caution for members of the public and our staff, the EPA
Region 6 office may be closed to the public to reduce the risk of
transmitting COVID-19. We encourage the public to submit comments via
https://www.regulations.gov, as there will be a delay in processing
mail and no courier or hand deliveries will be accepted. Please call or
email the contact listed above if you need alternative access to
material indexed but not provided in the docket.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Throughout this document ``we,'' ``us,'' and
``our'' means the EPA.

Table of Contents

I. Background
    A. EPA's 2015 SIP Action
    B. New Mexico's Part 7 Excess Emissions
II. Analysis of SIP Submission
III. Proposed Action
IV. Environmental Justice Considerations
V. Incorporation by Reference
VI. Statutory and Executive Orders Review

I. Background

A. EPA's 2015 SIP Action

    On February 22, 2013, EPA issued a Federal Register notice of
proposed rulemaking action outlining EPA's policy at the time with
respect to SIP provisions related to periods of SSM. EPA analyzed
specific SSM SIP provisions and explained how each one either did or
did not comply with the CAA with regard to excess emission events.\1\
For each SIP provision that EPA determined to be inconsistent with the
CAA, EPA proposed to find that the existing SIP provision was
substantially inadequate to meet CAA requirements and thus proposed to
issue a SIP call under CAA section 110(k)(5). On September 17, 2014,
EPA issued a document supplementing and revising what the Agency had
previously proposed on February 22, 2013, in light of a D.C. Circuit
decision that determined the CAA precludes authority of EPA to create
affirmative defense provisions.\2\ EPA outlined its updated policy that
affirmative defense SIP provisions are not consistent with CAA
requirements. EPA proposed in the supplemental proposal document to
apply its revised interpretation of the Act to specific affirmative
defense SIP provisions and proposed SIP calls for those provisions
where appropriate (79 FR 55920, September 17, 2014).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ State Implementation Plans: Response to Petition for
Rulemaking; Findings of Substantial Inadequacy; and SIP Calls To
Amend Provisions Applying to Excess Emissions During Periods of
Startup, Shutdown, and Malfunction, (78 FR 12460) Feb. 22, 2013.
    \2\ The term affirmative defense means, in the context of an
enforcement proceeding, a response or defense put forward by a
defendant, regarding which the defendant has the burden of proof,
and the merits of which are independently and objectively evaluated
in a judicial or administrative proceeding.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    On June 12, 2015, pursuant to CAA section 110(k)(5), EPA finalized
``State Implementation Plans: Response to Petition for Rulemaking;
Restatement and Update of EPA's SSM Policy Applicable to SIPs; Findings
of Substantial Inadequacy; and SIP Calls To Amend Provisions Applying
to Excess Emissions During Periods of Startup, Shutdown and
Malfunction,'' (80 FR 33839, June 12, 2015), hereafter referred to as
the ``2015 SSM SIP Action.'' The 2015 SSM SIP Action clarified,
restated, and updated EPA's interpretation that SSM exemption and
affirmative defense SIP provisions are inconsistent with CAA
requirements. The 2015 SSM SIP Action found that certain SIP provisions
in 36 states were substantially inadequate to meet CAA requirements and
issued a SIP call to those states to submit SIP revisions to address
the inadequacies. EPA established an 18-month deadline by which the
affected states had to submit such SIP revisions. States, including New
Mexico, were required to submit corrective revisions to their SIPs in
response to the SIP calls by November 22, 2016.
    EPA issued a Memorandum in October 2020 (2020 Memorandum), which
stated that certain provisions governing SSM periods in SIPs could be
viewed as consistent with CAA requirements.\3\ Importantly, the 2020
Memorandum stated that it ``did not alter in any way the determinations
made in the 2015 SSM SIP Action that identified specific state SIP
provisions that were substantially inadequate to meet the requirements
of the Act.'' Accordingly, the 2020 Memorandum

had no direct impact on the SIP call issued to New Mexico in 2015. The
2020 Memorandum did, however, indicate EPA's intent at the time to
review SIP calls that were issued in the 2015 SSM SIP Action to
determine whether EPA should maintain, modify, or withdraw particular
SIP calls through future agency actions.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \3\ October 9, 2020, Memorandum ``Inclusion of Provisions
Governing Periods of Startup, Shutdown, and Malfunctions in State
Implementation Plans,'' from Andrew R. Wheeler, Administrator.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    On September 30, 2021, EPA's Deputy Administrator withdrew the 2020
Memorandum and announced EPA's return to the policy articulated in the
2015 SSM SIP Action (2021 Memorandum).\4\ As articulated in the 2021
Memorandum, SIP provisions that contain exemptions or affirmative
defense provisions are not consistent with CAA requirements and,
therefore, generally are not approvable if contained in a SIP
submission. This policy approach is intended to ensure that all
communities and populations, including populations overburdened by air
pollution, receive the full health and environmental protections
provided by the CAA.\5\ The 2021 Memorandum also retracted the prior
statement from the 2020 Memorandum of EPA's plans to review and
potentially modify or withdraw particular SIP calls. That statement no
longer reflects EPA's intent. EPA intends to implement the principles
laid out in the 2015 SSM SIP Action as the agency takes action on SIP
submissions, including this SIP submittal provided in response to the
2015 SIP call.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \4\ September 30, 2021, Memorandum ``Withdrawal of the October
9, 2020, Memorandum Addressing Startup, Shutdown, and Malfunctions
in State Implementation Plans and Implementation of the Prior
Policy,'' from Janet McCabe, Deputy Administrator.
    \5\ Section J, June 12, 2015 (80 FR 33985).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

B. New Mexico's Part 7 Excess Emissions

    New Mexico Administrative Code (NMAC), Title 20 Environmental
Protection, Chapter 2 Air Quality (Statewide), Part 7 Excess Emissions
(20.2.7 NMAC) was approved by EPA into the New Mexico SIP on September
14, 2009 (74 FR 46910) and became federally effective on November 13,
2009.
    As a part of EPA's 2015 SSM SIP Action, EPA made a finding that
certain provisions in Part 7--namely, <IP_ADDRESS> NMAC, <IP_ADDRESS> NMAC,
and <IP_ADDRESS> NMAC of the New Mexico SIP--are substantially inadequate
to meet CAA requirements, and thus issued a SIP call with respect to
these provisions because these provisions provide for an affirmative
defense.\6\ Although not part of the finding in the 2015 SIP call,
removal of <IP_ADDRESS> NMAC, <IP_ADDRESS> NMAC, and <IP_ADDRESS> NMAC from
the New Mexico SIP would render <IP_ADDRESS>(B) NMAC, <IP_ADDRESS>(B)(15)
NMAC, <IP_ADDRESS> NMAC, and <IP_ADDRESS> NMAC no longer operative or
problematic for SIP compliance purposes because they refer to or cross-
reference the substantially inadequate provisions of 20.2.7 NMAC.\7\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \6\ See Affected States in EPA Region VI, section IX.G.4, June
12, 2015 (80 FR 33968).
    \7\ More specifically, removal of <IP_ADDRESS> NMAC, <IP_ADDRESS>
NMAC, and <IP_ADDRESS> NMAC from the SIP will render <IP_ADDRESS>(B)
(concerning establishing criteria to claim an affirmative defense);
<IP_ADDRESS>(B)(15) (concerning extension of notification report
deadline upon receipt of written request from the owner or
operator); <IP_ADDRESS> NMAC (concerning review of the department's
determinations under sections 111, 112, and 113); and <IP_ADDRESS>
NMAC (concerning future enforcement action) no longer operative or
problematic for SIP compliance purposes as they are interrelated and
refer to or cross-reference the substantially inadequate provisions
of Part 7--being proposed for removal from the SIP in response to
June 12, 2015 SIP call Action--and EPA concurs with the State action
and recommends that these provisions be removed from the SIP as
well.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

II. Analysis of SIP Submission

    In response to EPA's June 12, 2015 SIP call, NMED requested by
letter dated October 13, 2016,\8\ that EPA approve removal of
<IP_ADDRESS> NMAC, <IP_ADDRESS> NMAC and <IP_ADDRESS> NMAC found by EPA's
June 12, 2015 SIP call to be substantially inadequate to meet CAA
requirements. The removal of these provisions from the New Mexico SIP
eliminates the affirmative defense provisions identified in the June
12, 2015 SIP call. In addition, NMED requested that <IP_ADDRESS>(B) NMAC,
<IP_ADDRESS>(B)(15) NMAC, <IP_ADDRESS> NMAC, and <IP_ADDRESS> NMAC be removed
from the New Mexico SIP as well. EPA believes that removal of these
seven provisions from the New Mexico SIP will not affect the adequacy
of the remaining portions of the New Mexico SIP.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \8\ Attachment A, October 13, 2016, submittal letter from NMED
Cabinet Secretary to EPA Region 6 Regional Administrator.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Although certain provisions of Part 7 (<IP_ADDRESS> NMAC, <IP_ADDRESS>
NMAC, <IP_ADDRESS> NMAC, <IP_ADDRESS>(B) NMAC, <IP_ADDRESS>(B)(15) NMAC,
<IP_ADDRESS> NMAC, and <IP_ADDRESS> NMAC) are being proposed for removal
from the EPA-approved New Mexico SIP, NMED intends to retain Part 7 in
its entirety as a matter of state law, outside of the SIP, as a
``state-only'' rule. It is EPA's position that the ``state-only''
measure will apply only to the state's own enforcement personnel and
not to EPA or to others.\9\ Since these provisions are only applicable
to the State air agency, EPA's view is that the provisions need not be
included within the SIP. Thus, EPA does not object to states or local
air agencies that elect to revise their SIPs ``to remove these
provisions to avoid any unnecessary confusion.'' \10\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \9\ June 12, 2015 (80 FR 33958).
    \10\ June 12, 2015 (80 FR 33958).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The submittal also includes an analysis to demonstrate compliance
with section 110(l) of the Act.\11\ Elimination of the above-mentioned
provisions of Part 7 from the New Mexico SIP is not expected to lead to
any emissions increase. We do not believe the proposed revisions would
interfere with attainment and reasonable further progress, or any
applicable requirement of the CAA. Thus, we find that EPA's approval
would be consistent with section 110(l). Consequently, we are proposing
to approve the removal of the above-referenced provisions of Part 7
Excess Emissions from the New Mexico SIP. The SIP is not approved to
apply on any Indian reservation land or in any other area where EPA or
an Indian tribe has demonstrated that a tribe has jurisdiction;
however, in light of Oklahoma Dept. of Environmental Quality v. EPA,
740 F.3d 185 (D.C. Cir. 2014), the SIP applies to non-reservation
Indian allotments within the State.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \11\ Pages 11-14 of the SIP submittal, Docket ID No. EPA-R06-
OAR-2016-0676.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

III. Proposed Action

    EPA is proposing to approve a revision to the New Mexico SIP
submitted on October 13, 2016, in response to EPA's national SIP call
of June 12, 2015, concerning excess emissions during periods of SSM.
More specifically, we are proposing to approve the removal of
<IP_ADDRESS> NMAC, <IP_ADDRESS> NMAC, <IP_ADDRESS> NMAC, <IP_ADDRESS>(B) NMAC,
<IP_ADDRESS>(B)(15) NMAC, <IP_ADDRESS> NMAC, and <IP_ADDRESS> NMAC of Part 7
Excess Emissions from the New Mexico SIP. We are proposing to approve
these revisions in accordance with section 110 of the Act. EPA is
further proposing to determine that such SIP revisions correct the
deficiencies identified in the June 12, 2015 SIP call with respect to
the New Mexico SIP. EPA is not reopening the 2015 SSM SIP Action and is
only taking comment on whether the proposed SIP revisions are
consistent with CAA requirements and whether they addresses the
substantial inadequacy in the specific provisions identified in the
2015 SSM SIP Action.

IV. Environmental Justice Considerations

    Executive Order 12898 (Federal Actions To Address Environmental
Justice in Minority Populations and

Low-Income Populations, 59 FR 7629, Feb. 16, 1994) directs federal
agencies to identify and address ``disproportionately high and adverse
human health or environmental effects'' of their actions on minority
populations and low-income populations to the greatest extent
practicable and permitted by law. EPA defines environmental justice
(EJ) as ``the fair treatment and meaningful involvement of all people
regardless of race, color, national origin, or income with respect to
the development, implementation, and enforcement of environmental laws,
regulations, and policies.'' EPA further defines the term fair
treatment to mean that ``no group of people should bear a
disproportionate burden of environmental harms and risks, including
those resulting from the negative environmental consequences of
industrial, governmental, and commercial operations or programs and
policies.'' \12\ EPA is providing additional analysis of environmental
justice associated with this action for the purpose of providing
information to the public.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \12\ https://www.epa.gov/environmentaljustice/learn-about-environmental-justice.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    EPA reviewed demographic data, which provides an assessment of
individual demographic groups of the populations living within New
Mexico.\13\ EPA then compared the data to the national average for each
of the demographic groups. The results of the demographic analysis
indicate that, for populations within New Mexico, the percent people of
color (persons who reported their race as a category other than White
alone (not Hispanic or Latino)) is significantly higher than the
national average (64.1 percent versus 31.7 percent). The percent of the
state population that is Hispanic or Latino is higher than the national
averages (50.1 percent versus 18.9 percent) and the percent of the
population that is American Indian/Alaska Native is also higher than
the national average (11.2 percent versus 1.3 percent). The percent of
people living below the poverty level in New Mexico is higher than the
national average (16.8 percent versus 11.4 percent). The percent of
people in New Mexico over age 25 with a high school diploma is lower
than the national average (86.5 percent versus 88.5 percent), and the
percent with a Bachelor's degree or higher is also slightly lower than
the national average (28.1 percent versus 32.9 percent).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \13\ https://www.census.gov/quickfacts/NM?.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Communities in close proximity to and/or downwind of industrial
sources may be subject to disproportionate environmental impacts of
excess emissions. Short- and/or long-term exposure to air pollution has
been associated with a wide range of human health effects including
increased respiratory symptoms, hospitalization for heart or lung
diseases, and even premature death. Excess emissions during periods of
SSM can be considerably higher than emissions under normal steady-state
operations.
    As to all population groups within the State of New Mexico, we
believe that this proposed action will be beneficial and may reduce
impacts as explained below. As discussed earlier in this notice, this
rulemaking, if finalized as proposed, would result in the removal of
the provisions in the New Mexico SIP applicable to all counties in the
State, except Bernalillo County, that provide sources emitting
pollutants in excess of otherwise allowable amounts with the
opportunity to assert an affirmative defense to violations involving
excess emissions during SSM events. Removal of such impermissible
affirmative defense provisions from the SIP is necessary to preserve
the enforcement structure of the CAA, the jurisdiction of courts to
adjudicate questions of liability and remedies in judicial enforcement
actions, and the potential for enforcement by the EPA and other parties
under the citizen suit provision as an effective deterrent to
violations. If finalized as proposed, this action is intended to ensure
that overburdened communities and affected populations across the State
and downwind areas receive the full human health and environmental
protection provided by the CAA. We therefore propose to determine that
this rule, if finalized, will not have disproportionately high or
adverse human health or environmental effects on communities with
environmental justice concerns.

V. Incorporation by Reference

    In this action, we are proposing to include in a final rule
regulatory text that includes incorporation by reference. In accordance
with the requirements of 1 CFR 51.5, we are proposing to remove
<IP_ADDRESS> NMAC, <IP_ADDRESS> NMAC, <IP_ADDRESS> NMAC, <IP_ADDRESS>(B) NMAC,
<IP_ADDRESS>(B)(15) NMAC, <IP_ADDRESS> NMAC, and <IP_ADDRESS> NMAC of Part 7
Excess Emissions from the New Mexico SIP, as described in the Proposed
Action section above. EPA has made, and will continue to make, these
documents generally available electronically through
www.regulations.gov and in hard copy at the EPA Region 6 office.

VI. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews

    Under the 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 Act. Accordingly, this
action merely proposes to approve 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) and 13563 (76 FR 3821, January 21,
2011);
     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 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, the SIP is not approved to apply on any Indian
reservation land 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 proposed rule 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). However, in light of Oklahoma Dept. of
Environmental Quality v. EPA, 740 F.3d 185 (D.C. Cir. 2014), this
proposed rule, if finalized as proposed, will apply to non-reservation
Indian allotments within the state and, therefore, has tribal
implications as specified in E.O. 13175. This action will neither
impose substantial direct compliance costs on federally recognized
tribal governments, nor preempt tribal law. This action will not impose
substantial direct compliance costs on federally recognized tribal
governments because no actions will be required of tribal governments.
This action will also not preempt tribal law as no tribe in New Mexico
implements a Tribal Implementation Program under the CAA. Consistent
with the EPA Policy on Consultation and Coordination with Indian Tribes
(May 4, 2011), EPA has offered consultation to tribal governments that
may be affected by this action.

List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52

    Environmental protection, Air pollution control, Carbon monoxide,
Hydrocarbons, Incorporation by reference, Intergovernmental relations,
Lead, Nitrogen dioxide, Particulate matter, Sulfur dioxide, Reporting
and recordkeeping requirements, Volatile organic compounds.

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

    Dated: September 26, 2022.
Earthea Nance,
Regional Administrator, Region 6.
[FR Doc. 2022-21246 Filed 9-29-22; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P