40 CFR - Title 40—Protection of Environment

This regulation establishes a tolerance for residues of acibenzolar- S -methyl in or on berry, low growing, subgroup 13-07G. The Interregional Research Project No. 4 (IR-4) requested the tolerance under the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act (FFDCA).

EPA is promulgating significant new use rules (SNURs) under the Toxic Substances Control Act (TSCA) for 17 chemical substances which were the subject of premanufacture notices (PMNs). Two of these chemical substances are subject to TSCA consent orders issued by EPA. This action requires persons who intend to manufacture, import, or process any of these 17 chemical substances for an activity that is designated as a significant new use by this rule to notify EPA at least 90 days before commencing that activity. The required notification will provide EPA with the opportunity to evaluate the intended use and, if necessary, to prohibit or limit that activity before it occurs.

EPA is taking final action to approve a revision to the California State Implementation Plan (SIP) submitted by the California Air Resources Board (CARB or Board). This revision concerns two regulations that reduce emissions of diesel particulate matter (PM), oxides of nitrogen (NO X ), and other pollutants from in-use, heavy-duty diesel-fueled trucks and buses, and drayage trucks. EPA is approving this SIP revision because the Agency has determined that the regulations are consistent with the relevant Clean Air Act requirements, policies and guidance. Final approval of the two regulations and incorporation of them into the California SIP makes them federally enforceable.

EPA is making two determinations regarding the Philadelphia-Wilmington-Atlantic City, PA-NJ-MD-DE 8-hour ozone moderate nonattainment area (the Philadelphia Area). First, EPA is determining that the Philadelphia Area has attained the 1997 8-hour ozone National Ambient Air Quality Standard (NAAQS). This determination is based upon complete, quality assured, and certified ambient air monitoring data that show the area has monitored attainment of the 1997 8-hour ozone NAAQS for the 2008-2010 monitoring period. In accordance with EPA's applicable ozone implementation rule, this clean data determination suspends the requirement for the Philadelphia Area to submit an attainment demonstration, reasonably available control measures (RACM), a reasonable further progress (RFP) plan and contingency measures related to attainment of the 1997 8-hours ozone NAAQS. These requirements shall be suspended for so long as the area continues to attain the 1997 8-hour ozone NAAQS. Second, EPA is determining that the Philadelphia Area has attained the 1997 8-hour ozone NAAQS by its attainment date of June 15, 2011. These actions are being taken under the Clean Air Act (CAA).

EPA is approving revisions to the Puerto Rico Regulations for the Control of Atmospheric Pollution, submitted to EPA by the Puerto Rico Environmental Quality Board on July 13, 2011. This action approves revisions to Rules 102, 111, 115, 116, 609 and Appendix A. Generally the revisions to the regulations involve administrative changes which improve the clarity of the rules contained in the Commonwealth's Implementation Plan and Operating Permits Program. They do not change the emission limitations nor add significant new requirements.

The EPA issued “Revisions to Final Response to Petition From New Jersey Regarding SO 2 Emissions From the Portland Generating Station” as a direct final rule on December 22, 2011. Because the EPA received an adverse comment to the parallel proposal issued under the same name on December 22, 2011, we are withdrawing the direct final rule amendments to “Revisions to Final Response to Petition From New Jersey Regarding SO 2 Emissions From the Portland Generating Station” published in the Federal Register on December 22, 2011.

The EPA is promulgating full approval of the Title V Operating Permits Program submitted by the Southern Ute Indian Tribe (Tribe). The Tribe's Title V Operating Permit Program (Title V Program) was submitted for the purpose of administering a tribal program for issuing operating permits to all major stationary sources, and certain other sources on the Southern Ute Indian Reservation (Reservation).

Oklahoma has applied to the EPA for Final authorization of the changes to its hazardous waste program under the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA). EPA has determined that these changes satisfy all requirements needed to qualify for Final authorization, and is authorizing the State's changes through this immediate final action. The EPA is publishing this rule to authorize the changes without a prior proposal because we believe this action is not controversial and do not expect comments that oppose it. Unless we receive written comments which oppose this authorization during the comment period, the decision to authorize Oklahoma's changes to its hazardous waste program will take effect. If we receive comments that oppose this action, we will publish a document in the Federal Register withdrawing this rule before it takes effect, and a separate document in the proposed rules section of this Federal Register will serve as a proposal to authorize the changes.

Due to an adverse comment, EPA is withdrawing the direct final rule, published on January 23, 2012 (77 FR 3147), that made two determinations regarding the Philadelphia-Wilmington fine particulate (PM 2.5 ) nonattainment area (the Philadelphia Area), which is comprised of the New Castle County in Delaware; Burlington, Camden, and Gloucester Counties in New Jersey; and Bucks, Chester, Delaware, Montgomery, and Philadelphia Counties in Pennsylvania. First, EPA made a determination that the Philadelphia Area attained the 1997 annual PM 2.5 national ambient air quality standard (NAAQS) by its attainment date of April 5, 2010. Second, EPA made a clean data determination, finding that the Philadelphia Area has attained the 1997 PM 2.5 NAAQS, based on quality assured and certified ambient air monitoring data for the 2007-2009 and 2008-2010 monitoring periods. In the direct final rule, EPA stated that if we received adverse comment by February 22, 2012, the rule would be withdrawn and not take effect. EPA subsequently received adverse comments. EPA will address the comments received in a subsequent final action based upon the proposed action also published on January 23, 2012 (77 FR 3223). EPA will not institute a second comment period on this action.

The Council on Environmental Quality (CEQ) is issuing its final guidance on Improving the Process for Preparing Efficient and Timely Environmental Reviews under the National Environmental Policy Act. The National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) and CEQ Regulations implementing NEPA provide numerous techniques for preparing efficient and timely environmental reviews. CEQ is issuing this guidance for Federal departments and agencies to emphasize and clarify that these techniques are available for all NEPA Environmental Assessments and Environmental Impact Statements. These techniques are consistent with a thorough and meaningful environmental review and agencies using these techniques should keep in mind the following basic principles: NEPA encourages straightforward and concise reviews and documentation that are proportionate to potential impacts and effectively convey the relevant considerations in a timely manner to the public and decision makers, while rigorously addressing the issues presented; NEPA shall be integrated into project planning to ensure planning and decisions reflect environmental considerations, avoid delays later in the process, and anticipate and attempt to resolve issues, rather than be an after-the-fact process that justifies decisions already made; NEPA reviews should coordinate and take appropriate advantage of existing documents and studies, including through adoption and incorporation by reference; early and well-defined scoping can assist in focusing environmental reviews on appropriate issues that would be meaningful to a decision on the proposed action; agencies are encouraged to develop meaningful, predictable, and expeditious timelines for environmental reviews; and agencies should respond to comments in proportion to the scope and scale of the environmental issues raised. This guidance applies equally to the preparation of an Environmental Assessment or an Environmental Impact Statement consistent with legal precedent and agency NEPA experience and practice. This guidance does not change or substitute for any law, regulations, or any other legally binding requirement. It does provide CEQ's interpretation of existing regulations promulgated under NEPA.

The Council on Environmental Quality (CEQ) is issuing its final guidance on Improving the Process for Preparing Efficient and Timely Environmental Reviews under the National Environmental Policy Act. The National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) and CEQ Regulations implementing NEPA provide numerous techniques for preparing efficient and timely environmental reviews. CEQ is issuing this guidance for Federal departments and agencies to emphasize and clarify that these techniques are available for all NEPA Environmental Assessments and Environmental Impact Statements. These techniques are consistent with a thorough and meaningful environmental review and agencies using these techniques should keep in mind the following basic principles: NEPA encourages straightforward and concise reviews and documentation that are proportionate to potential impacts and effectively convey the relevant considerations in a timely manner to the public and decision makers, while rigorously addressing the issues presented; NEPA shall be integrated into project planning to ensure planning and decisions reflect environmental considerations, avoid delays later in the process, and anticipate and attempt to resolve issues, rather than be an after-the-fact process that justifies decisions already made; NEPA reviews should coordinate and take appropriate advantage of existing documents and studies, including through adoption and incorporation by reference; early and well-defined scoping can assist in focusing environmental reviews on appropriate issues that would be meaningful to a decision on the proposed action; agencies are encouraged to develop meaningful, predictable, and expeditious timelines for environmental reviews; and agencies should respond to comments in proportion to the scope and scale of the environmental issues raised. This guidance applies equally to the preparation of an Environmental Assessment or an Environmental Impact Statement consistent with legal precedent and agency NEPA experience and practice. This guidance does not change or substitute for any law, regulations, or any other legally binding requirement. It does provide CEQ's interpretation of existing regulations promulgated under NEPA.

The Council on Environmental Quality (CEQ) is issuing its final guidance on Improving the Process for Preparing Efficient and Timely Environmental Reviews under the National Environmental Policy Act. The National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) and CEQ Regulations implementing NEPA provide numerous techniques for preparing efficient and timely environmental reviews. CEQ is issuing this guidance for Federal departments and agencies to emphasize and clarify that these techniques are available for all NEPA Environmental Assessments and Environmental Impact Statements. These techniques are consistent with a thorough and meaningful environmental review and agencies using these techniques should keep in mind the following basic principles: NEPA encourages straightforward and concise reviews and documentation that are proportionate to potential impacts and effectively convey the relevant considerations in a timely manner to the public and decision makers, while rigorously addressing the issues presented; NEPA shall be integrated into project planning to ensure planning and decisions reflect environmental considerations, avoid delays later in the process, and anticipate and attempt to resolve issues, rather than be an after-the-fact process that justifies decisions already made; NEPA reviews should coordinate and take appropriate advantage of existing documents and studies, including through adoption and incorporation by reference; early and well-defined scoping can assist in focusing environmental reviews on appropriate issues that would be meaningful to a decision on the proposed action; agencies are encouraged to develop meaningful, predictable, and expeditious timelines for environmental reviews; and agencies should respond to comments in proportion to the scope and scale of the environmental issues raised. This guidance applies equally to the preparation of an Environmental Assessment or an Environmental Impact Statement consistent with legal precedent and agency NEPA experience and practice. This guidance does not change or substitute for any law, regulations, or any other legally binding requirement. It does provide CEQ's interpretation of existing regulations promulgated under NEPA.

The Council on Environmental Quality (CEQ) is issuing its final guidance on Improving the Process for Preparing Efficient and Timely Environmental Reviews under the National Environmental Policy Act. The National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) and CEQ Regulations implementing NEPA provide numerous techniques for preparing efficient and timely environmental reviews. CEQ is issuing this guidance for Federal departments and agencies to emphasize and clarify that these techniques are available for all NEPA Environmental Assessments and Environmental Impact Statements. These techniques are consistent with a thorough and meaningful environmental review and agencies using these techniques should keep in mind the following basic principles: NEPA encourages straightforward and concise reviews and documentation that are proportionate to potential impacts and effectively convey the relevant considerations in a timely manner to the public and decision makers, while rigorously addressing the issues presented; NEPA shall be integrated into project planning to ensure planning and decisions reflect environmental considerations, avoid delays later in the process, and anticipate and attempt to resolve issues, rather than be an after-the-fact process that justifies decisions already made; NEPA reviews should coordinate and take appropriate advantage of existing documents and studies, including through adoption and incorporation by reference; early and well-defined scoping can assist in focusing environmental reviews on appropriate issues that would be meaningful to a decision on the proposed action; agencies are encouraged to develop meaningful, predictable, and expeditious timelines for environmental reviews; and agencies should respond to comments in proportion to the scope and scale of the environmental issues raised. This guidance applies equally to the preparation of an Environmental Assessment or an Environmental Impact Statement consistent with legal precedent and agency NEPA experience and practice. This guidance does not change or substitute for any law, regulations, or any other legally binding requirement. It does provide CEQ's interpretation of existing regulations promulgated under NEPA.

The Council on Environmental Quality (CEQ) is issuing its final guidance on Improving the Process for Preparing Efficient and Timely Environmental Reviews under the National Environmental Policy Act. The National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) and CEQ Regulations implementing NEPA provide numerous techniques for preparing efficient and timely environmental reviews. CEQ is issuing this guidance for Federal departments and agencies to emphasize and clarify that these techniques are available for all NEPA Environmental Assessments and Environmental Impact Statements. These techniques are consistent with a thorough and meaningful environmental review and agencies using these techniques should keep in mind the following basic principles: NEPA encourages straightforward and concise reviews and documentation that are proportionate to potential impacts and effectively convey the relevant considerations in a timely manner to the public and decision makers, while rigorously addressing the issues presented; NEPA shall be integrated into project planning to ensure planning and decisions reflect environmental considerations, avoid delays later in the process, and anticipate and attempt to resolve issues, rather than be an after-the-fact process that justifies decisions already made; NEPA reviews should coordinate and take appropriate advantage of existing documents and studies, including through adoption and incorporation by reference; early and well-defined scoping can assist in focusing environmental reviews on appropriate issues that would be meaningful to a decision on the proposed action; agencies are encouraged to develop meaningful, predictable, and expeditious timelines for environmental reviews; and agencies should respond to comments in proportion to the scope and scale of the environmental issues raised. This guidance applies equally to the preparation of an Environmental Assessment or an Environmental Impact Statement consistent with legal precedent and agency NEPA experience and practice. This guidance does not change or substitute for any law, regulations, or any other legally binding requirement. It does provide CEQ's interpretation of existing regulations promulgated under NEPA.

The Council on Environmental Quality (CEQ) is issuing its final guidance on Improving the Process for Preparing Efficient and Timely Environmental Reviews under the National Environmental Policy Act. The National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) and CEQ Regulations implementing NEPA provide numerous techniques for preparing efficient and timely environmental reviews. CEQ is issuing this guidance for Federal departments and agencies to emphasize and clarify that these techniques are available for all NEPA Environmental Assessments and Environmental Impact Statements. These techniques are consistent with a thorough and meaningful environmental review and agencies using these techniques should keep in mind the following basic principles: NEPA encourages straightforward and concise reviews and documentation that are proportionate to potential impacts and effectively convey the relevant considerations in a timely manner to the public and decision makers, while rigorously addressing the issues presented; NEPA shall be integrated into project planning to ensure planning and decisions reflect environmental considerations, avoid delays later in the process, and anticipate and attempt to resolve issues, rather than be an after-the-fact process that justifies decisions already made; NEPA reviews should coordinate and take appropriate advantage of existing documents and studies, including through adoption and incorporation by reference; early and well-defined scoping can assist in focusing environmental reviews on appropriate issues that would be meaningful to a decision on the proposed action; agencies are encouraged to develop meaningful, predictable, and expeditious timelines for environmental reviews; and agencies should respond to comments in proportion to the scope and scale of the environmental issues raised. This guidance applies equally to the preparation of an Environmental Assessment or an Environmental Impact Statement consistent with legal precedent and agency NEPA experience and practice. This guidance does not change or substitute for any law, regulations, or any other legally binding requirement. It does provide CEQ's interpretation of existing regulations promulgated under NEPA.

The Council on Environmental Quality (CEQ) is issuing its final guidance on Improving the Process for Preparing Efficient and Timely Environmental Reviews under the National Environmental Policy Act. The National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) and CEQ Regulations implementing NEPA provide numerous techniques for preparing efficient and timely environmental reviews. CEQ is issuing this guidance for Federal departments and agencies to emphasize and clarify that these techniques are available for all NEPA Environmental Assessments and Environmental Impact Statements. These techniques are consistent with a thorough and meaningful environmental review and agencies using these techniques should keep in mind the following basic principles: NEPA encourages straightforward and concise reviews and documentation that are proportionate to potential impacts and effectively convey the relevant considerations in a timely manner to the public and decision makers, while rigorously addressing the issues presented; NEPA shall be integrated into project planning to ensure planning and decisions reflect environmental considerations, avoid delays later in the process, and anticipate and attempt to resolve issues, rather than be an after-the-fact process that justifies decisions already made; NEPA reviews should coordinate and take appropriate advantage of existing documents and studies, including through adoption and incorporation by reference; early and well-defined scoping can assist in focusing environmental reviews on appropriate issues that would be meaningful to a decision on the proposed action; agencies are encouraged to develop meaningful, predictable, and expeditious timelines for environmental reviews; and agencies should respond to comments in proportion to the scope and scale of the environmental issues raised. This guidance applies equally to the preparation of an Environmental Assessment or an Environmental Impact Statement consistent with legal precedent and agency NEPA experience and practice. This guidance does not change or substitute for any law, regulations, or any other legally binding requirement. It does provide CEQ's interpretation of existing regulations promulgated under NEPA.

This regulation amends the existing temporary tolerance exemption for Aspergillus flavus AF36 by establishing a permanent exemption from the requirement of a tolerance for residues of the microbial pesticide, Aspergillus flavus AF36, in or on pistachio when applied as an antifungal agent and used in accordance with good agricultural practices. On behalf of the Arizona Cotton Research and Protection Council, Interregional Research Project Number 4 submitted a petition to EPA under the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act (FFDCA), requesting that EPA amend an existing temporary tolerance exemption for Aspergillus flavus AF36. This regulation eliminates the need to establish a maximum permissible level for residues of Aspergillus flavus AF36 under the FFDCA.

EPA is determining that the bi-state Charlotte-Gastonia-Rock Hill, North Carolina-South Carolina, 1997 8-hour ozone nonattainment Area (hereafter referred to as “the bi-state Charlotte Area” or “the Area”) has attained the 1997 8-hour ozone national ambient air quality standards (NAAQS) by its applicable attainment date of June 15, 2011. The determination of attainment was made by EPA on November 15, 2011, and was based on quality-assured and certified monitoring data for the 2008-2010 monitoring period. The bi-state Charlotte Area is comprised of Cabarrus, Gaston, Lincoln, Mecklenburg, Rowan, Union and a portion of Iredell (Davidson and Coddle Creek Townships) Counties in North Carolina; and a portion of York County in South Carolina. In this action EPA is determining to find that the above-identified Area attained the 1997 8-hour ozone NAAQS by its applicable attainment date. EPA is finalizing this action because it is consistent with the Clean Air Act (CAA) and its implementing regulations. Additionally, in this action EPA is clarifying an inadvertent citation error in the proposed approval for this action.

EPA is finalizing approval of revisions to the South Coast Air Quality Management District (SCAQMD) portion of the California State Implementation Plan (SIP). These revisions were proposed in the Federal Register on November 22, 2011 and concern particulate matter (PM) emissions from paved and unpaved roads and livestock operations and aggregate and related operations. We are approving local rules that regulate these emission sources under the Clean Air Act as amended in 1990 (CAA or the Act).

The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is finalizing an extension of the March 6, 2012 effective date of the “Water Quality Standards for the State of Florida's Lakes and Flowing Waters; Final Rule” (inland waters rule) for four months to July 6, 2012. EPA's inland waters rule included an effective date of March 6, 2012 for the entire regulation except for the site-specific alternative criteria provision, which took effect on February 4, 2011. This revision of the effective date for the inland waters rule does not affect or change the February 4, 2011 effective date for the site-specific alternative criteria provision.

This order requires the submission of various data to support the continuation of the tolerances for the pesticide fenamiphos. Pesticide tolerances are established under the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act (FFDCA). Following publication of this order, persons who are interested in the continuation of the fenamiphos tolerances must notify the Agency by completing and submitting the required section 408(f) Order Response Form (available in the docket) within 90 days. If the Agency does not receive within 90 days after publication of the final order a section 408(f) Response Form identifying a person who agrees to submit the required data, EPA will revoke the fenamiphos tolerances.

This regulation establishes tolerances for residues of pyriofenone, (5-chloro-2-methoxy-4-methyl-3-pyridinyl)(2,3,4-trimethoxy-6-methylphenyl) methanone, including its metabolites and degradates, in or on grape and grape, raisin. ISK BioSciences Corporation requested these tolerances under the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act (FFDCA).

This regulation establishes a tolerance for residues of trifloxystrobin in or on coffee, green bean. Bayer CropScience requested these tolerances under the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act (FFDCA).

This regulation establishes tolerances for residues of thiamethoxam in or on multiple commodities which are identified and discussed later in this document. Syngenta Crop Protection, Inc. requested these tolerances under the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act (FFDCA).

EPA is taking direct final action to approve the State Implementation Plan (SIP) revision submitted by the State of Tennessee, through the Tennessee Department of Environmental Conservation (TDEC), Air Pollution Control Division, to EPA on January 11, 2012, for the purpose of amending the State's New Source Review (NSR) Prevention of Significant Deterioration (PSD) regulations as they relate to greenhouse gases (GHGs). Specifically, Tennessee amended its PSD regulations to add automatic rescission provisions. These provisions provide that in the event that the U.S. Court of Appeals for the DC Circuit or the U.S. Supreme Court issues an order which would render GHGs not subject to regulation under the Clean Air Act's PSD permitting program, then GHGs shall not be subject to regulation under Tennessee's PSD regulations as of the effective date of EPA's Federal Register notice of vacatur. Further, the provisions provide that in the event that there is a change to Federal law that supersedes regulation of GHGs under the Clean Air Act's PSD permitting program, then GHGs shall not be subject to regulation under Tennessee's PSD regulations as of the effective date of the change in federal law. EPA took action to approve the GHG Tailoring Rule PSD provisions into the Tennessee SIP in a separate rulemaking. EPA is approving Tennessee's January 11, 2012, SIP revision because the Agency has made the determination that this SIP revision is not contrary to section 110 and part C of the Clean Air Act (CAA or Act) or EPA regulations regarding PSD permitting for GHGs.

EPA is taking direct final action to approve the fine particulate matter (PM 2.5 ) 2002 base year emissions inventory, portion of the State Implementation Plan (SIP) revision submitted by the State of Georgia on July 6, 2010. The emissions inventory is part of the Atlanta, Georgia (hereafter referred to as “the Atlanta Area” or “Area”), PM 2.5 attainment demonstration that was submitted for the 1997 annual PM 2.5 National Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS). This action is being taken pursuant to section 110 of the Clean Air Act (CAA).

EPA is taking direct final action to approve revisions to the Antelope Valley Air Quality Management District (AVAQMD) and San Joaquin Valley Unified Air Pollution Control District (SJVUAPCD) portions of the California State Implementation Plan (SIP). These revisions concern negative declarations for volatile organic compound (VOC) and oxides of sulfur source categories for the AVAQMD and SJVUAPCD. We are approving these negative declarations under the Clean Air Act as amended in 1990 (CAA or the Act).

EPA is finalizing a limited approval and limited disapproval of revisions to the Feather River Air Quality Management District (FRAQMD) portion of the California State Implementation Plan (SIP). This action was proposed in the Federal Register on December 6, 2011 and concerns oxides of nitrogen (NO X ) emissions from internal combustion engines. Under authority of the Clean Air Act as amended in 1990 (CAA or the Act), this action simultaneously approves a local rule that regulates these emission sources and directs California to correct rule deficiencies.

EPA is taking direct final action to approve revisions to the Antelope Valley Air Quality Management District (AVAQMD) and Mojave Desert Air Quality Management District (MDAQMD) portion of the California State Implementation Plan (SIP). These revisions concern recordkeeping for rules governing volatile organic compound (VOC) emissions from coatings, solvents and adhesives and rules governing VOC emissions from graphic arts and paper, film, foil and fabric coatings. We are approving local rules that regulate these emission sources under the Clean Air Act as amended in 1990(CAA or the Act).

The Environmental Protection Agency (“EPA,” “the Agency” or “we” in this preamble) today is granting a petition submitted by the ConocoPhillips Billings, Montana Refinery (“ConocoPhillips”, “Refinery” or “Petitioner”) to exclude or “delist,” from the list of hazardous wastes, a maximum of 200 cubic yards per year of residual solids from sludge removed from two storm water tanks at its Billings, Montana refinery and processed in accordance with the petition. After careful analysis we have concluded that the petitioned waste is not a hazardous waste. This exclusion conditionally excludes the petitioned waste from the requirements of hazardous waste regulations under the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA) when processed in accordance with the petition and disposed in a Subtitle D landfill permitted, licensed, or otherwise authorized by a State to accept the delisted processed storm water tank sludge. This rule also imposes testing conditions for future processed storm water tank residuals to ensure they continue to qualify for delisting.

EPA is approving state implementation plan (SIP) revisions submitted by California to provide for attainment of the 1997 8-hour ozone national ambient air quality standards in the San Joaquin Valley (SJV). These SIP revisions are the 2007 Ozone Plan (revised 2008 and 2011) and SJV-related portions of the 2007 State Strategy (revised 2009 and 2011). EPA is approving the base year emissions inventory, reasonably available control measures demonstration, provisions for transportation control strategies and measures, provisions for advanced technology/clean fuels for boilers, reasonable further progress (RFP) and attainment demonstrations, transportation conformity motor vehicle emissions budgets for all RFP milestone years and the attainment year, contingency measures for failure to make RFP or attain, and Clean Air Act section 182(e)(5) new technologies provisions and associated commitment to adopt contingency measures. EPA is also approving commitments to measures and reductions by the SJV Air Pollution Control District and the California Air Resources Board.

EPA is providing notice that it has responded to a petition for reconsideration and a request for an administrative stay of certain provisions of the final rule titled, “Approval and Promulgation of Air Quality Implementation Plans; Ohio; New Source Review Rules” published February 25, 2010. The Ohio EPA sought approval to implement the New Source Review (NSR) Reform provisions that were not vacated by the United States Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia (DC Circuit) in New York v. EPA . The final rule approved certain revisions to Ohio's NSR program, which Ohio submitted to EPA for review on September 14, 2004, under the Clean Air Act (CAA). Subsequently EPA received a petition dated April 26, 2010, for reconsideration from the Natural Resources Defense Council (NRDC). The petition also requested that EPA stay implementation of certain provisions of the final rule pending its reconsideration. EPA considered the petition for reconsideration and request for an administrative stay, along with information contained in the rulemaking docket, in reaching a decision on both the petition and request for a stay. EPA Administrator, Lisa P. Jackson, denied both the petition for reconsideration and request for stay in a letter to the petitioner dated January 24, 2012. The letter explains the basis for the denial and is available as set forth below.

The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is approving a proposed State Implementation Plan revision submitted by the New York State Department of Environmental Conservation. This revision consists of changes to New York's motor vehicle enhanced inspection and maintenance program that would eliminate the transient emission short test program as it relates to the New York portion of the New York-Northern New Jersey-Long Island, NY-NJ-CT 8-hour ozone moderate nonattainment area. EPA is approving this State Implementation Plan revision because it meets all applicable requirements of the Clean Air Act and EPA's regulations and because the revision will not interfere with attainment or maintenance of the national ambient air quality standards in the affected area. The intended effect of this action is to maintain consistency between the State-adopted rules and the federally approved SIP.

EPA is taking final action to approve a revision to the State Implementation Plan (SIP), submitted by the State of Tennessee, through the Tennessee Department of Environmental Conservation (TDEC), Air Pollution Control Division, to EPA on August 30, 2010, for parallel processing. TDEC submitted the final version of this SIP revision on January 11, 2012. The SIP revision approved by today's action adopts into Tennessee's SIP rules impacting the regulation of greenhouse gases (GHGs) under Tennessee's New Source Review (NSR) Prevention of Significant Deterioration (PSD) program. Specifically, the SIP revision establishes appropriate emission thresholds for determining which new stationary sources and modification projects become subject to Tennessee's PSD permitting requirements for GHG emissions. This rule incorporates state law changes into the federally approved SIP, and specifically clarifies the applicable thresholds in the Tennessee SIP for GHG PSD requirements. EPA is approving Tennessee's January 11, 2012, SIP revision because the Agency has made the determination that this SIP revision is in accordance with the Clean Air Act (CAA or Act) and EPA regulations, including regulations pertaining to PSD permitting for GHGs. Additionally, EPA is responding to adverse comments received on EPA's November 5, 2010, proposed approval of Tennessee's August 30, 2010, draft SIP revision.

EPA is taking final action on administrative changes to the State Implementation Plan (SIP) and the Operating Permits Program. The first revision is an administrative change that codifies EPA's prior approval of a SIP submission which re-numbers references to the St. Louis City Code local ordinance. The second revision is a correction which reinserts text that was inadvertently removed and re-letters a paragraph which codifies a recent approval of revisions to Missouri's Title V operating permits program related to the Submission of Emission Data, Emission Fees and Process Information.

EPA is taking final action on administrative changes to the State Implementation Plan (SIP) and the Operating Permits Program. The first revision is an administrative change that codifies EPA's prior approval of a SIP submission which re-numbers references to the St. Louis City Code local ordinance. The second revision is a correction which reinserts text that was inadvertently removed and re-letters a paragraph which codifies a recent approval of revisions to Missouri's Title V operating permits program related to the Submission of Emission Data, Emission Fees and Process Information.

EPA is taking final action to extend the grace period before the MOtor Vehicle Emission Simulator (MOVES) model is required for regional emissions analyses for transportation conformity determinations (“regional conformity analyses”). This final rule provides an additional year to the previously established two-year conformity grace period. As a result, EPA is announcing in this Federal Register that MOVES must be used for new regional conformity analyses that begin after March 2, 2013. This action does not affect EPA's previous approval of the use of MOVES in state air quality implementation plan (SIP) submissions or the existing grace period before MOVES is required for carbon monoxide and particulate matter hot-spot analyses for project-level conformity determinations (75 FR 79370).

This regulation establishes tolerances for residues of metaflumizone in or on citrus fruit, tree nuts, almond hulls; and grape. BASF Corporation requested these tolerances under the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act (FFDCA).

EPA is finalizing revisions to the Transport Rule that was published on August 8, 2011 (76 FR 48208). These revisions address discrepancies in unit-specific modeling assumptions that affect the proper calculation of Transport Rule state budgets and assurance levels in Florida, Louisiana, Michigan, Mississippi, Nebraska, New Jersey, New York, Texas, and Wisconsin, as well as new unit set-asides in Arkansas and Texas. EPA is also finalizing allowance allocation revisions to specific units covered by certain consent decrees that restrict the use of those allowances.The resulting budgets maintain substantial emission reductions from historic levels and are consistent with the final Transport Rule's methodology for defining significant contribution and interference with maintenance. 1 1 In this preamble, EPA uses the terms “significant contribution” and “interference with maintenance” to refer to the emissions that must be prohibited pursuant to Clean Air Act section 110(a)(2)(D)(i)(I) because they significantly contribute to nonattainment or interfere with maintenance of the NAAQS in another state. EPA is also finalizing the proposal to amend the assurance penalty provisions of the rule to make them effective beginning January 1, 2014. EPA believes that deferring the effective date of the assurance provisions will provide additional program confidence and will not compromise the air quality goals of the program. In addition, we are finalizing corrections of typographical errors in the rule.

This regulation establishes an exemption from the requirement of a tolerance for residues of Pasteuria nishizawae —Pn1 in or on all food commodities when applied as a nematicide and used in accordance with good agricultural practices. Pasteuria Bioscience, Inc. submitted a petition to EPA under the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act (FFDCA), requesting an exemption from the requirement of a tolerance. This regulation eliminates the need to establish a maximum permissible level for residues of Pasteuria nishizawae —Pn1 under the FFDCA.

This regulation establishes time-limited tolerances for residues of spirotetramat in or on onion, dry bulb under section 408(l)(6) of the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act (FFDCA), 21 U.S.C. 346a(l)(6). This action is in response to EPA's granting of an emergency exemption under section 18 of the Federal Insecticide, Fungicide, and Rodenticide Act (FIFRA) authorizing use of the pesticide on dry bulb onions. This regulation establishes a maximum permissible level for residues of spirotetramat in or on these commodities. The time-limited tolerances expire on December 31, 2014.

EPA is finalizing approval of revisions to the California Air Resources Board (CARB) portion of the California State Implementation Plan (SIP). These revisions were proposed in the Federal Register on October 6, 2011 and concern volatile organic compound (VOC) emissions from consumer products. We are approving a State rule that regulates these emission sources under the Clean Air Act as amended in 1990 (CAA or the Act).

This regulation establishes an exemption from the requirement of a tolerance for residues of Bacillus thuringiensis Cry2Ae protein in or on the food and feed commodities of cotton; cotton, undelinted seed; cotton, gin byproducts; cotton, forage; cotton, hay; cotton, hulls; cotton, meal; and cotton, refined oil, when used as a plant-incorporated protectant (PIP) in cotton. Bayer CropScience LP submitted a petition to EPA under the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act (FFDCA), requesting an exemption from the requirement of a tolerance. This regulation eliminates the need to establish a maximum permissible level for residues of Bacillus thuringiensis Cry2Ae protein in cotton under the FFDCA.

EPA is taking final action to approve in part and conditionally approve in part, the State Implementation Plan (SIP) submission, submitted by the State of North Carolina, through the Department of Environment and Natural Resources (NC DENR), Division of Air Quality (DAQ), as demonstrating that the State meets the state implementation plan (SIP) requirements of sections 110(a)(1) and (2) of the Clean Air Act (CAA or the Act) for the 1997 8-hour ozone national ambient air quality standards (NAAQS). Section 110(a) of the CAA requires that each state adopt and submit a SIP for the implementation, maintenance, and enforcement of each NAAQS promulgated by the EPA, which is commonly referred to as an “infrastructure” SIP. North Carolina certified that the North Carolina SIP contains provisions that ensure the 1997 8-hour ozone NAAQS is implemented, enforced, and maintained in North Carolina (hereafter referred to as “infrastructure submission”). With the exception of sub-element 110(a)(2)(E)(ii), North Carolina's infrastructure submission, provided to EPA on December 12, 2007, and clarified in a subsequent submission submitted on June 20, 2008, addresses all the required infrastructure elements for the 1997 8-hour ozone NAAQS.

EPA is taking final action to approve the State Implementation Plan (SIP) submission, submitted by the State of Georgia, through the Georgia Department of Natural Resources, Environmental Protection Division (EPD), as demonstrating that the State meets the state implementation plan (SIP) requirements of sections 110(a)(1) and (2) of the Clean Air Act (CAA or the Act) for the 1997 8-hour ozone national ambient air quality standards (NAAQS). Section 110(a) of the CAA requires that each state adopt and submit a SIP for the implementation, maintenance, and enforcement of each NAAQS promulgated by the EPA, which is commonly referred to as an “infrastructure” SIP. Georgia certified that the Georgia SIP contains provisions that ensure the 1997 8-hour ozone NAAQS is implemented, enforced, and maintained in Georgia (hereafter referred to as “infrastructure submission”). Georgia's infrastructure submission, provided to EPA on December 13, 2007, and clarified in a subsequent submission submitted on September 9, 2008, addresses all the required infrastructure elements for the 1997 8-hour ozone NAAQS.

EPA is finalizing approval of revisions to the San Joaquin Valley Unified Air Pollution Control District (SJVUAPCD) portion of the California State Implementation Plan (SIP). These revisions were proposed in the Federal Register on September 12, 2011 and concern volatile organic compound (VOC) emissions from polyester resin operations. We are approving a local rule that regulates these emission sources under the Clean Air Act as amended in 1990 (CAA or the Act).

A December 30, 2011 order of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit stayed the Transport Rule, also known as the Cross State Air Pollution Rule. 1 This document sets out EPA's interpretation of the effect of the Court's stay on the federal implementation plans finalized by EPA on December 15, 2011 (SNFR), which included the conclusion that Iowa, Kansas, Michigan, Missouri, Oklahoma, and Wisconsin significantly contribute to nonattainment or interfere with maintenance of the 1997 ozone National Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS) in other states and required sources in five states to comply with the Transport Rule's ozone season NO X trading program. 2 1 Federal Implementation Plans to Reduce Interstate Transport of Fine Particulate Matter and Ozone in 27 States; Correction of SIP Approvals for 22 States: Final Rule (76 FR 48208, August 8, 2011). Available on the Web at http://www.epa.gov/crossstaterule. 2 EPA did not finalize a FIP for Kansas with respect to the 1997 ozone NAAQS in the SNFR. EPA had previously approved a section 110(a)(2)(D)(i) SIP submission from the state of Kansas for the 1997 ozone and 1997 PM 2.5 NAAQS on March 9, 2007 (75 FR 10608), and that SIP submission did not rely on the unlawful CAIR trading programs or on the conclusion that compliance with CAIR was sufficient to satisfy its 110(a)(2)(D)(i)(I) obligations with respect to the 1997 ozone and PM 2.5 NAAQS. EPA therefore did not have the obligation to promulgate a FIP for Kansas under section 110(c)(1) of the CAA, and instead proposed a SIP Call for Kansas under section 110(k)(5) of the Act (76 FR 763, January 6, 2011). EPA proposed to find Kansas' SIP substantially inadequate to meet the requirements of 110(a)(2)(D)(i)(I) with respect to the 1997 ozone NAAQS based on the proposed conclusion that emissions from Kansas are significantly contributing to nonattainment or interfering with maintenance of the 1997 ozone NAAQS in another state. EPA has not taken final action yet on the proposed SIP Call.

This regulation establishes tolerances for residues of etoxazole in or on field corn and popcorn. Valent U.S.A. Corporation requested these tolerances under the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act (FFDCA).

EPA is taking direct final action to make two determinations regarding the Philadelphia-Wilmington fine particulate (PM 2.5 ) nonattainment area (the Philadelphia Area). First, EPA is making a determination that the Philadelphia Area has attained the 1997 annual PM 2.5 national ambient air quality standard (NAAQS) by its attainment date of April 5, 2010. This determination is based upon quality assured and certified ambient air monitoring data that show the area has monitored attainment of the 1997 annual PM 2.5 NAAQS for the 2007-2009 monitoring period. Second, EPA is making a clean data determination, finding that the Philadelphia Area has attained the 1997 PM 2.5 NAAQS, based on quality assured and certified ambient air monitoring data for the 2007-2009 and 2008-2010 monitoring periods. In accordance with EPA's applicable PM 2.5 implementation rule, this determination suspends the requirement for the Philadelphia Area to submit an attainment demonstration, reasonably available control measures (RACM), a reasonable further progress (RFP) plan, and contingency measures related to attainment of the 1997 annual PM 2.5 NAAQS for so long as the area continues to attain the 1997 annual PM 2.5 NAAQS. Although these requirements are suspended, EPA is not precluded from acting upon these elements at any time if submitted to EPA for review and approval. These actions are being taken under the Clean Air Act (CAA).

During a review of New Mexico's regulations, the EPA identified a variety of State-initiated changes to its hazardous waste program under the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA). We have determined that these changes are minor and satisfy all requirements needed to qualify for Final authorization and are authorizing the State-initiated changes through this Direct Final action. The Solid Waste Disposal Act, as amended, commonly referred to as the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA), allows the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) to authorize States to operate their hazardous waste management programs in lieu of the Federal program. The EPA uses the regulations entitled “Approved State Hazardous Waste Management Programs” to provide notice of the authorization status of State programs and to incorporate by reference those provisions of the State statutes and regulations that will be subject to the EPA's inspection and enforcement. The rule codifies in the regulations the prior approval of New Mexico's hazardous waste management program and incorporates by reference authorized provisions of the State's statutes and regulations.

EPA is promulgating a final rule to incorporate the most recent versions of ASTM International (ASTM) standards into EPA regulations that provide flexibility to use alternatives to mercury-containing industrial thermometers. This final rule will allow the use of such alternatives in certain field and laboratory applications previously impermissible as part of compliance with EPA regulations. EPA believes the older embedded ASTM standards unnecessarily impede the use of effective, comparable, and available alternatives to mercury-containing industrial thermometers. Due to mercury's high toxicity, EPA seeks to reduce potential mercury exposures to humans and the environment by reducing the overall use of mercury-containing products, including mercury-containing industrial thermometers.

EPA is promulgating a final rule to incorporate the most recent versions of ASTM International (ASTM) standards into EPA regulations that provide flexibility to use alternatives to mercury-containing industrial thermometers. This final rule will allow the use of such alternatives in certain field and laboratory applications previously impermissible as part of compliance with EPA regulations. EPA believes the older embedded ASTM standards unnecessarily impede the use of effective, comparable, and available alternatives to mercury-containing industrial thermometers. Due to mercury's high toxicity, EPA seeks to reduce potential mercury exposures to humans and the environment by reducing the overall use of mercury-containing products, including mercury-containing industrial thermometers.

EPA is promulgating a final rule to incorporate the most recent versions of ASTM International (ASTM) standards into EPA regulations that provide flexibility to use alternatives to mercury-containing industrial thermometers. This final rule will allow the use of such alternatives in certain field and laboratory applications previously impermissible as part of compliance with EPA regulations. EPA believes the older embedded ASTM standards unnecessarily impede the use of effective, comparable, and available alternatives to mercury-containing industrial thermometers. Due to mercury's high toxicity, EPA seeks to reduce potential mercury exposures to humans and the environment by reducing the overall use of mercury-containing products, including mercury-containing industrial thermometers.

EPA is promulgating a final rule to incorporate the most recent versions of ASTM International (ASTM) standards into EPA regulations that provide flexibility to use alternatives to mercury-containing industrial thermometers. This final rule will allow the use of such alternatives in certain field and laboratory applications previously impermissible as part of compliance with EPA regulations. EPA believes the older embedded ASTM standards unnecessarily impede the use of effective, comparable, and available alternatives to mercury-containing industrial thermometers. Due to mercury's high toxicity, EPA seeks to reduce potential mercury exposures to humans and the environment by reducing the overall use of mercury-containing products, including mercury-containing industrial thermometers.

EPA is promulgating a final rule to incorporate the most recent versions of ASTM International (ASTM) standards into EPA regulations that provide flexibility to use alternatives to mercury-containing industrial thermometers. This final rule will allow the use of such alternatives in certain field and laboratory applications previously impermissible as part of compliance with EPA regulations. EPA believes the older embedded ASTM standards unnecessarily impede the use of effective, comparable, and available alternatives to mercury-containing industrial thermometers. Due to mercury's high toxicity, EPA seeks to reduce potential mercury exposures to humans and the environment by reducing the overall use of mercury-containing products, including mercury-containing industrial thermometers.

EPA is promulgating a final rule to incorporate the most recent versions of ASTM International (ASTM) standards into EPA regulations that provide flexibility to use alternatives to mercury-containing industrial thermometers. This final rule will allow the use of such alternatives in certain field and laboratory applications previously impermissible as part of compliance with EPA regulations. EPA believes the older embedded ASTM standards unnecessarily impede the use of effective, comparable, and available alternatives to mercury-containing industrial thermometers. Due to mercury's high toxicity, EPA seeks to reduce potential mercury exposures to humans and the environment by reducing the overall use of mercury-containing products, including mercury-containing industrial thermometers.

EPA is promulgating a final rule to incorporate the most recent versions of ASTM International (ASTM) standards into EPA regulations that provide flexibility to use alternatives to mercury-containing industrial thermometers. This final rule will allow the use of such alternatives in certain field and laboratory applications previously impermissible as part of compliance with EPA regulations. EPA believes the older embedded ASTM standards unnecessarily impede the use of effective, comparable, and available alternatives to mercury-containing industrial thermometers. Due to mercury's high toxicity, EPA seeks to reduce potential mercury exposures to humans and the environment by reducing the overall use of mercury-containing products, including mercury-containing industrial thermometers.

EPA is partially approving and partially disapproving State Implementation Plan (SIP) revisions to Colorado's Regulation 1. The partial approval of the State's revisions allows for the use of obscurants during military exercises at the Fort Carson Military Base and Pinón Canyon Maneuver Site in Colorado when precautionary steps are taken during the exercise to maintain air quality. EPA approves the State's revised determination of averaged over time emission rates and the expansion of recordkeeping requirements. EPA, however, is disapproving the revised provision governing fuel burning equipment. These revisions were adopted by the State of Colorado on July 21, 2005 and submitted to EPA on August 8, 2006. The proposed partial approval and partial disapproval appeared in the Federal Register on August 10, 2011 (76 FR 49391). EPA has determined that the approved revisions in Colorado's submittal are consistent with the Clean Air Act (CAA). This action is being taken under section 110 of the Clean Air Act.

EPA is taking direct final action to approve revisions to the Antelope Valley Air Quality Management District (AVAQMD) and Imperial County Air Pollution Control District (ICAPCD) portions of the California State Implementation Plan (SIP). These revisions concern oxides of nitrogen (NO X ) emissions from stationary gas turbines. We are approving local rules that regulate these emission sources under the Clean Air Act as amended in 1990 (CAA or the Act).