80 FR 44000 - Approval and Promulgation of Air Quality Implementation Plans; New Mexico; Electronic Reporting Consistent With the Cross Media Electronic Reporting Rule

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

Federal Register Volume 80, Issue 142 (July 24, 2015)

Page Range		44000-44001
FR Document		2015-18097

The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is proposing to approve a State Implementation Plan (SIP) revision submitted by the State of New Mexico. The revision pertains primarily to electronic reporting and would require electronic reporting of documents submitted for compliance with Clean Air Act (CAA) requirements. The revision also includes other changes which are non- substantive and primarily address updates to New Mexico Environment Department (NMED) document viewing locations.

Federal Register, Volume 80 Issue 142 (Friday, July 24, 2015)

[Federal Register Volume 80, Number 142 (Friday, July 24, 2015)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 44000-44001]
From the Federal Register Online  [www.thefederalregister.org]
[FR Doc No: 2015-18097]


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

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

40 CFR Part 52

[EPA-R06-OAR-2015-0172; FRL-9931-08-Region 6]


Approval and Promulgation of Air Quality Implementation Plans; 
New Mexico; Electronic Reporting Consistent With the Cross Media 
Electronic Reporting Rule

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 New Mexico. The revision pertains primarily

[[Page 44001]]

to electronic reporting and would require electronic reporting of 
documents submitted for compliance with Clean Air Act (CAA) 
requirements. The revision also includes other changes which are non-
substantive and primarily address updates to New Mexico Environment 
Department (NMED) document viewing locations.

DATES: Written comments should be received on or before August 24, 
2015.

ADDRESSES: Comments may be mailed to Mr. Guy Donaldson, Chief, Air 
Planning Section (6PD-L), Environmental Protection Agency, 1445 Ross 
Avenue, Suite 1200, Dallas, Texas 75202-2733. Comments may also be 
submitted electronically or through hand delivery/courier by following 
the detailed instructions in the ADDRESSES section of the direct final 
rule located in the rules section of this Federal Register.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Sherry Fuerst, 214-665-6454, 
fuerst.sherry@epa.gov.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: In the final rules section of this Federal 
Register, EPA is approving the State's SIP submittal as a direct rule 
without prior proposal because the Agency views this as 
noncontroversial submittal and anticipates no adverse comments. A 
detailed rationale for the approval is set forth in the direct final 
rule. If no relevant adverse comments are received in response to this 
action no further activity is contemplated. If EPA receives relevant 
adverse comments, the direct final rule will be withdrawn and all 
public comments received will be addressed in a subsequent final rule 
based on this proposed rule. EPA will not institute a second comment 
period. Any parties interested in commenting on this action should do 
so at this time.
    For additional information, see the direct final rule which is 
located in the rules section of this Federal Register.

List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52

    Environmental protection, Air pollution control, Incorporation by 
reference, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements.

    Dated: July 10, 2015.
Ron Curry,
Regional Administrator, Region 6.
[FR Doc. 2015-18097 Filed 7-23-15; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P

44000 Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 142 / Friday, July 24, 2015 / Proposed Rules

compliance, please submit a comment Reform, to minimize litigation, information that may lead to the
(see ADDRESSES) explaining why you eliminate ambiguity, and reduce discovery of a significant environmental
think it qualifies and how and to what burden. impact from this proposed rule.
degree this rule would economically
10. Protection of Children From List of Subjects in 33 CFR Part 147
affect it.
Environmental Health Risks Continental shelf, Marine safety,
The Coast Guard will not retaliate
against small entities that question or We have analyzed this proposed rule Navigation (water).
complain about this proposed rule or under Executive Order 13045, For the reasons discussed in the
any policy or action of the Coast Guard. Protection of Children from preamble, the Coast Guard proposes to
Environmental Health Risks and Safety amend 33 CFR part 147 as follows:
4. Collection of Information Risks. This rule is not an economically
This proposed rule would call for no significant rule and would not create an PART 147—SAFETY ZONES
new collection of information under the environmental risk to health or risk to
Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44 safety that might disproportionately ■ 1. The authority citation for part 147
U.S.C. 3501–3520.). affect children. continues to read as follows:
5. Federalism 11. Indian Tribal Governments Authority: 14 U.S.C. 85; 43 U.S.C. 1333;
and Department of Homeland Security
A rule has implications for federalism This proposed rule does not have Delegation No. 0170.1.
under Executive Order 13132, tribal implications under Executive
■ 2. Add § 147.865 to read as follows:
Federalism, if it has a substantial direct Order 13175, Consultation and
effect on the States, on the relationship Coordination with Indian Tribal § 147.865 Titan SPAR Facility Safety Zone.
between the national government and Governments, because it would not have (a) Description. The Titan SPAR
the States, or on the distribution of a substantial direct effect on one or system is in the deepwater area of the
power and responsibilities among the more Indian tribes, on the relationship Gulf of Mexico at Mississippi Canyon
various levels of government. We have between the Federal Government and 941. The facility is located at 28°02′02″
analyzed this proposed rule under that Indian tribes, or on the distribution of N. 89°06′04″ W. and the area within 500
Order and have determined that it does power and responsibilities between the meters (1640.4 feet) from each point on
not have implications for federalism. Federal Government and Indian tribes. the facility structure’s outer edge is a
6. Protest Activities 12. Energy Effects safety zone.
(b) Regulation. No vessel may enter or
The Coast Guard respects the First We have analyzed this proposed rule
remain in this safety zone except the
Amendment rights of protesters. under Executive Order 13211, Actions
following:
Protesters are asked to contact the Concerning Regulations That
(1) An attending vessel;
person listed in the FOR FURTHER Significantly Affect Energy Supply,
(2) A vessel under 100 feet in length
INFORMATION CONTACT section to Distribution, or Use.
overall not engaged in towing; or
coordinate protest activities so that your 13. Technical Standards (3) A vessel authorized by the
message can be received without Commander, Eighth Coast Guard
jeopardizing the safety or security of This proposed rule does not use
technical standards. Therefore, we did District.
people, places or vessels.
not consider the use of voluntary Dated: June 7, 2015.
7. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act consensus standards. David R. Callahan,
The Unfunded Mandates Reform Act 14. Environment Rear Admiral, U.S. Coast Guard, Commander,
of 1995 (2 U.S.C. 1531–1538) requires Eighth Coast Guard District.
Federal agencies to assess the effects of We have analyzed this proposed rule [FR Doc. 2015–18202 Filed 7–23–15; 8:45 am]
their discretionary regulatory actions. In under Department of Homeland BILLING CODE 9110–04–P
particular, the Act addresses actions Security Management Directive 023–01
that may result in the expenditure by a and Commandant Instruction
State, local, or tribal government, in the M16475.lD, which guide the Coast
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION
aggregate, or by the private sector of Guard in complying with the National
AGENCY
$100,000,000 (adjusted for inflation) or Environmental Policy Act of 1969
more in any one year. Though this (NEPA) 42 U.S.C. 4321–4370f), and have 40 CFR Part 52
proposed rule would not result in such made a preliminary determination that
this action is one of a category of actions [EPA–R06–OAR–2015–0172; FRL–9931–08–
an expenditure, we do discuss the Region 6]
effects of this rule elsewhere in this which do not individually or
preamble. cumulatively have a significant effect on
Approval and Promulgation of Air
the human environment. This proposed
8. Taking of Private Property Quality Implementation Plans; New
rule involves the establishment of a
Mexico; Electronic Reporting
This proposed rule would not cause a safety zone around an OCS facility to
Consistent With the Cross Media
taking of private property or otherwise protect life, property and the marine
Electronic Reporting Rule
have taking implications under environment. This proposed rule is
asabaliauskas on DSK5VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS

Executive Order 12630, Governmental categorical excluded from further AGENCY: Environmental Protection
Actions and Interference with review, under figure 2–1, paragraph Agency (EPA).
Constitutionally Protected Property (34)(g), of the Commandant Instruction. ACTION: Proposed rule.
Rights. A preliminary environmental analysis
checklist supporting this determination SUMMARY: The Environmental Protection
9. Civil Justice Reform and the Categorical Exclusion Agency (EPA) is proposing to approve a
This proposed rule meets applicable Determination are available in the State Implementation Plan (SIP)
standards in sections 3(a) and 3(b)(2) of docket where indicated under revision submitted by the State of New
Executive Order 12988, Civil Justice ADDRESSES. We seek any comments or Mexico. The revision pertains primarily

VerDate Sep<11>2014 16:51 Jul 23, 2015 Jkt 235001 PO 00000 Frm 00032 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\24JYP1.SGM 24JYP1

Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 142 / Friday, July 24, 2015 / Proposed Rules 44001

to electronic reporting and would ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION provided, unless the comment includes
require electronic reporting of AGENCY Confidential Business Information (CBI)
documents submitted for compliance or other information the disclosure of
with Clean Air Act (CAA) requirements. 40 CFR Part 52 which is restricted by statute.
The revision also includes other [EPA–R09–OAR–2015–0257; FRL–9931–04– Information that you consider CBI or
changes which are non-substantive and Region 9] otherwise protected should be clearly
primarily address updates to New identified as such and should not be
Mexico Environment Department Approval of Air Plans; California; submitted through www.regulations.gov
(NMED) document viewing locations. Multiple Districts; Prevention of or email. www.regulations.gov is an
Significant Deterioration ‘‘anonymous access’’ system, and the
DATES: Written comments should be EPA will not know your identity or
received on or before August 24, 2015. AGENCY: Environmental Protection contact information unless you provide
Agency (EPA). it in the body of your comment. If you
ADDRESSES: Comments may be mailed to
ACTION: Proposed rule. send email directly to the EPA, your
Mr. Guy Donaldson, Chief, Air Planning
email address will be automatically
Section (6PD–L), Environmental SUMMARY: The EPA is proposing captured and included as part of the
Protection Agency, 1445 Ross Avenue, approval of five permitting rules public comment. If the EPA cannot read
Suite 1200, Dallas, Texas 75202–2733. submitted for inclusion in the California your comment due to technical
Comments may also be submitted State Implementation Plan (SIP). The difficulties and cannot contact you for
electronically or through hand delivery/ State of California (State) is required clarification, the EPA may not be able to
courier by following the detailed under the Clean Air Act (CAA or Act) consider your comment.
instructions in the ADDRESSES section of to adopt and implement a SIP-approved
the direct final rule located in the rules Prevention of Significant Deterioration Docket: The index to the docket for
(PSD) permit program. This SIP revision this proposed action is available
section of this Federal Register.
proposes to incorporate PSD rules for electronically at www.regulations.gov,
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: five local California air districts into the docket number EPA–R09–OAR–2015–
Sherry Fuerst, 214–665–6454, SIP to establish a PSD permit program 0257, and in hard copy at EPA Region
fuerst.sherry@epa.gov. for pre-construction review of certain IX, 75 Hawthorne Street, San Francisco,
new and modified major stationary California. While all documents in the
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: In the docket are listed in the index, some
final rules section of this Federal sources in attainment and unclassifiable
areas. The local air districts with PSD information may be publicly available
Register, EPA is approving the State’s only at the hard copy location (e.g.,
SIP submittal as a direct rule without rules that are the subject of this proposal
are the Feather River Air Quality copyrighted material), and some may
prior proposal because the Agency not be publicly available in either
Management District (Feather River or
views this as noncontroversial submittal location (e.g., CBI). To inspect the hard
FRAQMD), Great Basin Unified Air
and anticipates no adverse comments. A Pollution Control District (Great Basin copy materials, please schedule an
detailed rationale for the approval is set or GBUAPCD), Butte County Air Quality appointment during normal business
forth in the direct final rule. If no Management District (Butte or hours with the contact listed in the FOR
relevant adverse comments are received BCAQMD), Santa Barbara County Air FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section
in response to this action no further Pollution Control District (Santa Barbara below. Due to building security
activity is contemplated. If EPA receives or SBAPCD), and San Luis Obispo procedures, appointments must be
relevant adverse comments, the direct County Air Pollution Control District scheduled at least 48 hours in advance.
final rule will be withdrawn and all (San Luis Obispo or SLOAPCD)— FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Lisa
public comments received will be collectively, the Districts. We are Beckham, Permits Office (AIR–3), U.S.
addressed in a subsequent final rule soliciting public comment on this Environmental Protection Agency,
based on this proposed rule. EPA will proposal and plan to follow with a final Region IX, (415) 972–3811,
not institute a second comment period. action after consideration of comments beckham.lisa@epa.gov.
Any parties interested in commenting received.
on this action should do so at this time. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
DATES: Any comments must be
submitted no later than August 24, Throughout this document, ‘‘we,’’ ‘‘us’’
For additional information, see the and ‘‘our’’ refer to the EPA.
direct final rule which is located in the 2015.
rules section of this Federal Register. ADDRESSES: Submit comments, Table of Contents
identified by docket number EPA–R09– I. The State’s Submittal
List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52
OAR–2015–0257, by one of the A. What rules did the State submit?
Environmental protection, Air following methods: B. Are there other versions of these rules?
pollution control, Incorporation by 1. Federal eRulemaking Portal: C. What is the purpose of the submitted
www.regulations.gov. Follow the online rules?
reference, Reporting and recordkeeping
instructions. II. The EPA’s Evaluation and Action
requirements. A. How is the EPA evaluating these rules?
2. Email: R9airpermits@epa.gov.
asabaliauskas on DSK5VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS

Dated: July 10, 2015. 3. Mail or deliver: Lisa Beckham (Air– B. Do the rules meet the evaluation
Ron Curry, criteria?
3), U.S. Environmental Protection
C. Significant impact levels and significant
Regional Administrator, Region 6. Agency Region IX, 75 Hawthorne Street, monitoring concentrations for PM2.5.
[FR Doc. 2015–18097 Filed 7–23–15; 8:45 am] San Francisco, CA 94105–3901. D. Greenhouse Gases
BILLING CODE 6560–50–P
Instructions: All comments will be E. Transfer of existing permits issued by
included in the public docket without the EPA
change and may be made available F. Public comment and proposed action
online at www.regulations.gov, III. Incorporation by Reference
including any personal information IV. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews

VerDate Sep<11>2014 16:51 Jul 23, 2015 Jkt 235001 PO 00000 Frm 00033 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\24JYP1.SGM 24JYP1

Document Created: 2018-02-23 09:24:39
Document Modified: 2018-02-23 09:24:39

Category		Regulatory Information
Collection		Federal Register
sudoc Class		AE 2.7: GS 4.107: AE 2.106:
Publisher		Office of the Federal Register, National Archives and Records Administration
Section		Proposed Rules
Action		Proposed rule.
Dates		Written comments should be received on or before August 24, 2015.
Contact		Sherry Fuerst, 214-665-6454, [email protected]
FR Citation		80 FR 44000
CFR Associated		Environmental Protection; Air Pollution Control; Incorporation by Reference and Reporting and Recordkeeping Requirements