Approval and Promulgation of Air Quality Implementation Plans; Virginia; Amendments to Virginia's Regulation Regarding the Sulfur Dioxide National Ambient Air Quality Standard, 63859-63860 [2011-26628]
Download as PDF
Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 199 / Friday, October 14, 2011 / Proposed Rules
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION
AGENCY
40 CFR Part 52
[EPA–R03–OAR–2011–0731; FRL–9479–5]
Approval and Promulgation of Air
Quality Implementation Plans; Virginia;
Amendments to Virginia’s Regulation
Regarding the Sulfur Dioxide National
Ambient Air Quality Standard
Environmental Protection
Agency (EPA).
ACTION: Proposed rule.
AGENCY:
EPA is proposing to approve
a State Implementation Plan (SIP)
revision submitted by the
Commonwealth of Virginia (Virginia).
This revision pertains to amendments of
Virginia’s regulations regarding the new
1-hour primary national ambient air
quality standard (NAAQS) for sulfur
dioxide (SO2). This action is being taken
under the Clean Air Act (CAA).
DATES: Written comments must be
received on or before November 14,
2011.
SUMMARY:
Submit your comments,
identified by Docket ID Number EPA–
R03–OAR–2011–0731 by one of the
following methods:
A. https://www.regulations.gov. Follow
the on-line instructions for submitting
comments.
B. E-mail:
fernandez.cristina@epa.gov.
C. Mail: EPA–R03–OAR–2011–0731,
Cristina Fernandez, Associate Director,
Office of Air Program Planning,
Mailcode 3AP30, U.S. Environmental
Protection Agency, Region III, 1650
Arch Street, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania
19103.
D. Hand Delivery: At the previously
listed EPA Region III address. Such
deliveries are only accepted during the
Docket’s normal hours of operation, and
special arrangements should be made
for deliveries of boxed information.
Instructions: Direct your comments to
Docket ID No. EPA–R03–OAR–2011–
0731. EPA’s policy is that all comments
received will be included in the public
docket without change, and may be
made available online at https://
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 information that you
consider to be CBI or otherwise
protected through https://
www.regulations.gov or e-mail. The
https://www.regulations.gov Web site is
tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
ADDRESSES:
VerDate Mar<15>2010
15:18 Oct 13, 2011
Jkt 226001
an ‘‘anonymous access’’ system, which
means EPA will not know your identity
or contact information unless you
provide it in the body of your comment.
If you send an e-mail comment directly
to EPA without going through https://
www.regulations.gov, your e-mail
address will be automatically captured
and included as part of the comment
that is placed in the public docket and
made available on the Internet. If you
submit an electronic comment, EPA
recommends that you include your
name and other contact information in
the body of your comment and with any
disk or CD–ROM you submit. If EPA
cannot read your comment due to
technical difficulties and cannot contact
you for clarification, EPA may not be
able to consider your comment.
Electronic files should avoid the use of
special characters, any form of
encryption, and be free of any defects or
viruses.
Docket: All documents in the
electronic docket are listed in the
https://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 https://
www.regulations.gov or in hard copy
during normal business hours at the Air
Protection Division, U.S. Environmental
Protection Agency, Region III, 1650
Arch Street, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania
19103. Copies of the State submittal are
available at the Virginia Department of
Environmental Quality, 629 East Main
Street, Richmond, Virginia 23219.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Asrah Khadr, (215) 814–2071, or by
e-mail at khadr.asrah@epa.gov.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Throughout this document, whenever
‘‘we,’’ ‘‘us,’’ or ‘‘our’’ is used, we mean
EPA. On July 12, 2011, the Virginia
Department of Environmental Quality
submitted a SIP revision pertaining to
amendments of Virginia’s regulations
regarding the new 1-hour primary
NAAQS for SO2. EPA is proposing to
approve this SIP revision.
I. Background
On June 2, 2010, EPA announced a
new 1-hour primary NAAQS for SO2 of
75 parts per billion (ppb), which is
attained when the 3-year average of the
99th-percentile of the annual
distribution of daily maximum 1-hour
average concentrations does not exceed
PO 00000
Frm 00014
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
63859
75 ppb at each monitor within an area.
On June 22, 2010 (75 FR 35520), the
final rule for the 1-hour primary
NAAQS for SO2 was published and
became effective on August 23, 2010.
This rule also revoked the previous
24-hour and annual primary NAAQS for
SO2. On July 12, 2011, the Virginia
Department of Environmental Quality
submitted a SIP revision pertaining to
the adoption of the new SO2 standard.
The Virginia SIP revision consists of
amending the state regulations by
adopting the new 1-hour primary SO2
NAAQS of 75 ppb as well as the
nullification of the previous annual
primary SO2 standard of 30 ppb, and
24-hour primary SO2 standard of 140
ppb. The previous standards will be
revoked one year after the effective date
of the designations of the 1-hour
primary SO2 standard of 75 ppb,
pursuant to section 107 of the CAA.
II. Summary of SIP Revision
The amendments to Virginia’s
regulations include the adoption of the
new 1-hour SO2 NAAQS and the
nullification of the previous annual and
24-hour primary SO2 NAAQS, one year
after designations for the new 1-hour
primary SO2 NAAQS. These
amendments can be found under
Regulation 9VAC5–30–30. There were
also administrative changes regarding
these amendments. These changes
include updates to documents
incorporated by reference under 40 CFR
part 50, as well as administrative
changes in regards to those updates.
These changes can be found under
Regulation 9VAC5–20–21.E.1.
III. 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
E:\FR\FM\14OCP1.SGM
14OCP1
tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
63860
Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 199 / Friday, October 14, 2011 / Proposed Rules
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 (1)
That are generated or developed before
the commencement of a voluntary
environmental assessment; (2) that are
prepared independently of the
assessment process; (3) that demonstrate
a clear, imminent and substantial
danger to the public health or
environment; or (4) that 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
§ 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
VerDate Mar<15>2010
15:18 Oct 13, 2011
Jkt 226001
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.
IV. Proposed Action
EPA is proposing to approve the
Virginia SIP revision for the adoption of
the new 1-hour primary SO2 NAAQS at
a level of 75 ppb to the state regulations,
which was submitted on July 12, 2011.
EPA is soliciting public comments on
the issues discussed in this document.
These comments will be considered
before taking final action.
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
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 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 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);
PO 00000
Frm 00015
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
• Is not a significant regulatory action
subject to Executive Order 13211 (66 FR
28355, May 22, 2001);
• Is not subject to requirements of
Section 12(d) of the National
Technology Transfer and Advancement
Act of 1995 (15 U.S.C. 272 note) because
application of those requirements would
be inconsistent with the CAA; and
• Does not provide EPA with the
discretionary authority to address, as
appropriate, disproportionate human
health or environmental effects, using
practicable and legally permissible
methods, under Executive Order 12898
(59 FR 7629, February 16, 1994).
In addition, the proposed approval of
the adoption of the 1-hour primary SO2
NAAQS into Virginia’s regulation does
not have tribal implications as specified
by Executive Order 13175 (65 FR 67249,
November 9, 2000), because the SIP is
not approved to apply in Indian country
located in the state, and EPA notes that
it will not impose substantial direct
costs on tribal governments or preempt
tribal law.
List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52
Environmental protection, Air
pollution control, Intergovernmental
relations, Reporting and recordkeeping
requirements, Sulfur oxides.
Authority: 42 U.S.C. 7401 et seq.
Dated: October 3, 2011.
W.C. Early,
Acting Regional Administrator, Region III.
[FR Doc. 2011–26628 Filed 10–13–11; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560–50–P
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION
AGENCY
40 CFR Parts 52 and 97
[EPA–HQ–OAR–2009–0491; FRL–9479–1]
RIN 2060–AR22
Revisions to Federal Implementation
Plans To Reduce Interstate Transport
of Fine Particulate Matter and Ozone
Environmental Protection
Agency (EPA).
ACTION: Proposed rule.
AGENCY:
EPA is proposing or seeking
comment on revisions to the final
Transport Rule promulgated on August
8, 2011. These revisions address
discrepancies in unit-specific modeling
assumptions that affect the proper
calculation of Transport Rule state
budgets and assurance levels in Florida,
Louisiana, Michigan, Mississippi,
Nebraska, New Jersey, New York, Texas,
and Wisconsin, as well as new unit setasides in Arkansas and Texas. EPA is
SUMMARY:
E:\FR\FM\14OCP1.SGM
14OCP1
Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 76, Number 199 (Friday, October 14, 2011)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 63859-63860]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2011-26628]
[[Page 63859]]
=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
40 CFR Part 52
[EPA-R03-OAR-2011-0731; FRL-9479-5]
Approval and Promulgation of Air Quality Implementation Plans;
Virginia; Amendments to Virginia's Regulation Regarding the Sulfur
Dioxide National Ambient Air Quality Standard
AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).
ACTION: Proposed rule.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: EPA is proposing to approve a State Implementation Plan (SIP)
revision submitted by the Commonwealth of Virginia (Virginia). This
revision pertains to amendments of Virginia's regulations regarding the
new 1-hour primary national ambient air quality standard (NAAQS) for
sulfur dioxide (SO2). This action is being taken under the
Clean Air Act (CAA).
DATES: Written comments must be received on or before November 14,
2011.
ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, identified by Docket ID Number EPA-
R03-OAR-2011-0731 by one of the following methods:
A. https://www.regulations.gov. Follow the on-line instructions for
submitting comments.
B. E-mail: fernandez.cristina@epa.gov.
C. Mail: EPA-R03-OAR-2011-0731, Cristina Fernandez, Associate
Director, Office of Air Program Planning, Mailcode 3AP30, U.S.
Environmental Protection Agency, Region III, 1650 Arch Street,
Philadelphia, Pennsylvania 19103.
D. Hand Delivery: At the previously listed EPA Region III address.
Such deliveries are only accepted during the Docket's normal hours of
operation, and special arrangements should be made for deliveries of
boxed information.
Instructions: Direct your comments to Docket ID No. EPA-R03-OAR-
2011-0731. EPA's policy is that all comments received will be included
in the public docket without change, and may be made available online
at https://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 information that you
consider to be CBI or otherwise protected through https://www.regulations.gov or e-mail. The https://www.regulations.gov Web site
is an ``anonymous access'' system, which means EPA will not know your
identity or contact information unless you provide it in the body of
your comment. If you send an e-mail comment directly to EPA without
going through https://www.regulations.gov, your e-mail address will be
automatically captured and included as part of the comment that is
placed in the public docket and made available on the Internet. If you
submit an electronic comment, EPA recommends that you include your name
and other contact information in the body of your comment and with any
disk or CD-ROM you submit. If EPA cannot read your comment due to
technical difficulties and cannot contact you for clarification, EPA
may not be able to consider your comment. Electronic files should avoid
the use of special characters, any form of encryption, and be free of
any defects or viruses.
Docket: All documents in the electronic docket are listed in the
https://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 https://www.regulations.gov or in hard copy during normal business hours at the
Air Protection Division, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Region
III, 1650 Arch Street, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania 19103. Copies of the
State submittal are available at the Virginia Department of
Environmental Quality, 629 East Main Street, Richmond, Virginia 23219.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Asrah Khadr, (215) 814-2071, or by e-
mail at khadr.asrah@epa.gov.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Throughout this document, whenever ``we,''
``us,'' or ``our'' is used, we mean EPA. On July 12, 2011, the Virginia
Department of Environmental Quality submitted a SIP revision pertaining
to amendments of Virginia's regulations regarding the new 1-hour
primary NAAQS for SO2. EPA is proposing to approve this SIP
revision.
I. Background
On June 2, 2010, EPA announced a new 1-hour primary NAAQS for
SO2 of 75 parts per billion (ppb), which is attained when
the 3-year average of the 99th-percentile of the annual distribution of
daily maximum 1-hour average concentrations does not exceed 75 ppb at
each monitor within an area. On June 22, 2010 (75 FR 35520), the final
rule for the 1-hour primary NAAQS for SO2 was published and
became effective on August 23, 2010. This rule also revoked the
previous 24-hour and annual primary NAAQS for SO2. On July
12, 2011, the Virginia Department of Environmental Quality submitted a
SIP revision pertaining to the adoption of the new SO2
standard. The Virginia SIP revision consists of amending the state
regulations by adopting the new 1-hour primary SO2 NAAQS of
75 ppb as well as the nullification of the previous annual primary
SO2 standard of 30 ppb, and 24-hour primary SO2
standard of 140 ppb. The previous standards will be revoked one year
after the effective date of the designations of the 1-hour primary
SO2 standard of 75 ppb, pursuant to section 107 of the CAA.
II. Summary of SIP Revision
The amendments to Virginia's regulations include the adoption of
the new 1-hour SO2 NAAQS and the nullification of the
previous annual and 24-hour primary SO2 NAAQS, one year
after designations for the new 1-hour primary SO2 NAAQS.
These amendments can be found under Regulation 9VAC5-30-30. There were
also administrative changes regarding these amendments. These changes
include updates to documents incorporated by reference under 40 CFR
part 50, as well as administrative changes in regards to those updates.
These changes can be found under Regulation 9VAC5-20-21.E.1.
III. 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
[[Page 63860]]
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 (1) That are generated or developed before
the commencement of a voluntary environmental assessment; (2) that are
prepared independently of the assessment process; (3) that demonstrate
a clear, imminent and substantial danger to the public health or
environment; or (4) that 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.
IV. Proposed Action
EPA is proposing to approve the Virginia SIP revision for the
adoption of the new 1-hour primary SO2 NAAQS at a level of
75 ppb to the state regulations, which was submitted on July 12, 2011.
EPA is soliciting public comments on the issues discussed in this
document. These comments will be considered before taking final action.
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 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 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 proposed action:
Is not a ``significant regulatory action'' subject to
review by the Office of Management and Budget under Executive Order
12866 (58 FR 51735, October 4, 1993);
Does not impose an information collection burden under the
provisions of the Paperwork Reduction Act (44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.);
Is certified as not having a significant economic impact
on a substantial number of small entities under the Regulatory
Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 601 et seq.);
Does not contain any unfunded mandate or significantly or
uniquely affect small governments, as described in the Unfunded
Mandates Reform Act of 1995 (Pub. L. 104-4);
Does not have Federalism implications as specified in
Executive Order 13132 (64 FR 43255, August 10, 1999);
Is not an economically significant regulatory action based
on health or safety risks subject to Executive Order 13045 (62 FR
19885, April 23, 1997);
Is not a significant regulatory action subject to
Executive Order 13211 (66 FR 28355, May 22, 2001);
Is not subject to requirements of Section 12(d) of the
National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act of 1995 (15 U.S.C. 272
note) because application of those requirements would be inconsistent
with the CAA; and
Does not provide EPA with the discretionary authority to
address, as appropriate, disproportionate human health or environmental
effects, using practicable and legally permissible methods, under
Executive Order 12898 (59 FR 7629, February 16, 1994).
In addition, the proposed approval of the adoption of the 1-hour
primary SO2 NAAQS into Virginia's regulation does not have
tribal implications as specified by Executive Order 13175 (65 FR 67249,
November 9, 2000), because the SIP is not approved to apply in Indian
country located in the state, and EPA notes that it will not impose
substantial direct costs on tribal governments or preempt tribal law.
List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52
Environmental protection, Air pollution control, Intergovernmental
relations, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements, Sulfur oxides.
Authority: 42 U.S.C. 7401 et seq.
Dated: October 3, 2011.
W.C. Early,
Acting Regional Administrator, Region III.
[FR Doc. 2011-26628 Filed 10-13-11; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P