[Federal Register Volume 77, Number 234 (Wednesday, December 5, 2012)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 72284-72287]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2012-29367]
[[Page 72284]]
=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
40 CFR Part 52
[EPA-R04-OAR-2012-0814; FRL- 9757-9]
Approval and Promulgation of Implementation Plans; Region 4
States; Section 110(a)(2)(D)(i)(II) Infrastructure Requirement for the
1997 and 2006 Fine Particulate Matter National Ambient Air Quality
Standards
AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).
ACTION: Proposed rule.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: EPA is proposing to approve submissions from Alabama, Georgia,
Mississippi and South Carolina for inclusion into each states' State
Implementation Plans (SIP). This proposal pertains to the Clean Air Act
(CAA) requirements regarding prevention of significant deterioration
(PSD) for the 1997 annual and 2006 24-hour fine particulate matter
(PM2.5) National Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS)
infrastructure SIPs. The CAA requires that each state adopt and submit
a SIP for the implementation, maintenance, and enforcement of each
NAAQS promulgated by EPA, which is commonly referred to as an
``infrastructure'' SIP. EPA is proposing to approve the submissions for
Alabama, Georgia, Mississippi, and South Carolina that relate to
adequate provisions prohibiting emissions that interfere with any other
state's required measures to prevent significant deterioration of its
air quality. All other applicable infrastructure requirements for the
1997 annual and 2006 24-hour PM2.5 NAAQS associated with
these States are being addressed in separate rulemakings.
DATES: Written comments must be received on or before January 4, 2013.
ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, identified by Docket ID No. EPA-R04-
OAR-2012-0814, by one of the following methods:
1. www.regulations.gov: Follow the on-line instructions for
submitting comments.
2. Email: [email protected].
3. Fax: (404) 562-9019.
4. Mail: ``EPA-R04-OAR-2012-0814,'' Regulatory Development Section,
Air Planning Branch, Air, Pesticides and Toxics Management Division,
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Region 4, 61 Forsyth Street, SW.,
Atlanta, Georgia 30303-8960.
5. Hand Delivery or Courier: Lynorae Benjamin, 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-
2012-0814. 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: Sean Lakeman, Regulatory Development
Section, Air Planning Branch, Air, Pesticides and Toxics Management
Division, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Region 4, 61 Forsyth
Street, SW., Atlanta, Georgia 30303-8960. The telephone number is (404)
562-9043. Mr. Lakeman can be reached via electronic mail at
[email protected].
Table of Contents
I. Background
II. What are States required to address under Sections 110(a)(2)(D)?
III. What is EPA's analysis of how Region 4 States addressed element
(D)(i)(II) related to PSD?
IV. Proposed Action
V. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews
I. Background
On July 18, 1997 (62 FR 38652), EPA established an annual
PM2.5 NAAQS at 15.0 micrograms per cubic meter ([mu]g/m\3\)
based on a 3-year average of annual mean PM2.5
concentrations. At that time, EPA also established a 24-hour NAAQS of
65 [mu]g/m\3\. See 40 CFR 50.7. On October 17, 2006 (71 FR 61144), EPA
retained the 1997 annual PM2.5 NAAQS at 15.0 [mu]g/m\3\
based on a 3-year average of annual mean PM2.5
concentrations, and promulgated a new 24-hour NAAQS of 35 [mu]g/m\3\
based on a 3-year average of the 98th percentile of 24-hour
concentrations. By statute, SIPs meeting the requirements of sections
110(a)(1) and (2) are to be submitted by states within three years
after promulgation of a new or revised NAAQS. Sections 110(a)(1) and
(2) require states to address basic SIP requirements, including
emissions inventories, monitoring, and modeling to assure attainment
and maintenance of the NAAQS. States were required to submit such SIPs
to EPA no later than July 2000 for the 1997 annual PM2.5
NAAQS, and no later than October 2009 for the 2006 24-hour
PM2.5 NAAQS.
States were required to submit such SIPs to EPA no later than July
2000 for the 1997 annual PM2.5 NAAQS, and no
[[Page 72285]]
later than Octoer 2009 for the 2006 24-hour PM2.5 NAAQS.
On March 4, 2004, Earthjustice submitted a notice of intent to sue
related to EPA's failure to issue findings of failure to submit related
to the ``infrastructure'' requirements for the 1997 annual
PM2.5 NAAQS. On March 10, 2005, EPA entered into a consent
decree with Earthjustice which required EPA, among other things, to
complete a Federal Register notice announcing EPA's determinations
pursuant to section 110(k)(1)(B) as to whether each state had made
complete submissions to meet the requirements of section 110(a)(2) for
the 1997 PM2.5 NAAQS by October 5, 2008. In accordance with
the consent decree, EPA made completeness findings for each state based
upon what the Agency received from each state for the 1997
PM2.5 NAAQS as of October 3, 2008.
On October 22, 2008, EPA published a final rulemaking entitled
``Completeness Findings for Section 110(a) State Implementation Plans
Pertaining to the Fine Particulate Matter (PM2.5) NAAQS''
making a finding that each state had submitted or failed to submit a
complete SIP that provided the basic program elements of section
110(a)(2) necessary to implement the 1997 PM2.5 NAAQS. See
73 FR 62902. For those states that did receive findings, the findings
of failure to submit for all or a portion of a state's implementation
plan established a 24-month deadline for EPA to promulgate a Federal
Implementation Plan (FIP) to address the outstanding SIP elements
unless, prior to that time, the affected states submitted, and EPA
approved, the required SIPs.
The findings that all or portions of a state's submission are
complete established a 12-month deadline for EPA to take action upon
the complete SIP elements in accordance with section 110(k). Alabama,
Georgia, Mississippi and South Carolina's infrastructure submissions
were received by EPA on July 25, 2008, July 23, 2008, December 7, 2007,
and March 14, 2008, respectively, for the 1997 annual PM2.5
NAAQS and on September 23, 2009, October 21, 2009, October 6, 2009, and
September 18, 2009, respectively, for the 2006 24-hour PM2.5
NAAQS. Alabama, Georgia, Mississippi and South Carolina were among
other states that did not receive findings of failure to submit because
they had provided a complete submission to EPA to address the
infrastructure elements for the 1997 PM2.5 NAAQS by October
3, 2008.
On July 6, 2011, WildEarth Guardians and Sierra Club filed an
amended complaint related to EPA's failure to take action on the SIP
submittal related to the ``infrastructure'' requirements for the 2006
24-hour PM2.5 NAAQS. On October 20, 2011, EPA entered into a
consent decree with WildEarth Guardians and Sierra Club which required
EPA, among other things, to complete a Federal Register notice of the
Agency's final action either approving, disapproving, or approving in
part and disapproving in part the Alabama, Georgia, Mississippi and
South Carolina 2006 24-hour PM2.5 NAAQS Infrastructure SIP
submittals addressing the applicable requirements of sections
110(a)(2)(A)-(H), (J)-(M), except for section 110(a)(2)(C)
nonattainment area requirements and section 110(a)(2)(D)(i) visibility
requirements. The rulemaking proposed through today's action is
consistent with the terms of this consent decree.
Today's action is proposing to approve Alabama, Georgia,
Mississippi and South Carolina's infrastructure submissions for the
1997 annual and 2006 24-hour PM2.5 NAAQS addressing CAA
section 110(a)(2)(D)(i)(II) related to adequate provisions prohibiting
emissions that interfere with any other state's required measures to
prevent significant deterioration of its air quality (referred to as
``prong 3''). EPA has taken previous action on Alabama, Georgia,
Mississippi and South Carolina's infrastructure submissions for the
1997 and 2006 PM2.5 NAAQS for sections 110(a)(2)(A)-(F),
(H), (J)-(M), including other portions of section 110(a)(2)(D)(i) in
separate actions from today's rulemaking.
II. What are States required to address under Sections 110(a)(2)(D)?
Section 110(a)(2)(D) has two components, 110(a)(2)(D)(i) and
110(a)(2)(D)(ii). Specifically, section 110(a)(2)(D)(i) has four
components that require SIPs to include provisions prohibiting any
source or other type of emissions activity in one state from: 1)
contributing significantly to nonattainment of the NAAQS in any other
State, and 2) interfering with maintenance of the NAAQS by any other
State (collectively referred to as 110(a)(2)(D)(i)(I)); or interfering
with measures required to 3) prevent significant deterioration of air
quality in any other State, or 4) protect visibility in any other State
(collectively referred to as 110(a)(2)(D)(i)(II)). Section
110(a)(2)(D)(ii) requires SIPs to include provisions insuring
compliance with sections 115 and 126 of the Act, relating to interstate
and international pollution abatement.
In previous actions, EPA has already taken action to address
Alabama, Georgia, Mississippi and South Carolina's SIP submissions
related to sections 110(a)(2)(D)(i)(I) and 110(a)(2)(D)(ii) for the
1997 annual and 2006 24-hour PM2.5 NAAQS. Today's proposed
rulemaking relates only to requirements related to prong 3 of section
110(a)(2)(D)(i), which as previously described, requires that the SIP
contain adequate provisions prohibiting emissions that interfere with
any other state's required measures to prevent significant
deterioration of its air quality. More information on this requirement
and EPA's rationale for today's proposal that each state is meeting
this requirement for purposes of the 1997 annual and 2006 24-hour
PM2.5 NAAQS is provided below.
III. What is EPA's analysis of how Region 4 States addressed element
(D)(i)(II) related to PSD?
EPA's September 25, 2009, memorandum entitled ``Guidance on SIP
Elements Required Under Section 110(a)(1) and (2) for the 2006 24-Hour
Fine Particle (PM2.5) National Ambient Air Quality
Standards'' provided guidance on addressing the infrastructure
requirements required under sections 110(a)(1) and 110(a)(2) of the CAA
with respect to the 2006 24-hour PM2.5 NAAQS. The 2009
Guidance describes that a state's PSD permitting program is the primary
measure that such state must include in its SIP to prevent significant
deterioration of air quality in accordance with prong 3 of section
110(a)(2)(D)(i). EPA believes that Alabama, Georgia, Mississippi and
South Carolina's infrastructure submissions are consistent with the
2009 Guidance, when considered in conjunction with each State's PSD
program.
At present, there are four regulations that are required to be
adopted into the SIP to meet PSD-related infrastructure requirements.
See Sections 110(a)(2)(C), 110(a)(2)(D)(i)(II), and 110(a)(2)(J) of the
CAA. These regulations are: (1) ``Final Rule To Implement the 8-Hour
Ozone National Ambient Air Quality Standard--Phase 2; Final Rule''
(November 29, 2005, 70 FR 71612) (hereafter referred to as the ``Phase
II Rule''); (2) ``Implementation of the New Source Review Program for
Particulate Matter Less Than 2.5 Micrometers; Final Rule'' (May 16,
2008, 73 FR 28321) (hereafter referred to as the ``NSR PM2.5
Rule''); (3) ``Prevention of Significant Deterioration and Title V
Greenhouse Gas Tailoring Rule; Final Rule'' (June 3, 2010, 75 FR 31514)
(hereafter referred to as the ``GHG Tailoring Rule''); and, (4) ``Final
Rule on the Prevention of Significant Deterioration (PSD) for
[[Page 72286]]
Particulate Matter Less Than 2.5 Micrometers (PM2.5)--
Increments, Significant Impact Levels (SILs) and Significant monitoring
Concentration (SMC); Final Rule'' (October 20, 2010, 75 FR 64864)
(hereafter referred to as ``PM2.5 PSD Increment-SILs-SMC
Rule (only as it relates to PM2.5 Increments)''). Specific
details on these PSD requirements can be found in the respective final
rules cited above, however, a brief summary of each rule is provided
below.
First, as part of the framework to implement the 1997 8-hour ozone
NAAQS, EPA promulgated an implementation rule in two phases.\1\ The
Phase 2 Rule is relevant to today's action. Among other changes, the
rule revised the PSD regulations to recognize nitrogen oxide (NOx) as
an ozone precursor.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ EPA promulgated the Phase I Rule on April 30, 2004 entitled
``Final Rule To Implement the 8-Hour Ozone National Ambient Air
Quality Standard--Phase 1.'' See 69 FR 23951.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Second, the NSR PM2.5 Rule revised the NSR program to
establish the framework for implementing preconstruction permit review
for the PM2.5 NAAQS in both attainment areas and
nonattainment areas. These PSD requirements included: (1) A provision
that NSR permits address directly emitted PM2.5 and
precursor pollutants; (2) a requirement establishing significant
emission rates for direct PM2.5 and precursor pollutants
(including sulfur dioxide (SO2) and NOx); 3) exceptions to
the grandfathering policy for permits being reviewed under the
PM10 surrogate program; and, (4) a revision that states
account for gases that condense to form particles (condensables) in
PM2.5 and PM10 emission limits in PSD permits.
Third, in the GHG Tailoring Rule, EPA tailored the applicability
criteria that determine which GHG emission sources become subject to
the PSD program of the CAA. See 75 FR 31514.
Lastly, the PM2.5 PSD Increment-SILs-SMC Rule (only as
it relates to PM2.5 increments) provided additional
regulatory requirements under the PSD program regarding the
implementation of the PM2.5 NAAQS for NSR by specifically
establishing PM2.5 increments pursuant to section 166(a) of
the CAA to prevent significant deterioration of air quality in areas
meeting the NAAQS.
The PSD requirements promulgated in the aforementioned regulations
establish the framework for a comprehensive SIP PSD program which EPA
has determined are necessary to comply with prong 3 of section
110(a)(2)(D)(i). The following table shows when EPA approved the
incorporation of the aforementioned regulations in each of the States'
implementation plan:
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\2\ On June 11, 2010, the South Carolina Governor signed an
Executive Order to confirm that the State had authority to implement
appropriate emission thresholds for determining which new stationary
sources and modification projects become subject to PSD permitting
requirements for their GHG emissions at the state level. On December
30, 2010, EPA published a final rulemaking, ``Action To Ensure
Authority To Implement Title V Permitting Programs Under the
Greenhouse Gas Tailoring Rule'' (75 FR 82254) to narrow EPA's
previous approval of State title V operating permit programs that
apply (or may apply) to GHG-emitting sources; this rule hereafter is
referred to as the ``Narrowing Rule.'' EPA narrowed its previous
approval of certain State permitting thresholds, for GHG emissions
so that only sources that equal or exceed the GHG thresholds, as
established in the final Tailoring Rule, would be covered as major
sources by the Federally-approved programs in the affected States.
South Carolina was included in this rulemaking. On March 4, 2011,
South Carolina submitted a letter withdrawing from EPA's
consideration the portion of South Carolina's SIP for which EPA
withdrew its previous approval in the Narrowing Rule. These
provisions are no longer intended for inclusion in the SIP, and are
no longer before EPA for its approval or disapproval. A copy of
South Carolina's letter can be accessed at www.regulations.gov using
Docket ID No. EPA-R04-OAR-2010-0721.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
PM2.5 PSD increment-SILs-SMC
State Phase II rule GHG tailoring rule NSR PM2.5 rule rule (as it relates to PM2.5
increments)
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Alabama........................ 5/1/2008 12/29/2010 9/26/2012 9/26/2012.
73 FR 23957 75 FR 81863 77 FR 59100 77 FR 59100.
Georgia........................ 11/22/2010 9/8/2011 9/8/2011 See Below.
75 FR 71018 76 FR 55572 76 FR 55572
Mississippi.................... 12/20/2010 12/29/2010 9/26/2012 9/26/2012.
75 FR 79300 75 FR 81858 77 FR 59095 77 FR 59095.
South Carolina................. 6/23/2011 Refer to Footnote \2\ 6/23/2011 See Below.
76 FR 36875 ............................ 76 FR 36875
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
1. Alabama: As noted in the table above, Alabama has addressed, and
EPA has approved, the underlying PSD regulations to support the State's
program. In this action, EPA is proposing to approve Alabama's
infrastructure submissions for the 1997 annual and 2006 24-hour
PM2.5 NAAQS with regard to the PSD requirements for prong 3
of 110(a)(2)(D)(i).
2. Georgia: In this action, EPA is proposing to approve Georgia's
infrastructure submissions for the 1997 annual and 2006 24-hour
PM2.5 NAAQS with regard to the prong 3 requirement of
section 110(a)(2)(D)(i). Today's proposed approval of Georgia's
implementation plan respecting the prong 3 infrastructure element of
110(a)(2)(D)(i) is contingent upon EPA first taking final action to
approve Georgia's July 26, 2012, SIP revision regarding
PM2.5 PSD Increment-SILs-SMC Rule (only as it relates to
PM2.5 Increments) revision into the State's implementation
plan. EPA will consider action on Georgia's July 26, 2012, submission
in a rulemaking separate from today's action.
3. Mississippi: As noted in the table above, Mississippi has
addressed, and EPA has approved, the underlying PSD regulations to
support the State's program. In this action, EPA is proposing to
approve Mississippi's infrastructure submissions for the 1997 annual
and 2006 24-hour PM2.5 NAAQS with regard to the PSD
requirements for prong 3 of section 110(a)(2)(D)(i).
4. South Carolina: In this action, EPA is proposing to approve
South Carolina's infrastructure submissions for the 1997 annual and
2006 24-hour PM2.5 NAAQS with regard to prong 3 of section
110(a)(2)(D)(i). Today's proposed approval of South Carolina's
implementation plan respecting prong 3 of section 110(a)(2)(D)(i)(II)
is contingent upon EPA first taking final action to approve South
Carolina's May 1, 2012, SIP revision regarding the PM2.5 PSD
Increment-SILs-SMC Rule (only as it relates to PM2.5
Increments) revision into the State's implementation plan. EPA will
consider action on South Carolina's May 1, 2012, submission in a
rulemaking separate from today's action.
Pending final approval of the above-described contingent SIP
revisions,
[[Page 72287]]
Alabama, Georgia, Mississippi and South Carolina have demonstrated that
major sources in each state are subject to PSD permitting programs to
comply with prong 3 of section 110(a)(2)(D)(i) of the CAA for the
PM2.5 NAAQS. Therefore, EPA has made the preliminary
determination that, pending these contingent revisions, Alabama,
Georgia, Mississippi and South Carolina's SIP and practices will be
adequate for insuring compliance with the applicable PSD requirements
relating to interstate transport pollution for the 1997 and 2006
PM2.5 NAAQS.
IV. Proposed Action
As described above, EPA is proposing to approve SIP revisions for
Alabama, Georgia, Mississippi and South Carolina to incorporate
provisions into the States' implementation plans to address prong 3 of
section 110(a)(2)(D)(i) of the CAA for both the 1997 and 2006
PM2.5 NAAQS. Specifically, EPA is proposing to approve the
States' prong 3 of section 110(a)(2)(D)(i) submissions because they are
consistent with section 110 of the CAA. As noted above, the proposed
approval of Georgia's and South Carolina's implementation plan
respecting prong 3 of section 110(a)(2)(D)(i) is contingent upon EPA
first taking final action to approve the States' July 26, 2012, and May
1, 2012, SIP revisions, respectively, for the PM2.5 PSD
Increment-SILs-SMC Rule (only as it relates to PM2.5
Increments).
V. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews
Under the CAA, the Administrator is required to approve a SIP
submission that complies with the provisions of the Act and applicable
federal regulations. See 42 U.S.C. 7410(k); 40 CFR 52.02(a). Thus, in
reviewing SIP submissions, EPA's role is to approve state choices,
provided that they meet the criteria of the CAA. Accordingly, this
proposed action merely approves state law as meeting federal
requirements and does not impose additional requirements beyond those
imposed by state law. For that reason, this proposed action:
Is not a ``significant regulatory action'' subject to
review by the Office of Management and Budget under Executive Order
12866 (58 FR 51735, October 4, 1993);
Does not impose an information collection burden under the
provisions of the Paperwork Reduction Act (44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.);
Is certified as not having a significant economic impact
on a substantial number of small entities under the Regulatory
Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 601 et seq.);
Does not contain any unfunded mandate or significantly or
uniquely affect small governments, as described in the Unfunded
Mandates Reform Act of 1995 (Pub. L. 104-4);
Does not have Federalism implications as specified in
Executive Order 13132 (64 FR 43255, August 10, 1999);
Is not an economically significant regulatory action based
on health or safety risks subject to Executive Order 13045 (62 FR
19885, April 23, 1997);
Is not a significant regulatory action subject to
Executive Order 13211 (66 FR 28355, May 22, 2001);
Is not subject to requirements of Section 12(d) of the
National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act of 1995 (15 U.S.C. 272
note) because application of those requirements would be inconsistent
with the CAA; and
Does not provide EPA with the discretionary authority to
address, as appropriate, disproportionate human health or environmental
effects, using practicable and legally permissible methods, under
Executive Order 12898 (59 FR 7629, February 16, 1994).
EPA has preliminarily determined that this proposed rule does not
have tribal implications as specified by Executive Order 13175 (65 FR
67249, November 9, 2000), because there are no ``substantial direct
effects'' on an Indian Tribe as a result of this action. EPA notes that
the Catawba Indian Nation Reservation is located within the South
Carolina. Pursuant to the Catawba Indian Claims Settlement Act, S.C.
Code Ann. 27-16-120, ``all state and local environmental laws and
regulations apply to the Catawba Indian Nation and Reservation and are
fully enforceable by all relevant state and local agencies and
authorities.'' Thus, while the South Carolina SIP applies to the
Catawba Reservation, because today's action is not proposing a
substantive revision to the South Carolina SIP, and is instead
proposing that the existing SIP will satisfy the prong 3 requirements
of section 110(a)(2)(D)(i)(II), EPA has preliminarily determined that
today's action will have no ``substantial direct effects'' on the
Catawba Indian Nation. EPA has also preliminarily determined that these
revisions will not impose any substantial direct costs on tribal
governments or preempt tribal law.
List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52
Environmental protection, Air pollution control, Incorporation by
reference, Intergovernmental relations, Nitrogen dioxide, Particulate
matter, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements, Volatile organic
compounds.
Authority: 42 U.S.C. 7401 et seq.
Dated: November 21, 2012.
A. Stanley Meiburg,
Acting Regional Administrator, Region 4.
[FR Doc. 2012-29367 Filed 12-4-12; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P