Approval and Promulgation of Implementation Plans; Revision to the New York State Implementation Plan for Carbon Monoxide, 21867-21871 [2013-08670]
Download as PDF
Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 71 / Friday, April 12, 2013 / Proposed Rules
List of Subjects in 33 CFR Part 100
Marine safety, Navigation (water),
Reporting and recordkeeping
requirements, Waterways.
For the reasons discussed in the
preamble, the Coast Guard proposes to
amend 33 CFR part 100 as follows:
PART 100—SAFETY OF LIFE ON
NAVIGABLE WATERS
1. The authority citation for part 100
continues to read as follows:
■
Authority: 33 U.S.C. 1233.
2. Add § 100.35–T05–0181 to read as
follows:
■
mstockstill on DSK6TPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
§ 100.35–T05–0181 Special Local
Regulations for Marine Events, Breton Bay;
St. Mary’s County, Leonardtown, MD.
(a) Regulated area. The following
location is a regulated area: All waters
of Breton Bay, from shoreline to
shoreline, within an area bounded to the
east by a line drawn along latitude38°16′45″ N, and bounded to the west
by a line drawn along longitude
076°38′30″ W, located at Leonardtown,
MD. All coordinates reference Datum
NAD 1983.
(b) Definitions: (1) Coast Guard Patrol
Commander means a commissioned,
warrant, or petty officer of the U.S.
Coast Guard who has been designated
by the Commander, Coast Guard Sector
Baltimore.
(2) Official Patrol means any vessel
assigned or approved by Commander,
Coast Guard Sector Baltimore with a
commissioned, warrant, or petty officer
on board and displaying a Coast Guard
ensign.
(3) Participant means all persons and
vessels participating in the Annual
Leonardtown Wharf Boat Race event
under the auspices of the Marine Event
Permit issued to the event sponsor and
approved by Commander, Coast Guard
Sector Baltimore.
(c) Special local regulations: (1) The
Coast Guard Patrol Commander may
forbid and control the movement of all
vessels and persons in the regulated
area. When hailed or signaled by an
official patrol vessel, a vessel or person
in the regulated area shall immediately
comply with the directions given.
Failure to do so may result in expulsion
from the area, citation for failure to
comply, or both.
(2) Vessels and persons may contact
the Coast Guard Patrol Commander to
request permission to pass through the
regulated area. If permission is granted,
vessels and persons must pass directly
through the regulated area, at a safe
speed and without loitering.
(3) The Coast Guard Patrol
Commander may terminate the event, or
VerDate Mar<15>2010
16:20 Apr 11, 2013
Jkt 229001
the operation of any participant in the
event, at any time it is deemed
necessary for the protection of life or
property.
(4) All Coast Guard vessels enforcing
this regulated area can be contacted on
marine band radio VHF–FM channel 16
(156.8 MHz).
(5) The Coast Guard will publish a
notice in the Fifth Coast Guard District
Local Notice to Mariners and issue a
marine information broadcast on VHF–
FM marine band radio announcing
specific event date and times.
(d) Enforcement periods: This section
will be enforced from 8 a.m. to 5 p.m.
on July 13, 2013 and from 8 a.m. to 5
p.m. on July 14, 2013.
Dated: March 21, 2013.
Kevin C. Kiefer,
Captain, U.S. Coast Guard, Captain of the
Port Baltimore.
[FR Doc. 2013–08581 Filed 4–11–13; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 9110–04–P
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION
AGENCY
40 CFR Part 52
[EPA–R02–OAR–2013–0192, FRL–9802–1]
Approval and Promulgation of
Implementation Plans; Revision to the
New York State Implementation Plan
for Carbon Monoxide
Environmental Protection
Agency (EPA).
ACTION: Proposed rule.
AGENCY:
The Environmental Protection
Agency (EPA) is proposing action on a
proposed State Implementation Plan
revision submitted by the New York
State Department of Environmental
Conservation. This revision consists of a
change to New York’s November 15,
1992 Carbon Monoxide Attainment
Demonstration that would remove a
reference to a limited off-street parking
program as it relates to the New York
County portion of the New YorkNorthern New Jersey-Long Island, NY–
NJ–CT Carbon Monoxide attainment
area. EPA is proposing approval of this
State Implementation Plan revision
because it will not interfere with
attainment or maintenance of the
national ambient air quality standards
in the affected area.
DATES: Comments must be received on
or before May 13, 2013.
ADDRESSES: Submit your comments,
identified by Docket Number EPA–R02–
OAR–2013–0192, by one of the
following methods:
SUMMARY:
PO 00000
Frm 00014
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
21867
• www.regulations.gov: Follow the
on-line instructions for submitting
comments.
• Email: Ruvo.Richard@epa.gov
• Fax: 212–637–3901
• Mail: Richard Ruvo, Acting Branch
Chief, Air Programs Branch,
Environmental Protection Agency,
Region 2 Office, 290 Broadway, 25th
Floor, New York, New York 10007–
1866.
• Hand Delivery: Richard Ruvo,
Acting Branch Chief, Air Programs
Branch, Environmental Protection
Agency, Region 2 Office, 290 Broadway,
25th Floor, New York, New York
10007–1866. 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 No. EPA–R02–OAR–2013–0192.
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 information that you
consider to be CBI or otherwise
protected through www.regulations.gov
or email. 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 or 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 https://
www.epa.gov/epahome/dockets.htm.
Docket: All documents in the docket
are listed in the https://
www.regulations.gov index. Although
listed in the index, some information is
E:\FR\FM\12APP1.SGM
12APP1
21868
Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 71 / Friday, April 12, 2013 / Proposed Rules
not publicly available, e.g., CBI or other
information whose disclosure is
restricted by statute. Certain other
material, such as copyrighted material,
will be publicly available only in hard
copy. Publicly available docket
materials are available either
electronically in https://
www.regulations.gov or in hard copy at
the Environmental Protection Agency,
Region 2 Office, Air Programs Branch,
290 Broadway, 25th Floor, New York,
New York 10007–1866. EPA requests, if
at all possible, that you contact the
individual listed in the FOR FURTHER
INFORMATION CONTACT section to view
the hard copy of the docket. You may
view the hard copy of the docket
Monday through Friday, 8 a.m. to 4
p.m., excluding federal holidays.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Henry Feingersh
(feingersh.henry@epa.gov), Air Programs
Branch, Environmental Protection
Agency, 290 Broadway, 25th Floor, New
York, New York 10007–1866, (212) 637–
4249.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Table of Contents
mstockstill on DSK6TPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
I. What action is EPA proposing?
II. What is the background information for
this proposal?
III. What was included in New York’s
proposed SIP submittal?
IV. What are the Carbon Monoxide trends?
V. What is EPA’s evaluation?
VI. What are EPA’s conclusions?
VII. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews
I. What action is EPA proposing?
The EPA is proposing to approve a
revision to the New York State
Implementation Plan (SIP) in response
to a request submitted by the New York
State Department of Environmental
Conservation (New York) on April 5,
2007. This revision consists of a change
to New York’s November 15, 1992
Carbon Monoxide Attainment
Demonstration that would remove a
reference to a limited off-street parking
program as it relates to the New York
County portion of the New YorkNorthern New Jersey-Long Island, NY–
NJ–CT Carbon Monoxide attainment
area. EPA’s proposal is to remove the
off-street parking program that was
identified by New York as one of the
Transportation Control Measures in
New York’s 1992 SIP submittal. This
limited off-street parking program is
VerDate Mar<15>2010
16:20 Apr 11, 2013
Jkt 229001
imposed and enforced by the City of
New York. EPA is proposing approval of
this SIP revision because it will not
interfere with attainment or
maintenance of the national ambient air
quality standards in the affected area.
II. What is the background information
for this proposal?
New York submitted a Carbon
Monoxide SIP on November 13, 1992
entitled ‘‘Carbon Monoxide Attainment
Demonstration—New York Metropolitan
Area’’ and EPA published a final
approval on July 25, 1996 (61 Federal
Register (FR) 38594.) These actions
became effective on August 26, 1996.
On November 23, 1999, New York
submitted a request to EPA to
redesignate this area from
nonattainment to attainment of the
National Ambient Air Quality Standards
(NAAQS) for Carbon Monoxide. EPA
published a final approval of this
request on April 19, 2002 (67 FR 19337)
and the action became effective on May
20, 2002.
On April 5, 2007, New York
submitted a request to revise the SIP to
remove a reference to a limited off-street
parking program as it relates to New
York County. This proposed SIP
revision underwent a public hearing
and public notice and comment process.
In a July 26, 2007 letter to the State, the
EPA responded to the April 5, 2007
revision request by asking for the public
hearing record including a response to
comments received. New York
submitted this additional information to
EPA in a letter dated October 5, 2012.
The New York portion of the New
York-Northern New Jersey-Long Island,
NY–NJ–CT CO attainment area is
composed of the five boroughs of New
York City and the surrounding counties
of Nassau, Suffolk, Westchester and
Rockland. This is collectively referred to
as the New York City Metropolitan Area
or NYMA.
The NYMA has been meeting the
Carbon Monoxide (CO) standard for
over twenty years, since 1992, and CO
levels have continuously trended
downward. As discussed later in
Section IV—‘‘What are the Carbon
Monoxide Trends,’’ current 8-hr CO
levels are less than 1⁄3 of the 8-hr
standard while 1-hr CO levels not only
achieve the 1-hour standard, they are
much less than the 8-hr standard.
PO 00000
Frm 00015
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
III. What was included in New York’s
proposed SIP submittal?
New York submitted to EPA a
proposed SIP revision that includes a
change to the New York State Carbon
Monoxide SIP. The change is a
clarification to a commitment identified
in New York’s November 13, 1992
submittal. New York also submitted air
quality monitoring data from 1997
through 2011 along with an ambient
monitoring trends analysis for the
period 1988 through 2011. This analysis
shows a marked downward trend in CO
ambient concentrations. These
concentrations are, and have been for a
number of years now, lower than the
background values used in the 1992 CO
SIP.
In addition, New York held a public
hearing on July 17, 2007 and written
comments were accepted until July 24,
2007, which was an extension of the
original May 30, 2007 deadline. New
York submitted to EPA a summary of
the public comments received and
responses to those comments.
IV. What are the Carbon Monoxide
trends?
There has been a steadily declining
Carbon Monoxide trend in the NYMA
since the 1980’s. The last few years have
seen a ‘‘bottoming out’’ of these
concentrations. CO values have been
dropping steadily for several years and
are now lower than background values
were at the time of the CO SIP
attainment demonstration in 1992.
While we observed concentrations over
13 ppm in the 1980’s, we are now seeing
these values at approximately 2 ppm.
This means we are seeing almost no
contributions from automobiles at this
time. Much of this improvement can be
attributed to newer cars with advanced
anti-pollution controls.
The following chart shows how the
CO monitored design values in New
York County have declined from 1988–
1989 through 2010–2011. The design
values are derived by first taking the
second highest 8-hour value for each
site in the county for each year. Of
these, the highest value for each year
(from all of the sites in the county) is the
design value for that year. Thus, the
design value went from 13.5 ppm in
1988–1989 to 1.8 ppm in 2010–2011.
E:\FR\FM\12APP1.SGM
12APP1
mstockstill on DSK6TPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
V. What is EPA’s evaluation?
Revisions to SIP-approved control
measures must meet the requirements of
the Clean Air Act (CAA) section 110(l)
to be approved by EPA. Section 110(l)
states: ‘‘The Administrator shall not
approve a revision of a plan if the
revision would interfere with any
applicable requirement concerning
attainment and reasonable further
progress (as defined in section 171), or
any other applicable requirement of this
Chapter.’’
EPA interprets section 110(l) to apply
to all requirements of the CAA and to
all areas of the country, whether
attainment, nonattainment,
unclassifiable, or maintenance for one
or more of the six criteria pollutants.
EPA also interprets section 110(l) to
require a demonstration addressing all
pollutants whose emissions and/or
ambient concentrations may change as a
result of the SIP revision. Thus, for
example, modification of a SIPapproved measure which may impact
nitrogen oxide emissions, may also
impact particulate matter emissions,
and this would have to be evaluated.
The scope and rigor of an adequate
section 110(l) demonstration of
noninterference depends on the air
quality status of the area, the potential
impact of the revision on air quality, the
pollutant(s) affected, and the nature of
the applicable CAA requirements.
As discussed previously, the air
quality data shows a striking downward
trend in ambient CO concentrations in
the NYMA area for the past twenty
years. This dramatic improvement can
VerDate Mar<15>2010
16:20 Apr 11, 2013
Jkt 229001
be attributed to the Federal Motor
Vehicle Turnover Program along with
advanced anti-pollution controls on
motor vehicles.
The NYMA has been attaining the CO
standard since 1993. As discussed in
Section II, above, on April 19, 2002,
EPA published a final rule redesignating
the area to attainment. A maintenance
plan explaining how the area will
maintain the CO standard has been in
place since that time. Action on a
second 10 year maintenance plan
explaining how the area will continue to
attain the CO standard for another 10
years will be taken in a separate Federal
Register Notice.
It is important to note, aside from
ozone, the NYMA is attaining the
NAAQS for all of the other criteria
pollutants. The area has been attaining
the SO2, NO2, and Pb standards for
many years. For CO, the area was
redesignated to attainment in 2002 and
is currently a maintenance area. For
ozone, the area has been designated
nonattainment and continues to be
designated nonattainment. However, the
area has attained the 1-hour ozone
standard and has attained the 1997 8hour ozone standard by its required
attainment date. In addition, the area
has been attaining the annual and 24hour PM2.5 standards and New York has
proposed redesignations for both PM
standards. EPA will be taking action on
the PM2.5 standards in a separate
Federal Register Notice.
EPA reviewed New York’s proposed
change to its CO attainment
demonstration to determine whether the
change will add or contribute to any air
PO 00000
Frm 00016
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
21869
quality violations. EPA proposes to
determine that removal of the limited
off-street parking program from the
previous federally approved CO
attainment demonstration will not add
or contribute to an already existing air
quality violation, primarily because
there is no existing air quality violation.
EPA, in essence, continues to evaluate
the New York CO SIP because New York
continues to have their CO maintenance
plan in place. This plan meets the
requirements set forth in section 175A
of the CAA and provides for continued
attainment of the CO NAAQS.
As for the only other pollutants,
ozone and PM2.5, for which there may be
any potential impact on air quality, EPA
notes that for each of these pollutants,
New York has developed several other
revisions to the SIP to continue the
reductions of emissions toward meeting
the NAAQS. Specifically for ozone, EPA
approved New York’s reasonable further
progress plan and attainment
demonstration for NYMA (see 76 FR
51264 (Aug. 18, 2011) and 78 FR 9596
(Feb. 11, 2013), respectively) which
included those measures necessary to
attain and maintain the standard. Also,
on June 15, 2001 and supplemented on
October 1, 2001, New York submitted to
EPA its assessment of whether any
Reasonably Available Control Measures
(RACM) are available to advance the 1hour ozone attainment date from 2007
to an earlier year for the New York
Metro Area. In this study New York
evaluated the emissions reductions
associated with several transportation
control measures. EPA approved New
York’s RACM Analysis on February 4,
E:\FR\FM\12APP1.SGM
12APP1
EP12AP13.005
Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 71 / Friday, April 12, 2013 / Proposed Rules
mstockstill on DSK6TPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
21870
Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 71 / Friday, April 12, 2013 / Proposed Rules
2002 (67 FR 5170) and determined that
there were no additional RACMs
(including the transportation control
measures) that, when implemented,
would advance the attainment date in
the NYMA from 2007 to an earlier year.
In addition, to address the RACM
requirement for the 1997 8-hour ozone
standard, New York did a similar
analysis and determined that there were
additional measures that New York
State believes represent RACM as they
are reasonably available and can be
expected to advance the attainment date
and contribute to reasonable further
progress. However, the measures
identified by New York were all
stationary source related and have since
been adopted and implemented by New
York State. On July 13, 2010 (75 FR
43066), EPA approved New York’s
RACM analysis for the 1997 8-hour
ozone standard.
New York developed a RACM
analysis for the 1997 annual PM2.5
NAAQS that was submitted to EPA on
October 27, 2009. Although EPA has not
yet proposed action on the PM2.5 RACM
analysis submitted by the state, New
York has adopted and implemented
control measures that will provide for
additional emissions reductions of
PM2.5 and its precursors since the
NYMA first demonstrated attainment
with the 1997 annual PM2.5 NAAQS.
The measures will be undergoing EPA
rulemaking in the near future and, if
approved, will become federally
enforceable. These measures will
collectively help ensure continued
compliance with both the 1997 annual
and 2006 24-hour PM2.5 NAAQS. These
measures include New York’s Hot Mix
Asphalt Production Plants rule (6
NYCRR Part 212.12), Reasonably
Available Control Technology for Major
Facilities of Oxides of Nitrogen (6
NYCRR Part 227–2), and Best Available
Retrofit Technology (6 NYCRR Part
249).
EPA recognizes that DEC’s April 7,
2007 SIP submittal is asserting that offstreet parking is regulated by the New
York City Department of City Planning
and its zoning resolutions and not by
the CO SIP.
EPA proposes to determine that
removal of this one Transportation
Control Measure (TCM) will not
interfere with air quality or attainment
of the NAAQS. In addition, New York
has revised the rules which address
TCMs before and concluded not to rely
on these similar measures in more
recent SIP actions. This provides further
evidence to lead EPA to determine that
this measure will not have an impact on
air quality.
VerDate Mar<15>2010
16:20 Apr 11, 2013
Jkt 229001
We are aware that any new
construction project using federal funds
must undergo a review pursuant to the
National Environmental Policy Act
(NEPA), [42 U.S.C. 4321 et seq.
Specifically, all federal agencies are to
prepare detailed assessments of the
environmental impacts of and
alternatives to major federal actions
significantly affecting the environment.
These documents are commonly
referred to as environmental impact
statements (EIS). The public has an
important role in the NEPA process,
particularly during scoping, in
providing input on what issues should
be addressed in an EIS and in
commenting on the findings in an
agency’s NEPA documents. The public
can participate in the NEPA process by
attending NEPA-related hearings or
public meetings and by submitting
comments directly to the lead agency.
The lead agency must take into
consideration all comments received
from the public and other parties on
NEPA documents during the comment
period.
New York has demonstrated that the
changes to its CO SIP will not interfere
with attainment and maintenance of the
NAAQS for all criteria pollutants. EPA
proposes to find that New York has
satisfied the demonstration of
noninterference required by CAA
section 110(l).
VI. What are EPA’s conclusions?
EPA is proposing to approve New
York’s request to remove a reference to
a limited off-street parking program in
New York County because this SIP
revision will not cause an exceedance of
the NAAQS. EPA reviewed the public
comments from the July 17, 2007 public
hearing record. EPA agrees with New
York’s responses that New York City
continues to run the limited off-street
parking program and, although New
York City may have relaxed aspects of
the program, there is no evidence that
this relaxation caused any degradation
in CO air quality in the area. In
addition, New York did not rely on any
emission reductions from this program
in its SIP modeling to support the
demonstration of attainment of the CO
standard. Finally, any new construction
project in the area would have to
undergo a NEPA process. The NEPA
process ensures that a NAAQS violation
would not occur due to the project in
question.
EPA’s review of the materials
submitted indicates that New York has
revised its CO SIP in accordance with
the requirements of the CAA, 40 CFR
Part 51 and all of EPA’s technical
requirements for a CO SIP. Therefore,
PO 00000
Frm 00017
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
EPA is proposing to approve the
removal of a reference to a limited offstreet parking program in New York
County.
VII. Statutory and Executive Order
Reviews
Under the CAA, the Administrator is
required to approve a SIP submission
that complies with the provisions of the
Act and applicable Federal regulations.
42 U.S.C. 7410(k); 40 CFR 52.02(a).
Thus, in reviewing SIP submissions,
EPA’s role is to approve state choices,
provided that they meet the criteria of
the CAA. Accordingly, this 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 CAA; and
• Does not provide EPA with the
discretionary authority to address, as
appropriate, disproportionate human
health or environmental effects, using
practicable and legally permissible
methods, under Executive Order 12898
(59 FR 7629, February 16, 1994).
In addition, this 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
E:\FR\FM\12APP1.SGM
12APP1
Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 71 / Friday, April 12, 2013 / Proposed Rules
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, Carbon monoxide,
Incorporation by reference,
Intergovernmental relations, Nitrogen
dioxide, Ozone, Particulate matter,
Reporting and recordkeeping
requirements, Volatile organic
compounds.
Authority: 42 U.S.C. 7401 et seq.
Dated: April 1, 2013.
Judith A. Enck,
Regional Administrator, Region 2.
[FR Doc. 2013–08670 Filed 4–11–13; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560–50–P
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION
AGENCY
40 CFR Part 62
[EPA–R01–OAR–2013–0109; A–1–FRL–
9799–9]
Approval and Promulgation of State
Plans for Designated Facilities and
Pollutants: Connecticut; 111(d)/129
Revised State Plan for Large and Small
Municipal Waste Combustors
Environmental Protection
Agency (EPA).
ACTION: Proposed rule.
AGENCY:
EPA is proposing to approve
the Clean Air Act 111(d)/129 State Plan
revisions for Large and Small Municipal
Waste Combustors (MWC) submitted by
the Connecticut Department of Energy
and Environmental Protection (DEEP)
on October 22, 2008. The revised Plan
is in response to amended emission
guidelines (EGs) and new source
performance standards (NSPS) for Large
MWCs promulgated on May 10, 2006.
Connecticut DEEP’s State Plan is for
implementing and enforcing provisions
at least as protective as the EGs
applicable to existing Large and Small
MWC units pursuant to 40 CFR part 60,
Subparts Cb and BBBB, respectively.
DATES: Written comments must be
received on or before May 13, 2013.
ADDRESSES: Submit your comments,
identified by Docket ID Number EPA–
R01–OAR–2013–0109 by one of the
following methods:
1. www.regulations.gov: Follow the
on-line instructions for submitting
comments.
2. Email: mcdonnell.ida@epa.gov
3. Fax: (617) 918–0653.
4. Mail: ‘‘Docket Identification
Number EPA–R01–OAR–2013–0109’’,
mstockstill on DSK6TPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
SUMMARY:
VerDate Mar<15>2010
16:20 Apr 11, 2013
Jkt 229001
Ida McDonnell, U.S. Environmental
Protection Agency, EPA New England
Regional Office, Office of Ecosystem
Protection, Air Permits, Toxic, & Indoor
Programs Unit, 5 Post Office Square—
Suite 100, (Mail code OEP05–2), Boston,
MA 02109–3912.
5. Hand Delivery or Courier. Deliver
your comments to: Ida McDonnell, U.S.
Environmental Protection Agency, EPA
New England Regional Office, Office of
Ecosystem Protection, Air Permits,
Toxic, & Indoor Programs Unit, 5 Post
Office Square—Suite 100, (Mail code
OEP05–2), Boston, MA 02109–3912.
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 legal holidays.
Please see the direct final rule which
is located in the Rules Section of this
Federal Register for detailed
instructions on how to submit
comments.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Patrick Bird, Air Permits, Toxic, &
Indoor Programs Unit, Air Programs
Branch, Office of Ecosystem Protection,
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency,
Region 1, 5 Post Office Square, Mail
Code: OEP05–2, Boston, MA, 02109–
0287. The telephone number is (617)
918–1287. Mr. Bird can also be reached
via electronic mail at
bird.patrick@epa.gov.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: In the
Final Rules Section of this Federal
Register, EPA is approving the State’s
State Plan revisions as a direct final rule
without prior proposal because the
Agency views this as a noncontroversial
submittal and anticipates no adverse
comments. A detailed rationale for the
approval is set forth in the direct final
rule. If no adverse comments are
received in response to this action rule,
no further activity is contemplated. If
EPA receives adverse comments, the
direct final rule will be withdrawn and
all public comments received will be
addressed in a subsequent final rule
based on this proposed rule. EPA will
not institute a second comment period.
Any parties interested in commenting
on this action should do so at this time.
Please note that if EPA receives adverse
comment on an amendment, paragraph,
or section of this rule and if that
provision may be severed from the
remainder of the rule, EPA may adopt
as final those provisions of the rule that
are not the subject of an adverse
comment.
For additional information, see the
direct final rule which is located in the
Rules Section of this Federal Register.
PO 00000
Frm 00018
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
21871
Dated: March 27, 2013.
H. Curtis Spalding,
Regional Administrator, EPA New England.
[FR Doc. 2013–08644 Filed 4–11–13; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560–50–P
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION
AGENCY
40 CFR Part 82
[EPA–HQ–OAR–2012–0580 FRL–9798–4]
RIN 2060–AM09
Protection of Stratospheric Ozone:
Revision of the Venting Prohibition for
Specific Refrigerant Substitutes
Environmental Protection
Agency (EPA).
ACTION: Proposed rule.
AGENCY:
The Environmental Protection
Agency is proposing to amend the
regulations promulgated as part of the
National Recycling and Emission
Reduction Program under section 608 of
the Clean Air Act. EPA is proposing to
exempt from the prohibition under
section 608 on venting, release and
disposal certain refrigerant substitutes
listed as acceptable or acceptable
subject to use conditions in regulations
promulgated as part of EPA’s Significant
New Alternative Policy Program under
section 612 of the Act on the basis of
current evidence that their venting,
release and disposal does not pose a
threat to the environment.
DATES: Written comments on this
proposed rule must be received by the
EPA Docket on or before on June 11,
2013. Any Party requesting a public
hearing must notify the contact listed
below under FOR FURTHER INFORMATION
CONTACT by 5 p.m. Eastern Standard
Time on April 29, 2013. If a hearing is
held, it will take place on or about May
7, 2013 at EPA Headquarters in
Washington, DC. EPA will post a notice
in our Web site, https://www.epa.gov/
ozone/strathome.html, announcing
further information should a hearing
take place.
ADDRESSES: EPA has established a
docket for this action under Docket ID
No. EPA–HQ–OAR–2012–0580. 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., confidential business information
(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.
SUMMARY:
E:\FR\FM\12APP1.SGM
12APP1
Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 78, Number 71 (Friday, April 12, 2013)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 21867-21871]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2013-08670]
=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
40 CFR Part 52
[EPA-R02-OAR-2013-0192, FRL-9802-1]
Approval and Promulgation of Implementation Plans; Revision to
the New York State Implementation Plan for Carbon Monoxide
AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).
ACTION: Proposed rule.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is proposing action
on a proposed State Implementation Plan revision submitted by the New
York State Department of Environmental Conservation. This revision
consists of a change to New York's November 15, 1992 Carbon Monoxide
Attainment Demonstration that would remove a reference to a limited
off-street parking program as it relates to the New York County portion
of the New York-Northern New Jersey-Long Island, NY-NJ-CT Carbon
Monoxide attainment area. EPA is proposing approval of this State
Implementation Plan revision because it will not interfere with
attainment or maintenance of the national ambient air quality standards
in the affected area.
DATES: Comments must be received on or before May 13, 2013.
ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, identified by Docket Number EPA-R02-
OAR-2013-0192, by one of the following methods:
www.regulations.gov: Follow the on-line instructions for
submitting comments.
Email: Ruvo.Richard@epa.gov
Fax: 212-637-3901
Mail: Richard Ruvo, Acting Branch Chief, Air Programs
Branch, Environmental Protection Agency, Region 2 Office, 290 Broadway,
25th Floor, New York, New York 10007-1866.
Hand Delivery: Richard Ruvo, Acting Branch Chief, Air
Programs Branch, Environmental Protection Agency, Region 2 Office, 290
Broadway, 25th Floor, New York, New York 10007-1866. 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 No. EPA-R02-OAR-2013-
0192. 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 information that you consider to
be CBI or otherwise protected through www.regulations.gov or email. 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 or 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 https://www.epa.gov/epahome/dockets.htm.
Docket: All documents in the docket are listed in the https://www.regulations.gov index. Although listed in the index, some
information is
[[Page 21868]]
not publicly available, e.g., CBI or other information whose disclosure
is restricted by statute. Certain other material, such as copyrighted
material, will be publicly available only in hard copy. Publicly
available docket materials are available either electronically in
https://www.regulations.gov or in hard copy at the Environmental
Protection Agency, Region 2 Office, Air Programs Branch, 290 Broadway,
25th Floor, New York, New York 10007-1866. EPA requests, if at all
possible, that you contact the individual listed in the FOR FURTHER
INFORMATION CONTACT section to view the hard copy of the docket. You
may view the hard copy of the docket Monday through Friday, 8 a.m. to 4
p.m., excluding federal holidays.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Henry Feingersh
(feingersh.henry@epa.gov), Air Programs Branch, Environmental
Protection Agency, 290 Broadway, 25th Floor, New York, New York 10007-
1866, (212) 637-4249.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Table of Contents
I. What action is EPA proposing?
II. What is the background information for this proposal?
III. What was included in New York's proposed SIP submittal?
IV. What are the Carbon Monoxide trends?
V. What is EPA's evaluation?
VI. What are EPA's conclusions?
VII. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews
I. What action is EPA proposing?
The EPA is proposing to approve a revision to the New York State
Implementation Plan (SIP) in response to a request submitted by the New
York State Department of Environmental Conservation (New York) on April
5, 2007. This revision consists of a change to New York's November 15,
1992 Carbon Monoxide Attainment Demonstration that would remove a
reference to a limited off-street parking program as it relates to the
New York County portion of the New York-Northern New Jersey-Long
Island, NY-NJ-CT Carbon Monoxide attainment area. EPA's proposal is to
remove the off-street parking program that was identified by New York
as one of the Transportation Control Measures in New York's 1992 SIP
submittal. This limited off-street parking program is imposed and
enforced by the City of New York. EPA is proposing approval of this SIP
revision because it will not interfere with attainment or maintenance
of the national ambient air quality standards in the affected area.
II. What is the background information for this proposal?
New York submitted a Carbon Monoxide SIP on November 13, 1992
entitled ``Carbon Monoxide Attainment Demonstration--New York
Metropolitan Area'' and EPA published a final approval on July 25, 1996
(61 Federal Register (FR) 38594.) These actions became effective on
August 26, 1996. On November 23, 1999, New York submitted a request to
EPA to redesignate this area from nonattainment to attainment of the
National Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS) for Carbon Monoxide. EPA
published a final approval of this request on April 19, 2002 (67 FR
19337) and the action became effective on May 20, 2002.
On April 5, 2007, New York submitted a request to revise the SIP to
remove a reference to a limited off-street parking program as it
relates to New York County. This proposed SIP revision underwent a
public hearing and public notice and comment process. In a July 26,
2007 letter to the State, the EPA responded to the April 5, 2007
revision request by asking for the public hearing record including a
response to comments received. New York submitted this additional
information to EPA in a letter dated October 5, 2012.
The New York portion of the New York-Northern New Jersey-Long
Island, NY-NJ-CT CO attainment area is composed of the five boroughs of
New York City and the surrounding counties of Nassau, Suffolk,
Westchester and Rockland. This is collectively referred to as the New
York City Metropolitan Area or NYMA.
The NYMA has been meeting the Carbon Monoxide (CO) standard for
over twenty years, since 1992, and CO levels have continuously trended
downward. As discussed later in Section IV--``What are the Carbon
Monoxide Trends,'' current 8-hr CO levels are less than \1/3\ of the 8-
hr standard while 1-hr CO levels not only achieve the 1-hour standard,
they are much less than the 8-hr standard.
III. What was included in New York's proposed SIP submittal?
New York submitted to EPA a proposed SIP revision that includes a
change to the New York State Carbon Monoxide SIP. The change is a
clarification to a commitment identified in New York's November 13,
1992 submittal. New York also submitted air quality monitoring data
from 1997 through 2011 along with an ambient monitoring trends analysis
for the period 1988 through 2011. This analysis shows a marked downward
trend in CO ambient concentrations. These concentrations are, and have
been for a number of years now, lower than the background values used
in the 1992 CO SIP.
In addition, New York held a public hearing on July 17, 2007 and
written comments were accepted until July 24, 2007, which was an
extension of the original May 30, 2007 deadline. New York submitted to
EPA a summary of the public comments received and responses to those
comments.
IV. What are the Carbon Monoxide trends?
There has been a steadily declining Carbon Monoxide trend in the
NYMA since the 1980's. The last few years have seen a ``bottoming out''
of these concentrations. CO values have been dropping steadily for
several years and are now lower than background values were at the time
of the CO SIP attainment demonstration in 1992. While we observed
concentrations over 13 ppm in the 1980's, we are now seeing these
values at approximately 2 ppm. This means we are seeing almost no
contributions from automobiles at this time. Much of this improvement
can be attributed to newer cars with advanced anti-pollution controls.
The following chart shows how the CO monitored design values in New
York County have declined from 1988-1989 through 2010-2011. The design
values are derived by first taking the second highest 8-hour value for
each site in the county for each year. Of these, the highest value for
each year (from all of the sites in the county) is the design value for
that year. Thus, the design value went from 13.5 ppm in 1988-1989 to
1.8 ppm in 2010-2011.
[[Page 21869]]
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TP12AP13.005
V. What is EPA's evaluation?
Revisions to SIP-approved control measures must meet the
requirements of the Clean Air Act (CAA) section 110(l) to be approved
by EPA. Section 110(l) states: ``The Administrator shall not approve a
revision of a plan if the revision would interfere with any applicable
requirement concerning attainment and reasonable further progress (as
defined in section 171), or any other applicable requirement of this
Chapter.''
EPA interprets section 110(l) to apply to all requirements of the
CAA and to all areas of the country, whether attainment, nonattainment,
unclassifiable, or maintenance for one or more of the six criteria
pollutants. EPA also interprets section 110(l) to require a
demonstration addressing all pollutants whose emissions and/or ambient
concentrations may change as a result of the SIP revision. Thus, for
example, modification of a SIP-approved measure which may impact
nitrogen oxide emissions, may also impact particulate matter emissions,
and this would have to be evaluated. The scope and rigor of an adequate
section 110(l) demonstration of noninterference depends on the air
quality status of the area, the potential impact of the revision on air
quality, the pollutant(s) affected, and the nature of the applicable
CAA requirements.
As discussed previously, the air quality data shows a striking
downward trend in ambient CO concentrations in the NYMA area for the
past twenty years. This dramatic improvement can be attributed to the
Federal Motor Vehicle Turnover Program along with advanced anti-
pollution controls on motor vehicles.
The NYMA has been attaining the CO standard since 1993. As
discussed in Section II, above, on April 19, 2002, EPA published a
final rule redesignating the area to attainment. A maintenance plan
explaining how the area will maintain the CO standard has been in place
since that time. Action on a second 10 year maintenance plan explaining
how the area will continue to attain the CO standard for another 10
years will be taken in a separate Federal Register Notice.
It is important to note, aside from ozone, the NYMA is attaining
the NAAQS for all of the other criteria pollutants. The area has been
attaining the SO2, NO2, and Pb standards for many
years. For CO, the area was redesignated to attainment in 2002 and is
currently a maintenance area. For ozone, the area has been designated
nonattainment and continues to be designated nonattainment. However,
the area has attained the 1-hour ozone standard and has attained the
1997 8-hour ozone standard by its required attainment date. In
addition, the area has been attaining the annual and 24-hour
PM2.5 standards and New York has proposed redesignations for
both PM standards. EPA will be taking action on the PM2.5
standards in a separate Federal Register Notice.
EPA reviewed New York's proposed change to its CO attainment
demonstration to determine whether the change will add or contribute to
any air quality violations. EPA proposes to determine that removal of
the limited off-street parking program from the previous federally
approved CO attainment demonstration will not add or contribute to an
already existing air quality violation, primarily because there is no
existing air quality violation. EPA, in essence, continues to evaluate
the New York CO SIP because New York continues to have their CO
maintenance plan in place. This plan meets the requirements set forth
in section 175A of the CAA and provides for continued attainment of the
CO NAAQS.
As for the only other pollutants, ozone and PM2.5, for
which there may be any potential impact on air quality, EPA notes that
for each of these pollutants, New York has developed several other
revisions to the SIP to continue the reductions of emissions toward
meeting the NAAQS. Specifically for ozone, EPA approved New York's
reasonable further progress plan and attainment demonstration for NYMA
(see 76 FR 51264 (Aug. 18, 2011) and 78 FR 9596 (Feb. 11, 2013),
respectively) which included those measures necessary to attain and
maintain the standard. Also, on June 15, 2001 and supplemented on
October 1, 2001, New York submitted to EPA its assessment of whether
any Reasonably Available Control Measures (RACM) are available to
advance the 1-hour ozone attainment date from 2007 to an earlier year
for the New York Metro Area. In this study New York evaluated the
emissions reductions associated with several transportation control
measures. EPA approved New York's RACM Analysis on February 4,
[[Page 21870]]
2002 (67 FR 5170) and determined that there were no additional RACMs
(including the transportation control measures) that, when implemented,
would advance the attainment date in the NYMA from 2007 to an earlier
year. In addition, to address the RACM requirement for the 1997 8-hour
ozone standard, New York did a similar analysis and determined that
there were additional measures that New York State believes represent
RACM as they are reasonably available and can be expected to advance
the attainment date and contribute to reasonable further progress.
However, the measures identified by New York were all stationary source
related and have since been adopted and implemented by New York State.
On July 13, 2010 (75 FR 43066), EPA approved New York's RACM analysis
for the 1997 8-hour ozone standard.
New York developed a RACM analysis for the 1997 annual
PM2.5 NAAQS that was submitted to EPA on October 27, 2009.
Although EPA has not yet proposed action on the PM2.5 RACM
analysis submitted by the state, New York has adopted and implemented
control measures that will provide for additional emissions reductions
of PM2.5 and its precursors since the NYMA first
demonstrated attainment with the 1997 annual PM2.5 NAAQS.
The measures will be undergoing EPA rulemaking in the near future and,
if approved, will become federally enforceable. These measures will
collectively help ensure continued compliance with both the 1997 annual
and 2006 24-hour PM2.5 NAAQS. These measures include New
York's Hot Mix Asphalt Production Plants rule (6 NYCRR Part 212.12),
Reasonably Available Control Technology for Major Facilities of Oxides
of Nitrogen (6 NYCRR Part 227-2), and Best Available Retrofit
Technology (6 NYCRR Part 249).
EPA recognizes that DEC's April 7, 2007 SIP submittal is asserting
that off-street parking is regulated by the New York City Department of
City Planning and its zoning resolutions and not by the CO SIP.
EPA proposes to determine that removal of this one Transportation
Control Measure (TCM) will not interfere with air quality or attainment
of the NAAQS. In addition, New York has revised the rules which address
TCMs before and concluded not to rely on these similar measures in more
recent SIP actions. This provides further evidence to lead EPA to
determine that this measure will not have an impact on air quality.
We are aware that any new construction project using federal funds
must undergo a review pursuant to the National Environmental Policy Act
(NEPA), [42 U.S.C. 4321 et seq. Specifically, all federal agencies are
to prepare detailed assessments of the environmental impacts of and
alternatives to major federal actions significantly affecting the
environment. These documents are commonly referred to as environmental
impact statements (EIS). The public has an important role in the NEPA
process, particularly during scoping, in providing input on what issues
should be addressed in an EIS and in commenting on the findings in an
agency's NEPA documents. The public can participate in the NEPA process
by attending NEPA-related hearings or public meetings and by submitting
comments directly to the lead agency. The lead agency must take into
consideration all comments received from the public and other parties
on NEPA documents during the comment period.
New York has demonstrated that the changes to its CO SIP will not
interfere with attainment and maintenance of the NAAQS for all criteria
pollutants. EPA proposes to find that New York has satisfied the
demonstration of noninterference required by CAA section 110(l).
VI. What are EPA's conclusions?
EPA is proposing to approve New York's request to remove a
reference to a limited off-street parking program in New York County
because this SIP revision will not cause an exceedance of the NAAQS.
EPA reviewed the public comments from the July 17, 2007 public hearing
record. EPA agrees with New York's responses that New York City
continues to run the limited off-street parking program and, although
New York City may have relaxed aspects of the program, there is no
evidence that this relaxation caused any degradation in CO air quality
in the area. In addition, New York did not rely on any emission
reductions from this program in its SIP modeling to support the
demonstration of attainment of the CO standard. Finally, any new
construction project in the area would have to undergo a NEPA process.
The NEPA process ensures that a NAAQS violation would not occur due to
the project in question.
EPA's review of the materials submitted indicates that New York has
revised its CO SIP in accordance with the requirements of the CAA, 40
CFR Part 51 and all of EPA's technical requirements for a CO SIP.
Therefore, EPA is proposing to approve the removal of a reference to a
limited off-street parking program in New York County.
VII. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews
Under the CAA, the Administrator is required to approve a SIP
submission that complies with the provisions of the Act and applicable
Federal regulations. 42 U.S.C. 7410(k); 40 CFR 52.02(a). Thus, in
reviewing SIP submissions, EPA's role is to approve state choices,
provided that they meet the criteria of the CAA. Accordingly, this
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 CAA; and
Does not provide EPA with the discretionary authority to
address, as appropriate, disproportionate human health or environmental
effects, using practicable and legally permissible methods, under
Executive Order 12898 (59 FR 7629, February 16, 1994).
In addition, this 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
[[Page 21871]]
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, Carbon monoxide,
Incorporation by reference, Intergovernmental relations, Nitrogen
dioxide, Ozone, Particulate matter, Reporting and recordkeeping
requirements, Volatile organic compounds.
Authority: 42 U.S.C. 7401 et seq.
Dated: April 1, 2013.
Judith A. Enck,
Regional Administrator, Region 2.
[FR Doc. 2013-08670 Filed 4-11-13; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P