80 FR 50248 - Approval and Promulgation of Implementation Plans; Texas; El Paso Particulate Matter Contingency Measures
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY Federal Register Volume 80, Issue 160 (August 19, 2015)
Federal Register Volume 80, Issue 160 (August 19, 2015)
| Page Range | 50248-50250 | |
| FR Document | 2015-20499 |
[Federal Register Volume 80, Number 160 (Wednesday, August 19, 2015)] [Proposed Rules] [Pages 50248-50250] From the Federal Register Online [www.thefederalregister.org] [FR Doc No: 2015-20499] ----------------------------------------------------------------------- ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY 40 CFR Part 52 [EPA-R06-OAR-2012-0205; FRL-9931-37-Region 6] Approval and Promulgation of Implementation Plans; Texas; El Paso Particulate Matter Contingency Measures AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). ACTION: Proposed rule. ----------------------------------------------------------------------- SUMMARY: The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is proposing to approve under the Federal Clean Air Act (CAA) State Implementation Plan (SIP) revisions submitted by the State of Texas. These revisions pertain to contingency measures for particulate matter in the City of El Paso. The affected contingency measures are the paving of alleys and sweeping of streets. DATES: Written comments must be received on or before September 18, 2015. ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, identified by Docket No. EPA-R06-OAR- 2012-0205, by one of the following methods:www.regulations.gov. Follow the online instructions. Email: Jeffrey Riley at [email protected]. Mail or delivery: Mr. Guy Donaldson, Chief, Air Planning Section (6PD-L), Environmental Protection Agency, 1445 Ross Avenue, Suite 1200, Dallas, Texas 75202-2733. Instructions: Direct your comments to Docket ID No. EPA-R06-OAR- 2012-0205. The EPA's policy is that all comments received will be included in the public docket without change and may be made available online at www.regulations.gov, including any personal information provided, unless the comment includes information claimed to be Confidential Business Information (CBI) or other information the disclosure of which is restricted by statute. Do not submit electronically any information that you consider to be CBI or other information whose disclosure is restricted by statute. The www.regulations.gov Web site is an ``anonymous access'' system, which means that the EPA will not know your identity or contact information unless you provide it in the body of your comment. If you send an email comment directly to the EPA without going through www.regulations.gov, your email address will be automatically captured and included as part of the comment that is placed in the public docket and made available on the Internet. If you submit an electronic comment, the EPA recommends that you include your name and other contact information in the body of your comment along with any disk or CD-ROM submitted. If the EPA cannot read your comment due to technical difficulties and cannot contact you for clarification, the EPA may not be able to consider your comment. Electronic files should avoid the use of special characters and any form of encryption and should be free of any defects or viruses. 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 information on submitting comments, please visit http://www2.epa.gov/dockets/commenting-epa-dockets. Docket: The index to the docket for this action is available electronically at www.regulations.gov and in hard copy at EPA Region 6, 1445 Ross Avenue, Suite 700, Dallas, Texas. While all documents in the docket are listed in the index, some information may be publicly available only at the hard copy location (e.g., copyrighted material), and some may not be publicly available at either location (e.g., CBI). FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Jeffrey Riley, 214-665-8542, [email protected]. To inspect the hard copy materials, please schedule an appointment with Mr. Riley or Mr. Bill Deese at 214-665- 7253. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Throughout this document wherever ``we'', ``us'', or ``our'' is used, we mean the EPA. I. Background A. El Paso PM10 History Under the 1990 CAA Amendments, the City of El Paso, Texas was designated by operation of law as nonattainment of the 1987 National Ambient Air Quality Standard (NAAQS) for particulate matter (PM) with an aerodynamic diameter less than or equal to a nominal ten micrometers (PM 10 ) and classified as a moderate nonattainment area. The EPA approved on January 18, 1994 at 59 FR 02532, the El Paso PM10 Attainment Demonstration SIP revision. The SIP included, among other things, PM control measures and a Memorandum of Understanding between the City of El Paso and the State of Texas (MOU). The EPA approved three types of PM control measures as contingency measures because they went beyond reasonably available control measures and were not relied upon to show attainment or reasonable further progress (RFP). The three types of PM control measures approved as contingency measures were prescribed burning, residential burning, and fugitive dust control measures. The fugitive dust measures include not only controls for roads, streets, alleys, [[Page 50249]] parking lots, construction and demolition sites, and materials handling, but also a requirement that existing unpaved alleys be paved at a rate of 15 miles per year and mechanical sweepers remove soil from roads four times per year in the city limits and six times per week in the central business district. The SIP MOU between the City of El Paso and the State of Texas outlines the responsibilities and regulatory requirements for both parties in implementing the dust control methods. B. Texas' Submittals On March 7, 2012, the Texas Commission on Environmental Quality (TCEQ) submitted revisions to remove the requirement to pave alleys at the rate of 15 miles per year, and replace it with the following requirements: (1) All new alleys must be paved; (2) unpaved alleys cannot be used for residential garbage and recycling collection; and (3) recycled asphalt product (RAP) may be used as an alternate means of control for unpaved alleys. The revisions also changed the street sweeping frequency requirement from four times per year to three times per year in the city limits and from six times per week to four times per week in the central business district. TCEQ provided supplemental information dated December 3, 2014 updating the unpaved alleys inventory between 2010 through 2014. II. The EPA's Evaluation Section 110(l) of the CAA states that the EPA cannot approve a SIP revision if the revision would interfere with any applicable requirement concerning attainment and RFP, or any other applicable requirement of the CAA. Contingency Measures are a required element of an attainment demonstration, to be implemented if the area fails to attain. In this case, the City implemented early the contingency measures for paving of alleys and street sweeping on an on-going basis since 1991, even though not required by the EPA. Implementation of these measures has continued even after the 1994 attainment date. To demonstrate noninterference, Texas provided a qualitative analysis of the emission reductions achieved by these measures coupled with evaluation of air quality data to show that the level of emissions provided for by the revised early implemented contingency measures would not interfere with attainment or RFP. At the time of the EPA's approval of the paving of alleys as a contingency measure, there were an estimated 89 miles of unpaved alleys, and all unpaved roads in the city of El Paso were required to be paved in order to reduce this source category's projected 1994 PM10 emissions by 0.5 percent. The State documents that the inventory of unpaved alleys in El Paso has decreased from 66% of total alley miles in 1991, to 16% of total alley miles in 2010, with approximately 23 miles of unpaved alleys remaining. The supplemental information provided to the EPA shows that between 2010 through 2014, the percentage of unpaved alleys has continued to decrease to 13% of the total inventory, with approximately 17 miles of unpaved alleys remaining. A total of 72 alley miles have been paved, the estimated emissions reductions for 1994 were met in 1994, and emissions reductions continued after that date. In the SIP submittal, the City commits to continue paving alleys. The additional compliance option of using RAP as a paving material helps ensure continued reduction of the inventory of uncontrolled alleys. The EPA agrees that RAP can be effective in suppressing dust. The overall inventory of unpaved alleys in El Paso has continued to decrease, and thereby further reductions in PM10 levels have occurred well beyond the decrease in inventory of unpaved alleys approved as the contingency measures. Furthermore, there will be no increase in unpaved alleys because the SIP revision requires that all new alleys be paved. As a practical matter, the EPA recognizes that a rate of 15 miles of paving per year could not be maintained unless the City were to create unpaved alleys in order to pave them. As additional support for the change to the rate of paving of alleys, the submitted revision prohibits garbage collection in unpaved alleys; the City since 1997 stopped garbage collection in paved and unpaved alleys. The significant paving progress, the requirement to pave new alleys, and prohibition of garbage collection in alleys have reduced the overall amount of fugitive dust in the El Paso area. In the SIP submittal, the City commits to continue sweeping on a different schedule. Because the emissions reductions from paving and street sweeping are from already-implemented contingency measures, thus above what was needed to show attainment, and the reductions continue, the PM reductions from these measures are above and beyond what is required to show continued maintenance of the NAAQS. The State's submittal also relied upon ambient monitoring data for the years 2007 through 2009 to demonstrate there will be no interference with attainment. The El Paso area continues to monitor attainment of the PM10 NAAQS based on data for all three years from 2011 through 2013. See the TSD for additional information on the monitoring data. Because the fugitive dust controls are early implemented contingency measures, they were not relied upon for demonstrating attainment or RFP; paving of new alleys is required; the inventory of pre-existing unpaved alleys has been reduced from 66% of total alleys to 13%; and paving continues using the effective RAP, the EPA finds that the SIP revision will not interfere with the area's ability to continue to attain or maintain the affected NAAQS or other CAA requirements. III. Proposed Action We are proposing to approve revisions to the Texas SIP that pertain to changes to the PM10 contingency measures in the City of El Paso. The State's revisions submitted on March 7, 2012 amend rule 30 TAC Sec. 111.147(1)(E) by removing the requirement to pave alleys at the rate of 15 miles/year, and replace it with the following requirements: (1) All new alleys must be paved; (2) Alleys may not be used for trash pickup; and (3) The use of recycled asphalt product as defined in Sec. 111.145 and Sec. 111.147(1) may be used as an alternate means of particulate matter control for alleys. We also are proposing to approve 30 TAC Sec. 111.145 and Sec. 111.147(1) that define RAP, and 30 TAC Sec. 111.147(2) that changes the sweeping frequency requirement from four to three time per year in the city limits and from six to four times per week in the El Paso central business district. We have evaluated the State's submittals and have determined that they meet the applicable requirements of the Clean Air Act and EPA regulations, and are consistent with EPA policy. IV. Incorporation by Reference In this action, we are proposing to include in a final rule regulatory text that includes incorporation by reference. In accordance with the requirements of 1 CFR 51.5, we are proposing to incorporate by reference revisions to the Texas regulations as described in the Proposed Action section above. We have made, and will continue to make, these documents generally available electronically through www.regulations.gov and/or in hard copy at the EPA Region 6 office. [[Page 50250]] 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. 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 CAA. Accordingly, 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 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); 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 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 proposed 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, Incorporation by reference, Particulate matter, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements. Authority: 42 U.S.C. 7401 et seq. Dated: August 5, 2015. Ron Curry, Regional Administrator, Region 6. [FR Doc. 2015-20499 Filed 8-18-15; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6560-50-P
![50248 Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 160 / Wednesday, August 19, 2015 / Proposed Rules
in the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act ACTION: Proposed rule. and should be free of any defects or
of 1995 (Pub. L. 104–4); viruses. Multimedia submissions (audio,
• Does not have Federalism SUMMARY: The Environmental Protection video, etc.) must be accompanied by a
implications as specified in Executive Agency (EPA) is proposing to approve written comment. The written comment
Order 13132 (64 FR 43255, August 10, under the Federal Clean Air Act (CAA) is considered the official comment and
1999); State Implementation Plan (SIP) should include discussion of all points
• Is not an economically significant revisions submitted by the State of you wish to make. The EPA will
regulatory action based on health or Texas. These revisions pertain to generally not consider comments or
safety risks subject to Executive Order contingency measures for particulate comment contents located outside of the
13045 (62 FR 19885, April 23, 1997); matter in the City of El Paso. The primary submission (i.e. on the web,
• Is not a significant regulatory action affected contingency measures are the cloud, or other file sharing system). For
subject to Executive Order 13211 (66 FR paving of alleys and sweeping of streets. additional information on submitting
28355, May 22, 2001); DATES: Written comments must be comments, please visit http://
• Is not subject to requirements of received on or before September 18, www2.epa.gov/dockets/commenting-
section 12(d) of the National 2015. epa-dockets.
Technology Transfer and Advancement Docket: The index to the docket for
Act of 1995 (15 U.S.C. 272 note) because ADDRESSES: Submit your comments,
this action is available electronically at
application of those requirements would identified by Docket No. EPA–R06–
www.regulations.gov and in hard copy
be inconsistent with the CAA; and OAR–2012–0205, by one of the
at EPA Region 6, 1445 Ross Avenue,
• Does not provide EPA with the following methods:
Suite 700, Dallas, Texas. While all
discretionary authority to address, as • www.regulations.gov. Follow the
documents in the docket are listed in
appropriate, disproportionate human online instructions.
the index, some information may be
health or environmental effects, using • Email: Jeffrey Riley at riley.jeffrey@
publicly available only at the hard copy
practicable and legally permissible epa.gov.
location (e.g., copyrighted material), and
methods, under Executive Order 12898 • Mail or delivery: Mr. Guy
some may not be publicly available at
(59 FR 7629, February 16, 1994). Donaldson, Chief, Air Planning Section
either location (e.g., CBI).
In addition, the SIP is not approved (6PD–L), Environmental Protection
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
to apply on any Indian reservation land Agency, 1445 Ross Avenue, Suite 1200,
Dallas, Texas 75202–2733. Jeffrey Riley, 214–665–8542,
or in any other area where EPA or an
Instructions: Direct your comments to riley.jeffrey@epa.gov. To inspect the
Indian tribe has demonstrated that a
Docket ID No. EPA–R06–OAR–2012– hard copy materials, please schedule an
tribe has jurisdiction. In those areas of
0205. The EPA’s policy is that all appointment with Mr. Riley or Mr. Bill
Indian country, the proposed rule does
comments received will be included in Deese at 214–665–7253.
not have tribal implications and will not
impose substantial direct costs on tribal the public docket without change and SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
governments or preempt tribal law as may be made available online at Throughout this document wherever
specified by Executive Order 13175 (65 www.regulations.gov, including any ‘‘we’’, ‘‘us’’, or ‘‘our’’ is used, we mean
FR 67249, November 9, 2000). personal information provided, unless the EPA.
the comment includes information I. Background
List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52 claimed to be Confidential Business
Environmental protection, Air Information (CBI) or other information A. El Paso PM10 History
pollution control, Carbon monoxide, the disclosure of which is restricted by Under the 1990 CAA Amendments,
Incorporation by reference, statute. Do not submit electronically any the City of El Paso, Texas was
Intergovernmental relations, Lead, information that you consider to be CBI designated by operation of law as
Nitrogen dioxide, Ozone, Particulate or other information whose disclosure is nonattainment of the 1987 National
matter, Reporting and recordkeeping restricted by statute. The Ambient Air Quality Standard (NAAQS)
requirements, Sulfur oxides, and www.regulations.gov Web site is an for particulate matter (PM) with an
Volatile organic compounds. ‘‘anonymous access’’ system, which aerodynamic diameter less than or equal
Authority: 42 U.S.C. 7401 et seq. means that the EPA will not know your to a nominal ten micrometers (PM10)
identity or contact information unless and classified as a moderate
Dated: August 5, 2015.
you provide it in the body of your nonattainment area. The EPA approved
Ron Curry,
comment. If you send an email on January 18, 1994 at 59 FR 02532, the
Regional Administrator, Region 6. comment directly to the EPA without El Paso PM10 Attainment Demonstration
[FR Doc. 2015–20504 Filed 8–18–15; 8:45 am] going through www.regulations.gov, SIP revision. The SIP included, among
BILLING CODE 6560–50–P your email address will be other things, PM control measures and
automatically captured and included as a Memorandum of Understanding
part of the comment that is placed in the between the City of El Paso and the
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION public docket and made available on the State of Texas (MOU). The EPA
AGENCY Internet. If you submit an electronic approved three types of PM control
40 CFR Part 52 comment, the EPA recommends that measures as contingency measures
you include your name and other because they went beyond reasonably
[EPA–R06–OAR–2012–0205; FRL–9931–37– contact information in the body of your available control measures and were not
rmajette on DSK2VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
Region 6] comment along with any disk or CD– relied upon to show attainment or
ROM submitted. If the EPA cannot read reasonable further progress (RFP). The
Approval and Promulgation of
your comment due to technical three types of PM control measures
Implementation Plans; Texas; El Paso
difficulties and cannot contact you for approved as contingency measures were
Particulate Matter Contingency
clarification, the EPA may not be able to prescribed burning, residential burning,
Measures
consider your comment. Electronic files and fugitive dust control measures. The
AGENCY: Environmental Protection should avoid the use of special fugitive dust measures include not only
Agency (EPA). characters and any form of encryption controls for roads, streets, alleys,
VerDate Sep<11>2014 15:11 Aug 18, 2015 Jkt 235001 PO 00000 Frm 00024 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\19AUP1.SGM 19AUP1](https://thefederalregister.org/doc/80_FR_50408/page/1.svg)
![50250 Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 160 / Wednesday, August 19, 2015 / Proposed Rules
V. Statutory and Executive Order governments or preempt tribal law as If you need to include CBI as part of
Reviews specified by Executive Order 13175 (65 your comment, please visit http://
Under the CAA, the Administrator is FR 67249, November 9, 2000). www.epa.gov/dockets/comments.html
required to approve a SIP submission for instructions. Multimedia
List of Subjects in 40 CFR part 52
that complies with the provisions of the submissions (audio, video, etc.) must be
Environmental protection, Air accompanied by a written comment.
Act and applicable Federal regulations.
pollution control, Incorporation by The written comment is considered the
42 U.S.C. 7410(k); 40 CFR 52.02(a).
reference, Particulate matter, Reporting official comment and should include
Thus, in reviewing SIP submissions, the
and recordkeeping requirements. discussion of all points you wish to
EPA’s role is to approve state choices,
provided that they meet the criteria of Authority: 42 U.S.C. 7401 et seq. make. For additional submission
the CAA. Accordingly, this action methods, the full EPA public comment
Dated: August 5, 2015.
merely proposes to approve state law as policy, and general guidance on making
Ron Curry, effective comments, please visit http://
meeting Federal requirements and does Regional Administrator, Region 6.
not impose additional requirements www.epa.gov/dockets/comments.html.
[FR Doc. 2015–20499 Filed 8–18–15; 8:45 am] FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: For
beyond those imposed by state law. For
that reason, this action:
BILLING CODE 6560–50–P technical information, contact Greg
• Is not a ‘‘significant regulatory Nizich, Air Quality Policy Division,
action’’ subject to review by the Office Office of Air Quality Planning and
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION Standards (C504–03), Environmental
of Management and Budget under AGENCY
Executive Orders 12866 (58 FR 51735, Protection Agency, Research Triangle
October 4, 1993) and 13563 (76 FR 3821, 40 CFR Part 56 Park, North Carolina 27711; telephone
January 21, 2011); number (919) 541–3078; fax number
• Does not impose an information [EPA–HQ–OAR–2014–0616; FRL–9929–98– (919) 541–5509; email address:
collection burden under the provisions OAR] nizich.greg@epa.gov.
of the Paperwork Reduction Act (44 RIN 2060–AS53
To request a public hearing or
U.S.C. 3501 et seq.); information pertaining to a public
• Is certified as not having a Amendments to Regional Consistency hearing on this document, contact Ms.
significant economic impact on a Regulations Pamela Long, Air Quality Policy
substantial number of small entities Division, Office of Air Quality Planning
under the Regulatory Flexibility Act (5 AGENCY: Environmental Protection and Standards (C504–01),
U.S.C. 601 et seq.); Agency (EPA). Environmental Protection Agency,
• Does not contain any unfunded ACTION: Proposed rule. Research Triangle Park, North Carolina
mandate or significantly or uniquely 27711; telephone number (919) 541–
SUMMARY: The U.S. Environmental 0641; fax number (919) 541–5509; email
affect small governments, as described
Protection Agency (EPA) is proposing to address: long.pam@epa.gov.
in the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act
revise its Regional Consistency SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
of 1995 (Pub. L. 104–4);
regulations to ensure the EPA has the
• Does not have Federalism Regulated entities. The Administrator
flexibility necessary to implement Clean determined that this action is subject to
implications as specified in Executive
Air Act (CAA or Act) programs on a the provisions of CAA section 307(d).
Order 13132 (64 FR 43255, August 10,
national scale while addressing court See CAA section 307(d)(1)(V) (the
1999);
rulings that concern certain agency
• Is not an economically significant provisions of CAA section 307(d) apply
actions under the Act. In addition, the to ‘‘such other actions as the
regulatory action based on health or
proposed revisions would help to foster Administrator may determine). These
safety risks subject to Executive Order
overall fairness and predictability are amendments to existing regulations
13045 (62 FR 19885, April 23, 1997);
• Is not a significant regulatory action regarding the scope and impact of and could affect your facility if it is the
subject to Executive Order 13211 (66 FR judicial decisions under the CAA. subject of a CAA-related ruling by a
28355, May 22, 2001); DATES: Comments must be received on federal court.
• Is not subject to requirements of or before October 19, 2015. The information in this
section 12(d) of the National Public hearing. If requested by SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION section of
Technology Transfer and Advancement September 3, 2015, then we will hold a this preamble is organized as follows:
Act of 1995 (15 U.S.C. 272 note) because public hearing. Additional information I. General Information
application of those requirements would about the hearing, if requested, will be A. Does this action apply to me?
be inconsistent with the CAA; and published in a subsequent Federal B. What should I consider as I prepare my
• Does not provide the EPA with the Register document. comments for the EPA?
discretionary authority to address, as ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, C. Where can I get a copy of this document
and other related information?
appropriate, disproportionate human identified by Docket ID No. EPA–HQ– D. How can I find information about a
health or environmental effects, using OAR–2014–0616, to the Federal possible public hearing?
practicable and legally permissible eRulemaking Portal: http:// E. What acronyms, abbreviations and units
methods, under Executive Order 12898 www.regulations.gov. Follow the online are used in this preamble?
(59 FR 7629, February 16, 1994). instructions for submitting comments. II. Purpose
rmajette on DSK2VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
In addition, the SIP is not approved Once submitted, comments cannot be III. Background
to apply on any Indian reservation land edited or withdrawn. The EPA may A. Purpose of the Regional Consistency
or in any other area where the EPA or publish any comment received to its Regulations
B. Establishing the Regional Consistency
an Indian tribe has demonstrated that a public docket. Do not submit Regulations
tribe has jurisdiction. In those areas of electronically any information you C. Reasons for Revising the Regional
Indian country, the proposed rule does consider to be Confidential Business Consistency Regulations
not have tribal implications and will not Information (CBI) or other information IV. Proposed Revisions to the Regional
impose substantial direct costs on tribal whose disclosure is restricted by statute. Consistency Rule
VerDate Sep<11>2014 15:11 Aug 18, 2015 Jkt 235001 PO 00000 Frm 00026 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\19AUP1.SGM 19AUP1](https://thefederalregister.org/doc/80_FR_50408/page/3.svg)
Document Created: 2015-12-15 11:58:56
Document Modified: 2015-12-15 11:58:56
| 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 must be received on or before September 18, 2015. | |
| Contact | Jeffrey Riley, 214-665-8542, [email protected] To inspect the hard copy materials, please schedule an appointment with Mr. Riley or Mr. Bill Deese at 214-665- 7253. | |
| FR Citation | 80 FR 50248 | |
| CFR Associated | Environmental Protection; Air Pollution Control; Incorporation by Reference; Particulate Matter and Reporting and Recordkeeping Requirements |
2024 Federal Register | Disclaimer | Privacy Policy
USC | CFR | eCFR