Air Plan Approval; Kentucky: Jefferson County Process Operations, 7313-7315 [2019-03851]

Download as PDF Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 42 / Monday, March 4, 2019 / Proposed Rules latitude 39°26′39.6’’ N, longitude 076°15′19.4″ W; thence south to latitude 39°26′36.6″ N, longitude 076°15′18.7″ W; thence west to latitude 39°26′37.0″ N, longitude 076°15′22.5″ W; thence north to point of origin. (c) Special local regulations: (1) The COTP Maryland-National Capital Region or PATCOM may forbid and control the movement of all vessels and persons, including event participants, in the regulated area. When hailed or signaled by an official patrol, a vessel or person in the regulated area must immediately comply with the directions given by the patrol. Failure to do so may result in the Coast Guard expelling the person or vessel from the area, issuing a citation for failure to comply, or both. The COTP Maryland-National Capital Region or PATCOM may terminate the event, or a participant’s operations at any time the COTP Maryland-National Capital Region or PATCOM believes it necessary to do so for the protection of life or property. (2) Except for participants and vessels already at berth, a person or vessel within the regulated area at the start of enforcement of this section must immediately depart the regulated area. (3) A spectator must contact the PATCOM to request permission to either enter or pass through the regulated area. The PATCOM, and official patrol vessels enforcing this regulated area, can be contacted on marine band radio VHF–FM channel 16 (156.8 MHz) and channel 22A (157.1 MHz). If permission is granted, the spectator may enter the designated Spectator Area or must pass directly through the regulated area as instructed by PATCOM. A vessel within the regulated area must operate at safe speed that minimizes wake. A spectator vessel must not loiter within the navigable channel while within the regulated area. (4) A person or vessel that desires to transit, moor, or anchor within the regulated area must first obtain authorization from the COTP MarylandNational Capital Region or PATCOM. A person or vessel seeking such permission can contact the COTP Maryland-National Capital Region at telephone number 410–576–2693 or on Marine Band Radio, VHF–FM channel 16 (156.8 MHz) or the PATCOM on Marine Band Radio, VHF–FM channel 16 (156.8 MHz). (5) Only participant vessels and official patrol vessels are allowed to enter the race area. (6) Spectators are only allowed inside the regulated area if they remain within the designated spectator area. All spectator vessels must be anchored or VerDate Sep<11>2014 16:47 Mar 01, 2019 Jkt 247001 operate at a No Wake Speed within the designated spectator area. Official patrol vessels will direct spectator vessels to the spectator area. Spectators must contact the Coast Guard Patrol Commander to request permission to pass through the regulated area. If permission is granted, spectators must pass directly through the regulated area at safe speed and without loitering. (7) 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 officials. The Coast Guard may be assisted with marine event patrol and enforcement of the regulated area by other Federal, State, and local agencies. (e) Enforcement periods. This section will be enforced from 9:30 a.m. to 6:30 p.m. on May 11, 2019, and, from 9:30 a.m. to 6:30 p.m. on May 12, 2019. Dated: February 26, 2019. Joseph B. Loring, Captain, U.S. Coast Guard, Captain of the Port Maryland-National Capital Region. [FR Doc. 2019–03781 Filed 3–1–19; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 9110–04–P ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY 40 CFR Part 52 [EPA–R04–OAR–2018–0609; FRL–9990–30– Region 4] Air Plan Approval; Kentucky: Jefferson County Process Operations Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). ACTION: Proposed rule. AGENCY: The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is proposing to approve changes to the Jefferson County portion of the Kentucky State Implementation Plan (SIP), submitted by the Commonwealth of Kentucky, through the Energy and Environment Cabinet (Cabinet), through a letter dated March 15, 2018. The proposed SIP revision was submitted by the Cabinet on behalf of the Louisville Metro Air Pollution Control District (District) and makes minor ministerial amendments to regulations regarding new and existing process operations. DATES: Comments must be received on or before April 3, 2019. ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, identified by Docket ID No. EPA–R04– OAR–2018–0609 at https:// www.regulations.gov. Follow the online SUMMARY: PO 00000 Frm 00010 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 7313 instructions for submitting comments. Once submitted, comments cannot be edited or removed from Regulations.gov. EPA may publish any comment received to its public docket. Do not submit electronically any information you consider to be Confidential Business Information (CBI) or other information whose disclosure is restricted by statute. Multimedia submissions (audio, video, etc.) must be accompanied by a written comment. The written comment is considered the official comment and should include discussion of all points you wish to make. 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, the full EPA public comment policy, information about CBI or multimedia submissions, and general guidance on making effective comments, please visit https://www2.epa.gov/dockets/ commenting-epa-dockets. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Andres Febres, Air Regulatory Management Section, Air Planning and Implementation Branch, Air, Pesticides and Toxics Management Division, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Region 4, 61 Forsyth Street SW, Atlanta, Georgia 30303–8960. The telephone number is (404) 562–8966. Mr. Febres can also be reached via electronic mail at febres-martinez.andres@epa.gov. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: I. What action is EPA proposing? EPA is proposing to approve changes to the Jefferson County portion of the Kentucky SIP that were provided to EPA through a letter dated March 15, 2018.1 EPA is proposing to approve the portions of this SIP revision that make changes to the District’s Regulation 6.09—Standards of Performance for Existing Process Operations, and Regulation 7.08—Standards of Performance for New Process Operations.2 The March 15, 2018, SIP revision makes minor and ministerial changes that do not alter the meaning of these regulations but rather are intended to clarify the applicability of these regulations, as well as reduce redundancy in the particulate matter (PM) and opacity standards. The SIP revision updates the current SIPapproved versions of Regulation 6.09 1 EPA notes that the Agency received the SIP revision on March 23, 2018. 2 EPA also notes that the Agency received several other revisions to the Jefferson County portion of the Kentucky SIP submitted with the same March 15, 2018, cover letter. EPA will be considering action on the remaining revisions in separate actions. E:\FR\FM\04MRP1.SGM 04MRP1 7314 Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 42 / Monday, March 4, 2019 / Proposed Rules (version 6) and Regulation 7.08 (version 3) to versions 7 and version 4, respectively. The changes that are being proposed for approval in this rulemaking and EPA’s rationale for proposing approval are described in more detail below. II. EPA’s Analysis of the State Submittal As mentioned in Section I of this document, the portion of Jefferson County’s March 15, 2018, SIP revision that EPA is proposing to approve makes changes to two Jefferson County Air Quality Regulations. Specifically, the SIP revision updates the SIP-approved version of Regulation 6.09 to version 7, and the SIP-approved version of Regulation 7.08 to version 4. (1) Regulation 6.09, Standards of Performance for Existing Process Operations Jefferson County’s Regulation 6.09 provides for the control of emissions from existing process operations and includes standards for PM emissions, as well as nitrogen oxides (NOX) emissions. Jefferson County’s March 15, 2018, SIP revision requests that EPA incorporate version 7 of Regulation 6.09 into the SIP. Version 7 amends two sections of Regulation 6.09: Section 1, Applicability, in order to clarify the applicability of this regulation through slightly modified language; and Section 3, Standards for Particulate Matter, in order to eliminate redundancies within that section. Section 1.1 of the current SIPapproved version of Regulation 6.09 states that the provisions of this regulation apply to process operations that were either in existence or had an approved construction permit on or before September 1, 1976. With the amendments in version 7, Jefferson County makes minor edits to clarify that the provisions of this regulation apply to process operations that not only were in existence on or before September 1, 1976, but also to those process operations that had either commenced construction, reconstruction, or a modification by that date. In addition, Jefferson County rewords, for clarification purposes, the part of Section 1.1 that specifies that Regulation 6.09 applies to those process operations not otherwise covered under any other portion of Regulation 6, but the scope, meaning, and applicability of Regulation 6.09 remain the same. Section 3 of the current SIP-approved version of Regulation 6.09 includes specific standards for PM emissions from existing process operations. With the amendments in version 7, Jefferson VerDate Sep<11>2014 16:47 Mar 01, 2019 Jkt 247001 County deletes Sections 3.3 and 3.4 of Regulation 6.09. Section 3.3 contains an opacity standard for PM that limits process operation emissions to 20 percent opacity; and Section 3.4 contains a Mass emission standard for PM that limits process operation emissions to emissions rates provided in Table 1 of Regulation 6.09. Both standards for PM emissions are unnecessary because they are already established under sections 3.1 and 3.2 of Regulation 6.09. By deleting Sections 3.3 and 3.4, Jefferson County is not removing any emissions limit for existing process operations, but is simply removing redundancy in the current SIP-approved version of the regulation. The March 15, 2018, SIP revision does not change the scope or meaning of Regulation 6.09, nor does it modify how the regulation works. These changes are minor and ministerial in nature and help to clean up and clarify the regulation of existing process operations. EPA has made the preliminary determination that the aforementioned changes will not have a negative impact on air quality in the area and is therefore proposing to approve version 7 of Regulation 6.09 into the Jefferson County portion of the Kentucky SIP. (2) Regulation 7.08, Standards of Performance for New Process Operations Like Jefferson County’s Regulation 6.09, Regulation 7.08 provides for the control of emissions from process operations, but these provisions apply to new process operations rather than existing ones. Jefferson County’s March 15, 2018, SIP revision requests that EPA adopt version 4 of Regulation 7.08 into the SIP. Version 4 of Regulation 7.08 makes changes similar to those in version 7 of Regulation 6.09 by amending the two corresponding sections: Section 1, Applicability, in order to clarify the applicability of this regulation through slightly modified language; and Section 3, Standards for Particulate Matter, in order to eliminate redundancies within that section. Section 1 of the current SIP-approved version of Regulation 7.08 states that the provisions of this regulation apply to process operations that commenced construction after September 1, 1976. With the amendments in version 4, Jefferson County clarifies that the provisions of this regulation apply to process operations that not only had commenced construction after September 1, 1976, but also to those that had either commenced modification or reconstruction after this date. As with PO 00000 Frm 00011 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 the changes in Regulation 6.09, Jefferson County also rewords, for clarification purposes, the provision in Section 1 that specifies that this regulation applies to those process operations not otherwise covered under any other portion of Regulation 7, but the scope, meaning, and applicability remain the same. Section 3 of the current SIP-approved version of Regulation 7.08 includes specific standards for PM emissions of new process operations. With the amendments in version 4, Jefferson County deletes Section 3.2, which contains the 20 percent opacity limit for PM from process operation emissions. This opacity standard is unnecessary because it is already established in section 3.1.1 of Regulation 7.08. By deleting Section 3.2, Jefferson County is not removing any emissions limitation for new process operations, but is simply removing a redundancy that exists in the current SIP-approved version of the regulation. Just as with Regulation 6.09 above, the March 15, 2018, SIP revision does not change the meaning or scope of Regulation 7.08, nor does it modify how the regulation works. These changes are minor and ministerial in nature and help to clean up and clarify the regulation of new process operations. EPA has made the preliminary determination that the aforementioned changes will not have a negative impact on air quality in the area and is therefore proposing to approve version 4 of Regulation 7.08 into the Jefferson County portion of the Kentucky SIP. III. Incorporation by Reference In this document, 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, EPA is proposing to incorporate by reference Jefferson County’s Regulation 6.09, Standards of Performance for Existing Process Operations, Version 7, and Regulation 7.08, Standards of Performance for New Process Operations, Version 4, both State effective January 17, 2018. EPA has made, and will continue to make, these materials generally available through www.regulations.gov and at the EPA Region 4 office (please contact the person identified in the ‘‘FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT’’ section of this preamble for more information). IV. Proposed Action EPA is proposing to approve changes to the Jefferson County portion of the Kentucky SIP that were provided to EPA through a letter dated March 15, 2018. Specifically, EPA is proposing to E:\FR\FM\04MRP1.SGM 04MRP1 Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 42 / Monday, March 4, 2019 / Proposed Rules approve the District’s Regulation 6.09 version 7 and Regulation 7.08 version 4. The March 15, 2018, SIP revision makes minor and ministerial changes and is intended to clarify the applicability of these regulations, as well as reduce redundancy in the PM and opacity standards. These rule adoptions do not contravene federal permitting requirements or existing EPA policy, nor will they impact the NAAQS or interfere with any other applicable requirement of the Act. V. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews Under the CAA, the Administrator is required to approve a SIP submission that complies with the provisions of the Act and applicable Federal regulations. See 42 U.S.C. 7410(k); 40 CFR 52.02(a). Thus, in reviewing SIP submissions, EPA’s role is to approve state choices, provided that they meet the criteria of the CAA. 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 Orders 12866 (58 FR 51735, October 4, 1993) and 13563 (76 FR 3821, January 21, 2011); • Is not an Executive Order 13771 (82 FR 9339, February 2, 2017) regulatory action because SIP approvals are exempted 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 VerDate Sep<11>2014 16:47 Mar 01, 2019 Jkt 247001 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). The SIP is not approved to apply on any Indian reservation land or in any other area where EPA or an Indian tribe has demonstrated that a tribe has jurisdiction. In those areas of Indian country, the rule does not have tribal implications as specified by Executive Order 13175 (65 FR 67249, November 9, 2000), nor will it 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, Lead, Nitrogen dioxide, Ozone, Particulate matter, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements, Sulfur oxides, Volatile organic compounds. Authority: 42 U.S.C. 7401 et seq. Dated: February 20, 2019. Mary S. Walker, Acting Regional Administrator, Region 4. [FR Doc. 2019–03851 Filed 3–1–19; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6560–50–P FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION 47 CFR Part 64 [WC Docket Nos. 18–335, 11–39; FCC 19– 12] Truth in Caller ID Federal Communications Commission. ACTION: Proposed rule. AGENCY: In this document, the Commission proposes rules to implement these recently adopted amendments which expand and clarify the Act’s prohibition on the use of misleading and inaccurate caller ID information. Specifically, this document proposes and seeks comment on modifications to the Commission’s current Truth in Caller ID rules that largely track the language of the recent statutory amendments. The document also invites comment on what other changes to our Truth in Caller ID rules the Commission can make to better prevent inaccurate or misleading caller ID information from harming consumers. In doing so, the Commission SUMMARY: PO 00000 Frm 00012 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 7315 takes another significant step in its multi-pronged approach to ending malicious caller ID spoofing. DATES: Comments are due on or before April 3, 2019, and reply comments are due on or before May 3, 2019. ADDRESSES: You may submit comments, identified by WC Docket Nos. 18–335 and 11–39, by any of the following methods: • Federal Communications Commission’s website: https:// apps.fcc.gov/ecfs/. Follow the instructions for submitting comments. • People with Disabilities: Contact the FCC to request reasonable accommodations (accessible format documents, sign language interpreters, CART, etc.) by email: FCC504@fcc.gov or phone: 202–418–0530 or TTY: 202– 418–0432. For detailed instructions for submitting comments and additional information on the rulemaking process, see section III in the SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION section of this document. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Wireline Competition Bureau, Competition Policy Division, Alex Espinoza, at (202) 418–0849, or alex.espinoza@fcc.gov. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: This is a summary of the Commission’s notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM) in WC Docket Nos. 18–335 and 11–39, adopted on February 14, 2019 and released on February 15, 2019. The full text of this document is available for public inspection during regular business hours in the FCC Reference Information Center, Portals II, 445 12th Street SW, Room CY–A257, Washington, DC 20554. It is available on the Commission’s website at https://www.fcc.gov/ document/fcc-seeks-combat-illegalspoofed-texts-international-calls. I. Implementing New Statutory Spoofing Prevention Authority 1. As the Commission did when it initially adopted the Truth in Caller ID Act rules, in proposing rules to implement the recent amendments to section 227(e) of the Act, we largely track the relevant statutory language. We seek comment on our proposals to implement the new statutory language in our rules, generally, and with regard to each specific issue addressed below. A. Communications Originating Outside the United States 2. First, consistent with the recent amendments to section 227(e), we propose to extend the reach of our caller ID spoofing rules to include communications originating from outside the United States to recipients E:\FR\FM\04MRP1.SGM 04MRP1

Agencies

[Federal Register Volume 84, Number 42 (Monday, March 4, 2019)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 7313-7315]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2019-03851]


=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

40 CFR Part 52

[EPA-R04-OAR-2018-0609; FRL-9990-30-Region 4]


Air Plan Approval; Kentucky: Jefferson County Process Operations

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Proposed rule.

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

SUMMARY: The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is proposing to 
approve changes to the Jefferson County portion of the Kentucky State 
Implementation Plan (SIP), submitted by the Commonwealth of Kentucky, 
through the Energy and Environment Cabinet (Cabinet), through a letter 
dated March 15, 2018. The proposed SIP revision was submitted by the 
Cabinet on behalf of the Louisville Metro Air Pollution Control 
District (District) and makes minor ministerial amendments to 
regulations regarding new and existing process operations.

DATES: Comments must be received on or before April 3, 2019.

ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, identified by Docket ID No. EPA-R04-
OAR-2018-0609 at https://www.regulations.gov. Follow the online 
instructions for submitting comments. Once submitted, comments cannot 
be edited or removed from Regulations.gov. EPA may publish any comment 
received to its public docket. Do not submit electronically any 
information you consider to be Confidential Business Information (CBI) 
or other information whose disclosure is restricted by statute. 
Multimedia submissions (audio, video, etc.) must be accompanied by a 
written comment. The written comment is considered the official comment 
and should include discussion of all points you wish to make. 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, the full EPA public comment 
policy, information about CBI or multimedia submissions, and general 
guidance on making effective comments, please visit https://www2.epa.gov/dockets/commenting-epa-dockets.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Andres Febres, Air Regulatory 
Management Section, Air Planning and Implementation Branch, Air, 
Pesticides and Toxics Management Division, U.S. Environmental 
Protection Agency, Region 4, 61 Forsyth Street SW, Atlanta, Georgia 
30303-8960. The telephone number is (404) 562-8966. Mr. Febres can also 
be reached via electronic mail at febres-martinez.andres@epa.gov.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

I. What action is EPA proposing?

    EPA is proposing to approve changes to the Jefferson County portion 
of the Kentucky SIP that were provided to EPA through a letter dated 
March 15, 2018.\1\ EPA is proposing to approve the portions of this SIP 
revision that make changes to the District's Regulation 6.09--Standards 
of Performance for Existing Process Operations, and Regulation 7.08--
Standards of Performance for New Process Operations.\2\ The March 15, 
2018, SIP revision makes minor and ministerial changes that do not 
alter the meaning of these regulations but rather are intended to 
clarify the applicability of these regulations, as well as reduce 
redundancy in the particulate matter (PM) and opacity standards. The 
SIP revision updates the current SIP-approved versions of Regulation 
6.09

[[Page 7314]]

(version 6) and Regulation 7.08 (version 3) to versions 7 and version 
4, respectively. The changes that are being proposed for approval in 
this rulemaking and EPA's rationale for proposing approval are 
described in more detail below.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ EPA notes that the Agency received the SIP revision on March 
23, 2018.
    \2\ EPA also notes that the Agency received several other 
revisions to the Jefferson County portion of the Kentucky SIP 
submitted with the same March 15, 2018, cover letter. EPA will be 
considering action on the remaining revisions in separate actions.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

II. EPA's Analysis of the State Submittal

    As mentioned in Section I of this document, the portion of 
Jefferson County's March 15, 2018, SIP revision that EPA is proposing 
to approve makes changes to two Jefferson County Air Quality 
Regulations. Specifically, the SIP revision updates the SIP-approved 
version of Regulation 6.09 to version 7, and the SIP-approved version 
of Regulation 7.08 to version 4.

(1) Regulation 6.09, Standards of Performance for Existing Process 
Operations

    Jefferson County's Regulation 6.09 provides for the control of 
emissions from existing process operations and includes standards for 
PM emissions, as well as nitrogen oxides (NOX) emissions. 
Jefferson County's March 15, 2018, SIP revision requests that EPA 
incorporate version 7 of Regulation 6.09 into the SIP. Version 7 amends 
two sections of Regulation 6.09: Section 1, Applicability, in order to 
clarify the applicability of this regulation through slightly modified 
language; and Section 3, Standards for Particulate Matter, in order to 
eliminate redundancies within that section.
    Section 1.1 of the current SIP-approved version of Regulation 6.09 
states that the provisions of this regulation apply to process 
operations that were either in existence or had an approved 
construction permit on or before September 1, 1976. With the amendments 
in version 7, Jefferson County makes minor edits to clarify that the 
provisions of this regulation apply to process operations that not only 
were in existence on or before September 1, 1976, but also to those 
process operations that had either commenced construction, 
reconstruction, or a modification by that date. In addition, Jefferson 
County rewords, for clarification purposes, the part of Section 1.1 
that specifies that Regulation 6.09 applies to those process operations 
not otherwise covered under any other portion of Regulation 6, but the 
scope, meaning, and applicability of Regulation 6.09 remain the same.
    Section 3 of the current SIP-approved version of Regulation 6.09 
includes specific standards for PM emissions from existing process 
operations. With the amendments in version 7, Jefferson County deletes 
Sections 3.3 and 3.4 of Regulation 6.09. Section 3.3 contains an 
opacity standard for PM that limits process operation emissions to 20 
percent opacity; and Section 3.4 contains a Mass emission standard for 
PM that limits process operation emissions to emissions rates provided 
in Table 1 of Regulation 6.09. Both standards for PM emissions are 
unnecessary because they are already established under sections 3.1 and 
3.2 of Regulation 6.09. By deleting Sections 3.3 and 3.4, Jefferson 
County is not removing any emissions limit for existing process 
operations, but is simply removing redundancy in the current SIP-
approved version of the regulation.
    The March 15, 2018, SIP revision does not change the scope or 
meaning of Regulation 6.09, nor does it modify how the regulation 
works. These changes are minor and ministerial in nature and help to 
clean up and clarify the regulation of existing process operations. EPA 
has made the preliminary determination that the aforementioned changes 
will not have a negative impact on air quality in the area and is 
therefore proposing to approve version 7 of Regulation 6.09 into the 
Jefferson County portion of the Kentucky SIP.

(2) Regulation 7.08, Standards of Performance for New Process 
Operations

    Like Jefferson County's Regulation 6.09, Regulation 7.08 provides 
for the control of emissions from process operations, but these 
provisions apply to new process operations rather than existing ones. 
Jefferson County's March 15, 2018, SIP revision requests that EPA adopt 
version 4 of Regulation 7.08 into the SIP. Version 4 of Regulation 7.08 
makes changes similar to those in version 7 of Regulation 6.09 by 
amending the two corresponding sections: Section 1, Applicability, in 
order to clarify the applicability of this regulation through slightly 
modified language; and Section 3, Standards for Particulate Matter, in 
order to eliminate redundancies within that section.
    Section 1 of the current SIP-approved version of Regulation 7.08 
states that the provisions of this regulation apply to process 
operations that commenced construction after September 1, 1976. With 
the amendments in version 4, Jefferson County clarifies that the 
provisions of this regulation apply to process operations that not only 
had commenced construction after September 1, 1976, but also to those 
that had either commenced modification or reconstruction after this 
date. As with the changes in Regulation 6.09, Jefferson County also 
rewords, for clarification purposes, the provision in Section 1 that 
specifies that this regulation applies to those process operations not 
otherwise covered under any other portion of Regulation 7, but the 
scope, meaning, and applicability remain the same.
    Section 3 of the current SIP-approved version of Regulation 7.08 
includes specific standards for PM emissions of new process operations. 
With the amendments in version 4, Jefferson County deletes Section 3.2, 
which contains the 20 percent opacity limit for PM from process 
operation emissions. This opacity standard is unnecessary because it is 
already established in section 3.1.1 of Regulation 7.08. By deleting 
Section 3.2, Jefferson County is not removing any emissions limitation 
for new process operations, but is simply removing a redundancy that 
exists in the current SIP-approved version of the regulation.
    Just as with Regulation 6.09 above, the March 15, 2018, SIP 
revision does not change the meaning or scope of Regulation 7.08, nor 
does it modify how the regulation works. These changes are minor and 
ministerial in nature and help to clean up and clarify the regulation 
of new process operations. EPA has made the preliminary determination 
that the aforementioned changes will not have a negative impact on air 
quality in the area and is therefore proposing to approve version 4 of 
Regulation 7.08 into the Jefferson County portion of the Kentucky SIP.

III. Incorporation by Reference

    In this document, 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, EPA is proposing to incorporate by 
reference Jefferson County's Regulation 6.09, Standards of Performance 
for Existing Process Operations, Version 7, and Regulation 7.08, 
Standards of Performance for New Process Operations, Version 4, both 
State effective January 17, 2018. EPA has made, and will continue to 
make, these materials generally available through www.regulations.gov 
and at the EPA Region 4 office (please contact the person identified in 
the ``For Further Information Contact'' section of this preamble for 
more information).

IV. Proposed Action

    EPA is proposing to approve changes to the Jefferson County portion 
of the Kentucky SIP that were provided to EPA through a letter dated 
March 15, 2018. Specifically, EPA is proposing to

[[Page 7315]]

approve the District's Regulation 6.09 version 7 and Regulation 7.08 
version 4. The March 15, 2018, SIP revision makes minor and ministerial 
changes and is intended to clarify the applicability of these 
regulations, as well as reduce redundancy in the PM and opacity 
standards. These rule adoptions do not contravene federal permitting 
requirements or existing EPA policy, nor will they impact the NAAQS or 
interfere with any other applicable requirement of the Act.

V. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews

    Under the CAA, the Administrator is required to approve a SIP 
submission that complies with the provisions of the Act and applicable 
Federal regulations. See 42 U.S.C. 7410(k); 40 CFR 52.02(a). Thus, in 
reviewing SIP submissions, EPA's role is to approve state choices, 
provided that they meet the criteria of the CAA. 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 Orders 12866 (58 
FR 51735, October 4, 1993) and 13563 (76 FR 3821, January 21, 2011);
     Is not an Executive Order 13771 (82 FR 9339, February 2, 
2017) regulatory action because SIP approvals are exempted 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 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).
    The SIP is not approved to apply on any Indian reservation land or 
in any other area where EPA or an Indian tribe has demonstrated that a 
tribe has jurisdiction. In those areas of Indian country, the rule does 
not have tribal implications as specified by Executive Order 13175 (65 
FR 67249, November 9, 2000), nor will it 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, Lead, Nitrogen dioxide, Ozone, Particulate 
matter, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements, Sulfur oxides, 
Volatile organic compounds.

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

    Dated: February 20, 2019.
Mary S. Walker,
Acting Regional Administrator, Region 4.
[FR Doc. 2019-03851 Filed 3-1-19; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.