Air Plan Approval; Connecticut; Prevention of Significant Deterioration; Revisions to the Prevention of Significant Deterioration Greenhouse Gas Permitting Authority, 27936-27937 [2018-12896]
Download as PDF
27936
Federal Register / Vol. 83, No. 116 / Friday, June 15, 2018 / Proposed Rules
Appeals, the United States Court of
Federal Claims, and the United States
Supreme Court. For purposes of this
section, state courts are not courts of
competent jurisdiction.
*
*
*
*
*
(5) Employment status. * * *
*
*
*
*
*
Ruth Stevenson,
Attorney, Federal Compliance.
[FR Doc. 2018–12858 Filed 6–14–18; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 7710–12–P
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION
AGENCY
40 CFR Part 52
[EPA–R01–OAR–2018–0212; FRL–9978–
97—Region 1]
Air Plan Approval; Connecticut;
Prevention of Significant Deterioration;
Revisions to the Prevention of
Significant Deterioration Greenhouse
Gas Permitting Authority
Environmental Protection
Agency (EPA).
ACTION: Proposed rule.
AGENCY:
The Environmental Protection
Agency (EPA) is proposing to approve a
State Implementation Plan (SIP)
revision submitted by the State of
Connecticut. This revision affects
provisions applicable to greenhouse
gases (GHGs) in the EPA’s Prevention of
Significant Deterioration (PSD) permit
program. Connecticut requested the
revision in response to the June 23,
2014, U.S. Supreme Court’s decision in
Utility Air Regulatory Group (UARG) v.
EPA and the April 10, 2015, Amended
Judgment by the United States Court of
Appeals for the District of Columbia
Circuit (D.C. Circuit) in Coalition for
Responsible Regulation v. EPA. The
intended effect of this action is to clarify
that the State’s PSD rules do not require
a source to obtain a permit solely
because the source emits or has the
potential to emit (PTE) GHGs: Above the
PSD applicability thresholds for new
major sources; or for which there is a
significant emissions increase from a
modification. This action is being taken
under the Clean Air Act.
DATES: Written comments must be
received on or before July 16, 2018.
ADDRESSES: Submit your comments,
identified by Docket ID No. EPA–R01–
OAR–2018–0212 at
www.regulations.gov, or via email to.
For comments submitted at
Regulations.gov, follow the online
instructions for submitting comments.
sradovich on DSK3GMQ082PROD with PROPOSALS
SUMMARY:
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:14 Jun 14, 2018
Jkt 244001
Once submitted, comments cannot be
edited or removed from Regulations.gov.
For either manner of submission, the
EPA may publish any comment received
to its public docket. Do not submit
electronically any information you
consider to be Confidential Business
Information (CBI) or other information
whose disclosure is restricted by statute.
Multimedia submissions (audio, video,
etc.) must be accompanied by a written
comment. The written comment is
considered the official comment and
should include discussion of all points
you wish to make. The EPA will
generally not consider comments or
comment contents located outside of the
primary submission (i.e., on the web,
cloud, or other file sharing system). For
additional submission methods, please
contact the person identified in the FOR
FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section.
For the full EPA public comment policy,
information about CBI or multimedia
submissions, and general guidance on
making effective comments, please visit
www.epa.gov/dockets/commenting-epadockets. Publicly available docket
materials are available at
www.regulations.gov or at the U.S.
Environmental Protection Agency, EPA
New England Regional Office, Office of
Ecosystem Protection, Air Quality
Planning Unit, 5 Post Office Square—
Suite 100, Boston, MA. The EPA
requests that if at all possible, you
contact the contact 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 a.m. to
4:30 p.m., excluding legal holidays.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Donald Dahl, Air Permits, Toxics, and
Indoor Programs Unit, U.S.
Environmental Protection Agency, EPA
New England Regional Office, 5 Post
Office Square—Suite 100, (Mail code
OEP05–2), Boston, MA 02109–3912, tel.
(617) 918–1657, email dahl.donald@
epa.gov.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Throughout this document whenever
‘‘we,’’ ‘‘us,’’ or ‘‘our’’ is used, we mean
the EPA.
Table of Contents
I. Background and Purpose
II. EPA’s Review
III. Proposed Action
IV. Incorporation by Reference
V. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews
treatment of GHGs in the context of the
PSD permit program under the Clean
Air Act (CAA). The revision consists of
removing the requirement that sources
would have to obtain a PSD permit
solely due to its GHG emissions,
commonly known as ‘‘Step 2’’ sources.
On January 2, 2011, GHG emissions
were, for the first time, covered by the
PSD and title V operating permit
programs. See 75 FR 17004, (April 2,
2010). To establish a process for phasing
in the permitting requirements for
stationary sources of GHGs under the
CAA PSD and title V programs, on June
3, 2010, the EPA published a final rule
entitled ‘‘Prevention of Significant
Deterioration and Title V Greenhouse
Gas Tailoring Rule’’ (hereinafter referred
to as the GHG Tailoring Rule). See 75 FR
31514. In Step 1 of the GHG Tailoring
Rule, which began on January 2, 2011,
the EPA limited application of PSD and
title V requirements to sources of GHG
emissions only if they were subject to
PSD or title V ‘‘anyway’’ due to their
emissions of pollutants other than
GHGs. These sources are referred to as
‘‘anyway sources.’’ In Step 2 of the GHG
Tailoring Rule, which applied as of July
1, 2011, the PSD and title V permitting
program requirements applied to some
sources that were classified as major
sources based solely on their GHG
emissions or potential to emit GHGs.
Step 2 also applied PSD permitting
requirements to modifications of
otherwise major sources that would
increase only GHG emissions above the
level in the EPA regulations. EPA
generally described the sources covered
by PSD during Step 2 of the GHG
Tailoring Rule as ‘‘Step 2 sources’’ or
‘‘GHG-only sources.’’
The United States Supreme Court
invalidated the EPA’s regulation of Step
2 sources in Utility Air Regulatory
Group (UARG) v. EPA, 134 S Ct. 2427
(2014). In accordance with that
decision, the United States Court of
Appeals for the District of Columbia
Circuit vacated the federal regulations
that implemented Step 2 of the GHG
Tailoring Rule. See Coalition for
Responsible Regulation, Inc. v. EPA, 606
Fed. Appx. 6, 7 (D.C. Cir. 2015).
Subsequently, the EPA removed the
vacated elements from its rules. See 80
FR 50199 (August 19, 2015). The EPA
therefore has the authority to approve a
state’s request to remove Step 2 sources
from the SIP.
I. Background and Purpose
On February 28, 2018, the
Connecticut Department of Energy and
Environmental Protection (CT DEEP)
submitted a revision to its State
Implementation Plan (SIP) for the
II. EPA’s Review
Section 110(l) of the CAA states that
the EPA shall not approve a revision to
the SIP if the revision would interfere
with any applicable requirement
concerning attainment (of the NAAQS)
PO 00000
Frm 00019
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
E:\FR\FM\15JNP1.SGM
15JNP1
Federal Register / Vol. 83, No. 116 / Friday, June 15, 2018 / Proposed Rules
and reasonable further progress (as
defined in CAA section 7501) or any
other requirement of the CAA. The EPA
has reviewed the SIP revision and is
proposing to find the revision is
consistent with Section 110(l) of the
CAA.
The EPA’s analysis and rationale for
proposing to approve Connecticut’s SIP
revision request can be found in the
Technical Support Document (TSD)
associated with this action. In addition
to the finding under Section 110(l), the
EPA reviewed the SIP revision to ensure
it is consistent with the EPA’s
regulations at 40 CFR 51.166, which
contain the requirements for a state’s
PSD permit program regulations. The
EPA’s May 15, 2018 TSD (which is
included in the docket for this action)
includes the state requirements revised
or removed, a list of the relevant federal
provisions relating to the State’s
revisions, and a description of how each
state provision complies with the
federal requirements.
During the EPA’s review, the EPA
noted that there was a typographical
error in the certified copy of the
regulatory changes Connecticut sent to
the EPA. The difference between the
certified copy and the state-adopted
regulations was due to a clerical error.
Connecticut subsequently submitted a
revised and correct certified copy of the
regulatory changes on May 7, 2018.
sradovich on DSK3GMQ082PROD with PROPOSALS
III. Proposed Action
Based on our analysis, the EPA is
proposing to approve the Connecticut
SIP revision, which was submitted on
February 28, 2018, for the removal of
the requirement that sources must
obtain a PSD permit based solely on a
source’s GHG emissions. The EPA is
soliciting public comments on the
issues discussed in this notice or on
other relevant matters. These comments
will be considered before taking final
action. Interested parties may
participate in the Federal rulemaking
procedure by submitting written
comments to this proposed rule by
following the instructions listed in the
ADDRESSES section of this Federal
Register.
IV. Incorporation by Reference
In this rule, the EPA is proposing to
include in a final EPA rule regulatory
text that includes incorporation by
reference. In accordance with
requirements of 1 CFR 51.5, the EPA is
proposing to incorporate revised RSCA
Section 22a–174–3a(a)(1) entitled
‘‘Applicability,’’ RSCA Section 22a–
174–3a(j)(1) for when control
technology applies, and RSCA Sections
22a–174–3a(k)(1) and (2) regarding
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:14 Jun 14, 2018
Jkt 244001
applicability of GHGs for new major
stationary sources and major
modifications. All three state
regulations were effective February 8,
2018. The EPA has made, and will
continue to make, these documents
generally available electronically
through www.regulations.gov and/or in
hard copy at the appropriate EPA office.
V. Statutory and Executive Order
Reviews
Under the Clean Air Act, the
Administrator is required to approve a
SIP submission that complies with the
provisions of the Act and applicable
Federal regulations. 42 U.S.C. 7410(k);
40 CFR 52.02(a). Thus, in reviewing SIP
submissions, the EPA’s role is to
approve state choices, provided that
they meet the criteria of the Clean Air
Act. 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 Orders 12866 (58 FR 51735,
October 4, 1993) and 13563 (76 FR 3821,
January 21, 2011);
• Is not expected to be an Executive
Order 13771 regulatory action because
this action is not significant under
Executive Order 12866.
• Does not impose an information
collection burden under the provisions
of the Paperwork Reduction Act (44
U.S.C. 3501 et seq.);
• Is certified as not having a
significant economic impact on a
substantial number of small entities
under the Regulatory Flexibility Act
(5 U.S.C. 601 et seq.);
• Does not contain any unfunded
mandate or significantly or uniquely
affect small governments, as described
in the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act
of 1995 (Pub. L. 104–4);
• Does not have Federalism
implications as specified in Executive
Order 13132 (64 FR 43255, August 10,
1999);
• Is not an economically significant
regulatory action based on health or
safety risks subject to Executive Order
13045 (62 FR 19885, April 23, 1997);
• Is not a significant regulatory action
subject to Executive Order 13211 (66 FR
28355, May 22, 2001);
• Is not subject to requirements of
Section 12(d) of the National
Technology Transfer and Advancement
Act of 1995 (15 U.S.C. 272 note) because
application of those requirements would
be inconsistent with the Clean Air Act;
and
PO 00000
Frm 00020
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
27937
• Does not provide the EPA with the
discretionary authority to address, as
appropriate, disproportionate human
health or environmental effects, using
practicable and legally permissible
methods, under Executive Order 12898
(59 FR 7629, February 16, 1994).
In addition, the SIP is not approved
to apply on any Indian reservation land
or in any other area where the EPA or
an Indian tribe has demonstrated that a
tribe has jurisdiction. In those areas of
Indian country, the rule does not have
tribal implications and will not impose
substantial direct costs on tribal
governments or preempt tribal law as
specified by Executive Order 13175 (65
FR 67249, November 9, 2000).
List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52
Environmental protection, Air
pollution control, Carbon monoxide,
Incorporation by reference,
Intergovernmental relations, Lead,
Nitrogen dioxide, Ozone, Particulate
matter, Reporting and recordkeeping
requirements, Sulfur oxides, Volatile
organic compounds.
Dated: June 12, 2018.
Alexandra Dunn,
Regional Administrator, EPA Region 1.
[FR Doc. 2018–12896 Filed 6–14–18; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560–50–P
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION
AGENCY
40 CFR Part 52
[EPA–R03–OAR–2018–0277; FRL–9979–
43—Region 3]
Approval and Promulgation of Air
Quality Implementation Plans;
Pennsylvania; Removal of Department
of Environmental Protection Gasoline
Volatility Requirements for the
Pittsburgh-Beaver Valley Area
Environmental Protection
Agency (EPA).
ACTION: Proposed rule.
AGENCY:
The Environmental Protection
Agency (EPA) proposes to approve a
state implementation plan (SIP) revision
submitted by the Commonwealth of
Pennsylvania on May 2, 2018. The
purpose of this SIP revision is to remove
from the Pennsylvania SIP, the
Commonwealth’s existing requirements
limiting summertime gasoline volatility
to 7.8 pounds per square inch (psi) Reid
Vapor Pressure (RVP) in seven counties
in the Pittsburgh-Beaver Valley Area. In
the Final Rules section of this Federal
Register, EPA is approving the State’s
SIP submittal as a direct final rule
without prior proposal because the
SUMMARY:
E:\FR\FM\15JNP1.SGM
15JNP1
Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 83, Number 116 (Friday, June 15, 2018)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 27936-27937]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2018-12896]
=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
40 CFR Part 52
[EPA-R01-OAR-2018-0212; FRL-9978- 97--Region 1]
Air Plan Approval; Connecticut; Prevention of Significant
Deterioration; Revisions to the Prevention of Significant Deterioration
Greenhouse Gas Permitting Authority
AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).
ACTION: Proposed rule.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is proposing to
approve a State Implementation Plan (SIP) revision submitted by the
State of Connecticut. This revision affects provisions applicable to
greenhouse gases (GHGs) in the EPA's Prevention of Significant
Deterioration (PSD) permit program. Connecticut requested the revision
in response to the June 23, 2014, U.S. Supreme Court's decision in
Utility Air Regulatory Group (UARG) v. EPA and the April 10, 2015,
Amended Judgment by the United States Court of Appeals for the District
of Columbia Circuit (D.C. Circuit) in Coalition for Responsible
Regulation v. EPA. The intended effect of this action is to clarify
that the State's PSD rules do not require a source to obtain a permit
solely because the source emits or has the potential to emit (PTE)
GHGs: Above the PSD applicability thresholds for new major sources; or
for which there is a significant emissions increase from a
modification. This action is being taken under the Clean Air Act.
DATES: Written comments must be received on or before July 16, 2018.
ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, identified by Docket ID No. EPA-R01-
OAR-2018-0212 at www.regulations.gov, or via email to. For comments
submitted at Regulations.gov, follow the online instructions for
submitting comments. Once submitted, comments cannot be edited or
removed from Regulations.gov. For either manner of submission, the EPA
may publish any comment received to its public docket. Do not submit
electronically any information you consider to be Confidential Business
Information (CBI) or other information whose disclosure is restricted
by statute. Multimedia submissions (audio, video, etc.) must be
accompanied by a written comment. The written comment is considered the
official comment and should include discussion of all points you wish
to make. The EPA will generally not consider comments or comment
contents located outside of the primary submission (i.e., on the web,
cloud, or other file sharing system). For additional submission
methods, please contact the person identified in the For Further
Information Contact section. For the full EPA public comment policy,
information about CBI or multimedia submissions, and general guidance
on making effective comments, please visit www.epa.gov/dockets/commenting-epa-dockets. Publicly available docket materials are
available at www.regulations.gov or at the U.S. Environmental
Protection Agency, EPA New England Regional Office, Office of Ecosystem
Protection, Air Quality Planning Unit, 5 Post Office Square--Suite 100,
Boston, MA. The EPA requests that if at all possible, you contact the
contact 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 a.m. to 4:30 p.m., excluding
legal holidays.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Donald Dahl, Air Permits, Toxics, and
Indoor Programs Unit, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, EPA New
England Regional Office, 5 Post Office Square--Suite 100, (Mail code
OEP05-2), Boston, MA 02109-3912, tel. (617) 918-1657, email
[email protected].
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Throughout this document whenever ``we,''
``us,'' or ``our'' is used, we mean the EPA.
Table of Contents
I. Background and Purpose
II. EPA's Review
III. Proposed Action
IV. Incorporation by Reference
V. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews
I. Background and Purpose
On February 28, 2018, the Connecticut Department of Energy and
Environmental Protection (CT DEEP) submitted a revision to its State
Implementation Plan (SIP) for the treatment of GHGs in the context of
the PSD permit program under the Clean Air Act (CAA). The revision
consists of removing the requirement that sources would have to obtain
a PSD permit solely due to its GHG emissions, commonly known as ``Step
2'' sources.
On January 2, 2011, GHG emissions were, for the first time, covered
by the PSD and title V operating permit programs. See 75 FR 17004,
(April 2, 2010). To establish a process for phasing in the permitting
requirements for stationary sources of GHGs under the CAA PSD and title
V programs, on June 3, 2010, the EPA published a final rule entitled
``Prevention of Significant Deterioration and Title V Greenhouse Gas
Tailoring Rule'' (hereinafter referred to as the GHG Tailoring Rule).
See 75 FR 31514. In Step 1 of the GHG Tailoring Rule, which began on
January 2, 2011, the EPA limited application of PSD and title V
requirements to sources of GHG emissions only if they were subject to
PSD or title V ``anyway'' due to their emissions of pollutants other
than GHGs. These sources are referred to as ``anyway sources.'' In Step
2 of the GHG Tailoring Rule, which applied as of July 1, 2011, the PSD
and title V permitting program requirements applied to some sources
that were classified as major sources based solely on their GHG
emissions or potential to emit GHGs. Step 2 also applied PSD permitting
requirements to modifications of otherwise major sources that would
increase only GHG emissions above the level in the EPA regulations. EPA
generally described the sources covered by PSD during Step 2 of the GHG
Tailoring Rule as ``Step 2 sources'' or ``GHG-only sources.''
The United States Supreme Court invalidated the EPA's regulation of
Step 2 sources in Utility Air Regulatory Group (UARG) v. EPA, 134 S Ct.
2427 (2014). In accordance with that decision, the United States Court
of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit vacated the federal
regulations that implemented Step 2 of the GHG Tailoring Rule. See
Coalition for Responsible Regulation, Inc. v. EPA, 606 Fed. Appx. 6, 7
(D.C. Cir. 2015). Subsequently, the EPA removed the vacated elements
from its rules. See 80 FR 50199 (August 19, 2015). The EPA therefore
has the authority to approve a state's request to remove Step 2 sources
from the SIP.
II. EPA's Review
Section 110(l) of the CAA states that the EPA shall not approve a
revision to the SIP if the revision would interfere with any applicable
requirement concerning attainment (of the NAAQS)
[[Page 27937]]
and reasonable further progress (as defined in CAA section 7501) or any
other requirement of the CAA. The EPA has reviewed the SIP revision and
is proposing to find the revision is consistent with Section 110(l) of
the CAA.
The EPA's analysis and rationale for proposing to approve
Connecticut's SIP revision request can be found in the Technical
Support Document (TSD) associated with this action. In addition to the
finding under Section 110(l), the EPA reviewed the SIP revision to
ensure it is consistent with the EPA's regulations at 40 CFR 51.166,
which contain the requirements for a state's PSD permit program
regulations. The EPA's May 15, 2018 TSD (which is included in the
docket for this action) includes the state requirements revised or
removed, a list of the relevant federal provisions relating to the
State's revisions, and a description of how each state provision
complies with the federal requirements.
During the EPA's review, the EPA noted that there was a
typographical error in the certified copy of the regulatory changes
Connecticut sent to the EPA. The difference between the certified copy
and the state-adopted regulations was due to a clerical error.
Connecticut subsequently submitted a revised and correct certified copy
of the regulatory changes on May 7, 2018.
III. Proposed Action
Based on our analysis, the EPA is proposing to approve the
Connecticut SIP revision, which was submitted on February 28, 2018, for
the removal of the requirement that sources must obtain a PSD permit
based solely on a source's GHG emissions. The EPA is soliciting public
comments on the issues discussed in this notice or on other relevant
matters. These comments will be considered before taking final action.
Interested parties may participate in the Federal rulemaking procedure
by submitting written comments to this proposed rule by following the
instructions listed in the ADDRESSES section of this Federal Register.
IV. Incorporation by Reference
In this rule, the EPA is proposing to include in a final EPA rule
regulatory text that includes incorporation by reference. In accordance
with requirements of 1 CFR 51.5, the EPA is proposing to incorporate
revised RSCA Section 22a-174-3a(a)(1) entitled ``Applicability,'' RSCA
Section 22a-174-3a(j)(1) for when control technology applies, and RSCA
Sections 22a-174-3a(k)(1) and (2) regarding applicability of GHGs for
new major stationary sources and major modifications. All three state
regulations were effective February 8, 2018. The EPA has made, and will
continue to make, these documents generally available electronically
through www.regulations.gov and/or in hard copy at the appropriate EPA
office.
V. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews
Under the Clean Air Act, the Administrator is required to approve a
SIP submission that complies with the provisions of the Act and
applicable Federal regulations. 42 U.S.C. 7410(k); 40 CFR 52.02(a).
Thus, in reviewing SIP submissions, the EPA's role is to approve state
choices, provided that they meet the criteria of the Clean Air Act.
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 Orders 12866 (58
FR 51735, October 4, 1993) and 13563 (76 FR 3821, January 21, 2011);
Is not expected to be an Executive Order 13771 regulatory
action because this action is not significant under Executive Order
12866.
Does not impose an information collection burden under the
provisions of the Paperwork Reduction Act (44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.);
Is certified as not having a significant economic impact
on a substantial number of small entities under the Regulatory
Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 601 et seq.);
Does not contain any unfunded mandate or significantly or
uniquely affect small governments, as described in the Unfunded
Mandates Reform Act of 1995 (Pub. L. 104-4);
Does not have Federalism implications as specified in
Executive Order 13132 (64 FR 43255, August 10, 1999);
Is not an economically significant regulatory action based
on health or safety risks subject to Executive Order 13045 (62 FR
19885, April 23, 1997);
Is not a significant regulatory action subject to
Executive Order 13211 (66 FR 28355, May 22, 2001);
Is not subject to requirements of Section 12(d) of the
National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act of 1995 (15 U.S.C. 272
note) because application of those requirements would be inconsistent
with the Clean Air Act; and
Does not provide the EPA with the discretionary authority
to address, as appropriate, disproportionate human health or
environmental effects, using practicable and legally permissible
methods, under Executive Order 12898 (59 FR 7629, February 16, 1994).
In addition, the SIP is not approved to apply on any Indian
reservation land or in any other area where the EPA or an Indian tribe
has demonstrated that a tribe has jurisdiction. In those areas of
Indian country, the rule does not have tribal implications and will not
impose substantial direct costs on tribal governments or preempt tribal
law as specified by Executive Order 13175 (65 FR 67249, November 9,
2000).
List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52
Environmental protection, Air pollution control, Carbon monoxide,
Incorporation by reference, Intergovernmental relations, Lead, Nitrogen
dioxide, Ozone, Particulate matter, Reporting and recordkeeping
requirements, Sulfur oxides, Volatile organic compounds.
Dated: June 12, 2018.
Alexandra Dunn,
Regional Administrator, EPA Region 1.
[FR Doc. 2018-12896 Filed 6-14-18; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P