Air Plan Approval; KY: Jefferson County Performance Tests, 23498-23500 [2020-08666]

Download as PDF 23498 Federal Register / Vol. 85, No. 82 / Tuesday, April 28, 2020 / Proposed Rules proposed rule were published in final form. 4. This proposed rule does not contain policies with Federalism implications as that term is defined in Executive Order 13132. 5. Pursuant to section 1762 of the Export Control Reform Act of 2018 (Title XVII, Subtitle B of Pub. L. 115– 232, 132 Stat. 2208), which was included in the John S. McCain National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2019, this action is exempt from the Administrative Procedure Act (APA) (5 U.S.C. 553) requirements for notice of proposed rulemaking, opportunity for public participation, and delay in effective date. Nonetheless, BIS is providing the public with an opportunity to review and comment on this rule, despite its being exempted from that requirement of the APA. 6. Because a notice of proposed rulemaking and an opportunity for public comment are not required to be given for this rule by 5 U.S.C. 553, or by any other law, the analytical requirements of the Regulatory Flexibility Act, 5 U.S.C. 601, et seq., are not applicable. Accordingly, no regulatory flexibility analysis is required and none has been prepared. List of Subjects in 15 CFR Part 740 Administrative practice and procedure, Exports, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements. Accordingly, 15 CFR part 740 of the EAR (15 CFR parts 730–774) is proposed to be amended as follows: PART 740—[AMENDED] 1. The authority citation for 15 CFR part 740 is revised to read as follows: ■ Authority: 50 U.S.C. 4801–4852; 50 U.S.C. 4601 et seq.; 50 U.S.C. 1701 et seq.; 22 U.S.C. 7201 et seq.; E.O. 13026, 61 FR 58767, 3 CFR, 1996 Comp., p. 228; E.O. 13222, 66 FR 44025, 3 CFR, 2001 Comp., p. 783. 2. Amend § 740.16 by revising paragraph (a)(3) to read as follows: ■ § 740.16 (APR). Additional permissive reexports jbell on DSKJLSW7X2PROD with PROPOSALS * * * * * (a) * * * (3) The reexport is destined to a country in Country Group B that is not also included in Country Group D:2, D:3, or D:4; and the commodity being reexported is both controlled for national security reasons and not VerDate Sep<11>2014 17:22 Apr 27, 2020 Jkt 250001 controlled for export to Country Group A:1. * * * * * Matthew S. Borman, Deputy Assistant Secretary for Export Administration. [FR Doc. 2020–07239 Filed 4–27–20; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 3510–33–P ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY 40 CFR Part 52 [EPA–R04–OAR–2020–0156; FRL–10008– 17-Region 4] Air Plan Approval; KY: Jefferson County Performance Tests 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), Division of Air Quality (DAQ), through a letter dated September 5, 2019. The changes were submitted by the Cabinet on behalf of the Louisville Metro Air Pollution Control District (District, also referred to herein as Jefferson County). The SIP revision includes changes to Jefferson County regulations regarding performance tests. DATES: Comments must be received on or before May 28, 2020. ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, identified by Docket ID No. EPA–R04– OAR–2020–0156 at 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 SUMMARY: PO 00000 Frm 00012 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 submissions, and general guidance on making effective comments, please visit www2.epa.gov/dockets/commentingepa-dockets. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: D. Brad Akers, Air Regulatory Management Section, Air Planning and Implementation Branch, Air and Radiation Division, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Region 4, 61 Forsyth Street SW, Atlanta, Georgia 30303–8960. Mr. Akers can be reached via electronic mail at akers.brad@epa.gov or via telephone at (404) 562–9089. 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 DAQ via a letter dated September 5, 2019.1 EPA is proposing to approve the changes to Jefferson County’s Regulation 1.04, Performance Tests.2 The September 5, 2019, SIP revision first makes minor changes to Regulation 1.04 that do not alter the meaning of the regulation such as clarifying changes to its notification requirements under the SIP. In addition, other changes strengthen the SIP by adding a specific reporting requirement to communicate results from any required performance testing. The SIP revision updates the current SIPapproved version of Regulation 1.04 (Version 6) to Version 7. The changes to this rule and EPA’s rationale for proposing approval are described in more detail in Section II of this notice of proposed rulemaking. II. EPA’s Analysis of the Commonwealth’s Submittal As mentioned in Section I of this proposed action, the September 5, 2019, SIP revision that EPA is proposing to approve makes changes to Jefferson County Air Quality Regulations at Regulation 1.04, Performance Tests. The 1 In 2003, the City of Louisville and Jefferson County governments merged and the ‘‘Jefferson County Air Pollution Control District’’ was renamed the ‘‘Louisville Metro Air Pollution Control District.’’ See The History of Air Pollution Control in Louisville, available at https://louisvilleky.gov/ government/air-pollution-control-district/historyair-pollution-control-louisville. However, each of the regulations in the Jefferson County portion of the Kentucky SIP still has the subheading ‘‘Air Pollution Control District of Jefferson County.’’ Thus, to be consistent with the terminology used in the SIP, we refer throughout this notice to regulations contained in the Jefferson County portion of the Kentucky SIP as the ‘‘Jefferson County’’ regulations. 2 EPA notes that the Agency received several submittals revising the Jefferson County portion of the Kentucky SIP transmitted with the same September 5, 2019, cover letter. EPA will be considering action for these other SIP revisions in separate rulemakings. E:\FR\FM\28APP1.SGM 28APP1 jbell on DSKJLSW7X2PROD with PROPOSALS Federal Register / Vol. 85, No. 82 / Tuesday, April 28, 2020 / Proposed Rules changes to Section 2, Test Requirements, makes several ministerial language changes throughout to include ‘‘the Administrator of the EPA’’ in place of ‘‘EPA’’ 3 and similar minor edits which do not alter the meaning of the regulation. As approved into the SIP before this revision, EPA has a role in approving alternative testing procedures, including changes in methodology or equivalent methods for use. In some instances, the Administrator of the EPA is now included where the provision only referred previously to the District. Specifically, the changes clarify that that EPA has the authority to require or conduct performance testing in addition to the District. Section 2 is then modified to move a noticing requirement ahead of starting testing to Section 3, Testing Notification, to streamline the regulation. This change also results in renumbering of the remainder of Section 2. Section 2 is also modified with additional language under 2.10 to describe the limited circumstances under which a person conducting a test may halt the test in progress. This language allows for halting the test only if: (1) There is a forced shutdown; (2) there is failure of an irreplaceable portion of the sampling train; (3) there are extreme meteorological conditions; or (4) there are unforeseen circumstances beyond the owner’s or operator’s control. Next, halting a test is specifically not allowed for the purpose of adjusting the parameters of the performance test. SIP-approved Section 2.11 already lists items 2.10.1—2.10.3 as potential causes of halting a test run. Therefore, the changes to Section 2.10 are intended to clarify when it is appropriate to halt a test run and when it is not allowed. Importantly, all data, including from halted test runs, is required to be reported in newly added Section 5. EPA proposes that these changes to Section 2 are clarifying and minor in nature. Section 3, Testing Notification, is modified first by reorganizing the section. Section 3.1 is moved from former 3.1.1, and the requirement to submit an intent to test at least 25 working days ahead of the projected start of a performance test is modified to require a test protocol at least 30 calendar days ahead of the projected start. These changes are clarifying and strengthening in nature, requiring a full test protocol—which Jefferson County describes as a site-specific testing plan—rather than an intent to test. Section 3.2 is modified to note that a pre-test conference may be arranged, but is not required. This conference is no longer specifically necessary since Section 3.1 now requires further advance notice of the performance test along with a site-specific testing protocol. Section 3.2 is also changed to remove the requirement that a pre-test ‘‘survey,’’ which was undefined, must accompany the conference. This requirement is superseded with the requirement to submit a protocol under 3.1. Next, Section 3.3 is added to include the 10-day notification of the intent to test to the District that was previously included in Section 2. EPA preliminarily finds these changes to Section 3 to be administrative, minor, and clarifying in nature. Section 4, Notification Waiver, is modified to correct a typographical error, restructure and renumber a provision, and eliminate language which is no longer necessary. The pretest survey previously referenced in Section 4.2 is no longer required by Section 3 and is removed accordingly from the list of items for which notification is waived in the case of an emergency or malfunction. Finally, the September 5, 2019, SIP revision adds Section 5, Test Report, to provide specific instruction on submitting a final test report following the test. Section 5.1 provides that a report shall be submitted within 60 days of the completion of any performance test, and Section 5.2 provides that the report shall include all data, including any data from aborted or rejected test runs and any other specified data in the test protocol. EPA proposes that the submission of a report at the end of a performance test is appropriate for communicating the results of any required testing pursuant to Regulation 1.04, and that the inclusion of Section 5 in the SIP is SIP-strengthening. These rule changes do not change any applicable emissions limitations or relax requirements for affected sources. EPA proposes that the changes serve to strengthen and clarify the SIP. Therefore, 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 1.04 into the Jefferson County portion of the Kentucky SIP. 3 EPA is proposing to approve the SIP revision with the understanding that these provisions referencing the ‘‘Administrator of the EPA’’ include any EPA official with the delegated authority to take the actions described in Section 2. III. Incorporation by Reference In this document, EPA is proposing to include in a final EPA rule regulatory text that includes incorporation by VerDate Sep<11>2014 17:22 Apr 27, 2020 Jkt 250001 PO 00000 Frm 00013 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 23499 reference. In accordance with requirements of 1 CFR 51.5, EPA is proposing to incorporate by reference Jefferson County’s Regulation 1.04, Performance Tests, Version 7, state effective June 19, 2019, which makes minor and ministerial changes for consistent language throughout the regulation and includes a new requirement for submitting reports on the conducted performances tests. 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 included in a September 5, 2019, SIP revision. Specifically, EPA is proposing to approve the District’s Regulation 1.04 Version 7 into the SIP. The September 5, 2019, SIP revision makes minor and ministerial changes for consistent language throughout the regulation and includes a new requirement for submitting reports on the conducted performances tests. EPA believes these changes are consistent with the Clean Air Act (CAA or Act), and this rule adoption will not impact the national ambient air quality standards 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.); E:\FR\FM\28APP1.SGM 28APP1 23500 Federal Register / Vol. 85, No. 82 / Tuesday, April 28, 2020 / Proposed Rules jbell on DSKJLSW7X2PROD with PROPOSALS • 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 (Public Law 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); VerDate Sep<11>2014 17:22 Apr 27, 2020 Jkt 250001 • 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 PO 00000 Frm 00014 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 9990 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, Incorporation by reference, Intergovernmental relations, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements. Authority: 42 U.S.C. 7401 et seq. Mary Walker, Regional Administrator, Region 4. [FR Doc. 2020–08666 Filed 4–27–20; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6560–50–P E:\FR\FM\28APP1.SGM 28APP1

Agencies

[Federal Register Volume 85, Number 82 (Tuesday, April 28, 2020)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 23498-23500]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2020-08666]


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

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

40 CFR Part 52

[EPA-R04-OAR-2020-0156; FRL-10008-17-Region 4]


Air Plan Approval; KY: Jefferson County Performance Tests

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), Division of Air 
Quality (DAQ), through a letter dated September 5, 2019. The changes 
were submitted by the Cabinet on behalf of the Louisville Metro Air 
Pollution Control District (District, also referred to herein as 
Jefferson County). The SIP revision includes changes to Jefferson 
County regulations regarding performance tests.

DATES: Comments must be received on or before May 28, 2020.

ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, identified by Docket ID No. EPA-R04-
OAR-2020-0156 at 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 www2.epa.gov/dockets/commenting-epa-dockets.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: D. Brad Akers, Air Regulatory 
Management Section, Air Planning and Implementation Branch, Air and 
Radiation Division, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Region 4, 61 
Forsyth Street SW, Atlanta, Georgia 30303-8960. Mr. Akers can be 
reached via electronic mail at [email protected] or via telephone at 
(404) 562-9089.

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 DAQ via a letter 
dated September 5, 2019.\1\ EPA is proposing to approve the changes to 
Jefferson County's Regulation 1.04, Performance Tests.\2\ The September 
5, 2019, SIP revision first makes minor changes to Regulation 1.04 that 
do not alter the meaning of the regulation such as clarifying changes 
to its notification requirements under the SIP. In addition, other 
changes strengthen the SIP by adding a specific reporting requirement 
to communicate results from any required performance testing. The SIP 
revision updates the current SIP-approved version of Regulation 1.04 
(Version 6) to Version 7. The changes to this rule and EPA's rationale 
for proposing approval are described in more detail in Section II of 
this notice of proposed rulemaking.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ In 2003, the City of Louisville and Jefferson County 
governments merged and the ``Jefferson County Air Pollution Control 
District'' was renamed the ``Louisville Metro Air Pollution Control 
District.'' See The History of Air Pollution Control in Louisville, 
available at https://louisvilleky.gov/government/air-pollution-control-district/history-air-pollution-control-louisville. However, 
each of the regulations in the Jefferson County portion of the 
Kentucky SIP still has the subheading ``Air Pollution Control 
District of Jefferson County.'' Thus, to be consistent with the 
terminology used in the SIP, we refer throughout this notice to 
regulations contained in the Jefferson County portion of the 
Kentucky SIP as the ``Jefferson County'' regulations.
    \2\ EPA notes that the Agency received several submittals 
revising the Jefferson County portion of the Kentucky SIP 
transmitted with the same September 5, 2019, cover letter. EPA will 
be considering action for these other SIP revisions in separate 
rulemakings.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

II. EPA's Analysis of the Commonwealth's Submittal

    As mentioned in Section I of this proposed action, the September 5, 
2019, SIP revision that EPA is proposing to approve makes changes to 
Jefferson County Air Quality Regulations at Regulation 1.04, 
Performance Tests. The

[[Page 23499]]

changes to Section 2, Test Requirements, makes several ministerial 
language changes throughout to include ``the Administrator of the EPA'' 
in place of ``EPA'' \3\ and similar minor edits which do not alter the 
meaning of the regulation. As approved into the SIP before this 
revision, EPA has a role in approving alternative testing procedures, 
including changes in methodology or equivalent methods for use. In some 
instances, the Administrator of the EPA is now included where the 
provision only referred previously to the District. Specifically, the 
changes clarify that that EPA has the authority to require or conduct 
performance testing in addition to the District. Section 2 is then 
modified to move a noticing requirement ahead of starting testing to 
Section 3, Testing Notification, to streamline the regulation. This 
change also results in renumbering of the remainder of Section 2.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \3\ EPA is proposing to approve the SIP revision with the 
understanding that these provisions referencing the ``Administrator 
of the EPA'' include any EPA official with the delegated authority 
to take the actions described in Section 2.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Section 2 is also modified with additional language under 2.10 to 
describe the limited circumstances under which a person conducting a 
test may halt the test in progress. This language allows for halting 
the test only if: (1) There is a forced shutdown; (2) there is failure 
of an irreplaceable portion of the sampling train; (3) there are 
extreme meteorological conditions; or (4) there are unforeseen 
circumstances beyond the owner's or operator's control. Next, halting a 
test is specifically not allowed for the purpose of adjusting the 
parameters of the performance test. SIP-approved Section 2.11 already 
lists items 2.10.1--2.10.3 as potential causes of halting a test run. 
Therefore, the changes to Section 2.10 are intended to clarify when it 
is appropriate to halt a test run and when it is not allowed. 
Importantly, all data, including from halted test runs, is required to 
be reported in newly added Section 5. EPA proposes that these changes 
to Section 2 are clarifying and minor in nature.
    Section 3, Testing Notification, is modified first by reorganizing 
the section. Section 3.1 is moved from former 3.1.1, and the 
requirement to submit an intent to test at least 25 working days ahead 
of the projected start of a performance test is modified to require a 
test protocol at least 30 calendar days ahead of the projected start. 
These changes are clarifying and strengthening in nature, requiring a 
full test protocol--which Jefferson County describes as a site-specific 
testing plan--rather than an intent to test. Section 3.2 is modified to 
note that a pre-test conference may be arranged, but is not required. 
This conference is no longer specifically necessary since Section 3.1 
now requires further advance notice of the performance test along with 
a site-specific testing protocol. Section 3.2 is also changed to remove 
the requirement that a pre-test ``survey,'' which was undefined, must 
accompany the conference. This requirement is superseded with the 
requirement to submit a protocol under 3.1. Next, Section 3.3 is added 
to include the 10-day notification of the intent to test to the 
District that was previously included in Section 2. EPA preliminarily 
finds these changes to Section 3 to be administrative, minor, and 
clarifying in nature.
    Section 4, Notification Waiver, is modified to correct a 
typographical error, restructure and renumber a provision, and 
eliminate language which is no longer necessary. The pre-test survey 
previously referenced in Section 4.2 is no longer required by Section 3 
and is removed accordingly from the list of items for which 
notification is waived in the case of an emergency or malfunction.
    Finally, the September 5, 2019, SIP revision adds Section 5, Test 
Report, to provide specific instruction on submitting a final test 
report following the test. Section 5.1 provides that a report shall be 
submitted within 60 days of the completion of any performance test, and 
Section 5.2 provides that the report shall include all data, including 
any data from aborted or rejected test runs and any other specified 
data in the test protocol. EPA proposes that the submission of a report 
at the end of a performance test is appropriate for communicating the 
results of any required testing pursuant to Regulation 1.04, and that 
the inclusion of Section 5 in the SIP is SIP-strengthening.
    These rule changes do not change any applicable emissions 
limitations or relax requirements for affected sources. EPA proposes 
that the changes serve to strengthen and clarify the SIP. Therefore, 
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 1.04 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 1.04, Performance Tests, 
Version 7, state effective June 19, 2019, which makes minor and 
ministerial changes for consistent language throughout the regulation 
and includes a new requirement for submitting reports on the conducted 
performances tests. 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 included in a September 5, 2019, SIP revision. 
Specifically, EPA is proposing to approve the District's Regulation 
1.04 Version 7 into the SIP. The September 5, 2019, SIP revision makes 
minor and ministerial changes for consistent language throughout the 
regulation and includes a new requirement for submitting reports on the 
conducted performances tests. EPA believes these changes are consistent 
with the Clean Air Act (CAA or Act), and this rule adoption will not 
impact the national ambient air quality standards 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.);

[[Page 23500]]

     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 (Public Law 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, Incorporation by 
reference, Intergovernmental relations, Reporting and recordkeeping 
requirements.

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

Mary Walker,
Regional Administrator, Region 4.
[FR Doc. 2020-08666 Filed 4-27-20; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.