Approval and Promulgation of Implementation Plans; Alabama; Nitrogen Oxides Budget and Allowance Trading Program, Phase II, 76694-76697 [05-24474]

Download as PDF 76694 Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 248 / Wednesday, December 28, 2005 / Rules and Regulations of Information and Regulatory Affairs has not designated it as a significant energy action. Therefore, it does not require a Statement of Energy Effects under Executive Order 13211. PART 165—REGULATED NAVIGATION AREAS AND LIMITED ACCESS AREAS 1. The authority citation for Part 165 continues to read as follows: The National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act (NTTAA) (15 U.S.C. 272 note) directs agencies to use voluntary consensus standards in their regulatory activities unless the agency provides Congress, through the Office of Management and Budget, with an explanation of why using these standards would be inconsistent with applicable law or otherwise impractical. Voluntary consensus standards are technical standards (e.g., specifications of materials, performance, design, or operation; test methods; sampling procedures; and related management systems practices) that are developed or adopted by voluntary consensus standards bodies. This rule does not use technical standards. Therefore, we did not consider the use of voluntary consensus standards. Environment We have analyzed this rule under Commandant Instruction M16475.1D, which guides the Coast Guard in complying with the National Environmental Policy Act of 1969 (NEPA) (42 U.S.C. 4321–4370f), and have made a preliminary determination that there are no factors in this case that would limit the use of a categorical exclusion under section 2.B.2 of the Instruction. Therefore we believe this rule should be categorically excluded, under figure 2–1, paragraph 34(g) from further environmental documentation. This rule establishes a regulated navigation area and as such is covered by this paragraph. A final ‘‘Environmental Analysis Check List’’ and a final ‘‘Categorical Exclusion Determination’’ are available in the docket where indicated under ADDRESSES. Comments on this section will be considered before we make the final decision on whether the rule should be categorically excluded from further environmental review. rwilkins on PROD1PC63 with RULES Harbors, Marine safety, Navigation (water), Reporting and record keeping requirements, Security measures, Waterways. For the reasons discussed in the preamble, the Coast Guard amends 33 CFR part 165 as follows: I VerDate Aug<31>2005 16:43 Dec 27, 2005 Jkt 205001 40 CFR Part 52 I Technical Standards List of Subjects in 33 CFR Part 165 ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY Authority: 33 U.S.C. 1226, 1231; 46 U.S.C. Chapter 701; 50 U.S.C. 191, 195; 33 CFR 1.05–1(g), 6.04–1, 6.04–6, and 160.5; Pub. L. 107–295, 116 Stat. 2064; Department of Homeland Security Delegation No. 0170.1. I 2. Add § 165.923 to read as follows: [R04–OAR–2005–AL–0001–200520a; FRL– 8014–9] Approval and Promulgation of Implementation Plans; Alabama; Nitrogen Oxides Budget and Allowance Trading Program, Phase II § 165.923 Regulated Navigation Area between mile markers 296.1 and 296.7 of the Chicago Sanitary and Ship Canal located near Romeoville, IL. AGENCY: (a) Location. The following is a Regulated Navigation Area: All waters of the Chicago Sanitary and Ship Canal, Romeoville, IL between the north side of Romeo Road Bridge Mile Marker 296.1, and the south side of the Aerial Pipeline Mile Marker 296.7. (b) Regulations. (1) The general regulations contained in 33 CFR 165.13 apply. (2) All vessels are prohibited from loitering in the regulated navigation area. (3) Vessels may enter the regulated navigation area for the sole purpose of transiting to the other side, and must maintain headway throughout the transit. (4) All personnel on open decks must wear a Coast Guard approved Type I personal flotation device while in the regulated navigation area. (5) Vessels may not moor or lay up on the right or left descending banks of the regulated navigation area. (6) Towboats may not make or break tows in the regulated navigation area. (7) Vessels may not pass (meet or overtake) in the regulated navigation area and must make a SECURITE call when approaching the barrier to announce intentions and work out passing arrangements on either side. (8) Commercial tows transiting the regulated navigation area must be made up with wire rope to ensure electrical connectivity between all segments of the tow. (c) Compliance. All persons and vessels shall comply with this rule and any additional instructions of the Ninth Coast Guard District Commander, or his designated representative. The Captain of the Port, Lake Michigan is a designated representative of the District Commander for the purposes of this rule. SUMMARY: The EPA is approving State Implementation Plan (SIP) revisions submitted by the State of Alabama on February 23, 2005. The revision responds to the EPA’s regulation entitled, ‘‘Interstate Ozone Transport: Response to Court Decisions on the Nitrogen Oxides (NOX) SIP Call, NOX SIP Call Technical Amendments, and Section 126 Rules,’’ otherwise known as the ‘‘NOX SIP Call Phase II.’’ This revision satisfies EPA’s rule that requires Alabama to submit NOX SIP Call Phase II revisions needed to achieve the necessary incremental reductions of NOX. The intended effect of this SIP revision is to reduce emissions of NOX in order to help attain the National Ambient Air Quality Standard (NAAQS) for ozone. The revision also corrects a typographical error and deletes an expired provision pertaining to open burning in Morgan County, Alabama in 2003. DATES: This direct final rule is effective February 27, 2006 without further notice, unless EPA receives adverse comment by January 27, 2006. If adverse comment is received, EPA will publish a timely withdrawal of the direct final rule in the Federal Register and inform the public that the rule will not take effect. Dated: December 19, 2005. R.J. Papp, Jr., Rear Admiral, U.S. Coast Guard, Commander, Ninth Coast Guard District. [FR Doc. 05–24538 Filed 12–27–05; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4910–15–P PO 00000 Frm 00024 Fmt 4700 Sfmt 4700 Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). ACTION: Final rule. Submit your comments, identified by Regional Material in EDocket (RME) ID No. R04–OAR–2005– AL–0001, by one of the following methods: 1. Federal eRulemaking Portal: http://www.regulations.gov. Follow the on-line instructions for submitting comments. 2. Agency Web site: http:// docket.epa.gov/rmepub/ RME, EPA’s electronic public docket and comment system, is EPA’s preferred method for receiving comments. Once in the system, select ‘‘quick search,’’ then key in the appropriate RME Docket identification number. Follow the online instructions for submitting comments. ADDRESSES: E:\FR\FM\28DER1.SGM 28DER1 rwilkins on PROD1PC63 with RULES Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 248 / Wednesday, December 28, 2005 / Rules and Regulations 3. E-mail: difrank.stacy@epa.gov. 4. Fax: (404) 562–9019. 5. Mail: ‘‘R04–OAR–2005–AL–0001,’’ Regulatory Development Section, Air Planning Branch, Air, Pesticides and Toxics Management Division, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Region 4, 61 Forsyth Street, SW., Atlanta, Georgia 30303–8960. 6. Hand Delivery or Courier. Deliver your comments to: Stacy DiFrank, Regulatory Development Section, Air Planning Branch, Air, Pesticides and Toxics Management Division, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Region 4, 61 Forsyth Street, SW., Atlanta, Georgia 30303–8960. Such deliveries are only accepted during the Regional Office’s normal hours of operation. The Regional Office’s official hours of business are Monday through Friday, 8:30 to 4:30, excluding Federal holidays. Instructions: Direct your comments to RME ID No. R04–OAR–2005–AL–0001. EPA’s policy is that all comments received will be included in the public docket without change and may be made available on-line at http:// docket.epa.gov/rmepub/, including any personal information provided, unless the comment includes information claimed to be Confidential Business Information (CBI) or other information whose disclosure is restricted by statute. Do not submit information that you consider to be CBI or otherwise protected through RME, regulations.gov, or e-mail. The EPA RME Web site and the Federal regulations.gov Web site are ‘‘anonymous access’’ systems, which means EPA will not know your identity or contact information unless you provide it in the body of your comment. If you send an e-mail comment directly to EPA without going through RME or regulations.gov, your e-mail 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, EPA recommends that you include your name and other contact information in the body of your comment and with any disk or CD–ROM you submit. If EPA cannot read your comment due to technical difficulties and cannot contact you for clarification, EPA may not be able to consider your comment. Electronic files should avoid the use of special characters, any form of encryption, and be free of any defects or viruses. Docket: All documents in the electronic docket are listed in the RME index at http://docket.epa.gov/rmepub/. Although listed in the index, some information is not publicly available, VerDate Aug<31>2005 17:11 Dec 27, 2005 Jkt 208001 i.e., CBI or other information whose disclosure is restricted by statute. Certain other material, such as copyrighted material, is not placed on the Internet and will be publicly available only in hard copy form. Publicly available docket materials are available either electronically in RME or in hard copy at the Regulatory Development Section, Air planning Branch, Air, Pesticides and Toxics Management Division, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Region 4, 61 Forsyth Street, SW., Atlanta, Georgia 30303–8960. EPA requests that if at all possible, you contact the person listed in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section to schedule your inspection. The Regional Office’s official hours of business are Monday through Friday, 8:30 to 4:30, excluding Federal holidays. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Stacy DiFrank, Regulatory Development Section, Air Planning Branch, Air, Pesticides and Toxics Management Division, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Region 4, 61 Forsyth Street, SW., Atlanta, Georgia 30303–8960. The telephone number is (404) 562–9042. Ms. DiFrank can also be reached via electronic mail at difrank.stacy@epa.gov. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: I. Background On October 27, 1998, EPA published a final rule known as the ‘‘NOX SIP Call’’ (See 63 FR 57356). The NOX SIP Call requires 22 states, including the State of Alabama, and the District of Columbia (DC) to meet statewide NOX emission budgets during the ozone season in order to reduce the amount of ground level ozone that is transported across the eastern United States (Phase I). EPA identified NOX emission reductions by source category that could be achieved by suing cost-effective measures. The source categories include electric generating units (EGUs), nonelectric generating units (non-EGUs), internal combustion (IC) engines, and cement kilns. EPA determined that state-wide NOX emission budgets based on the implementation of these cost effective controls for each affected jurisdiction are to be met by the year 2007. The Phase I NOX SIP Call gave states the flexibility to decide which source categories to regulate in order to meet the statewide budgets. IC engines were not addressed by Alabama in response to Phase I, but are addressed in Phase II. For more information regarding the specifics of these Phase I source categories and budgets, see 66 FR 27047, May 16, 2001. PO 00000 Frm 00025 Fmt 4700 Sfmt 4700 76695 A number of parties, including certain States as well as industry and labor groups, challenged the NOX SIP Call rule. On March 2, 2000 (65 FR 11222), EPA published additional technical amendments to the NOX SIP Call in the Federal Register. On March 3, 2000, the D.C. Circuit issued its decision on the NOX SIP Call, ruling in favor of EPA on all the major issues. Michigan v. EPA, 213 F.3d 663 (D.C. Cir. 2000). The DC Circuit Court denied petitioners’ requests for rehearing or rehearing en banc on July 22, 2000. However, the Circuit Court remanded four specific elements to EPA for further action: (1) The definition of EGU, (2) the level of control for stationary IC engines, (3) the geographic extent of the NOX SIP Call for Georgia and Missouri, and (4) the inclusion of Wisconsin. On March 5, 2001, the U.S. Supreme Court declined to hear an appeal by various utilities, industry groups and a number of upwind states from the DC Circuit’s ruling on EPA’s NOX SIP Call rule. On October 13, 2000, the Alabama Department of Environmental Management (ADEM) submitted a draft NOX emission control rule to the EPA. On March 12, 2001, ADEM submitted final revisions to its SIP that complied with the requirements of the NOX SIP Call Phase I (see 66 FR 27047, May 16, 2001). EPA published a final rule, dated April 21, 2004 (69 FR 21604), that addresses the remanded portion of the NOX SIP Call Rule. This rule is entitled, ‘‘Interstate Ozone Transport: Response to Court Decisions on the NOX SIP Call, NOX SIP Call Technical Amendments, and Section 126 Rules,’’ otherwise known as the ‘‘NOX SIP Rule Phase II.’’ This action finalizes specific changes in response to the Court’s rulings on the NOX SIP Call. Specifically, it finalizes certain aspects of the definitions of EGU and non-EGU, the control level assumed for large stationary IC engines in the NOX SIP Call, partial State budgets for Georgia, Missouri, Alabama, and Michigan in the NOX SIP Call, changes to the statewide NOX budgets, the SIP submittal dates for the required States to address the Phase II portion of the budget, and for Georgia and Missouri to submit full SIPs meeting the NOX SIP Call and the exclusion of Wisconsin from the NOX SIP Call (See 69 FR 21604, April 21, 2004). This final rule also requires States that submitted NOX SIP Call Phase I revisions to submit Phase II SIP Revisions as needed to achieve the necessary incremental reductions of NOX. Additional emission reductions required as a result of this final rulemaking are reflected in the Phase II E:\FR\FM\28DER1.SGM 28DER1 76696 Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 248 / Wednesday, December 28, 2005 / Rules and Regulations portion of the State’s emission budget. On April 11, 2000, in response to the Court’s decision, EPA notified Alabama of the maximum amount of NOX emissions allowed for the State during the ozone season. This emission budget reflected adjustments to Alabama’s NOX emission budget to reflect the Court’s decision that Georgia and Missouri should not be included in full. Although the Court did not order EPA to modify Alabama’s budget, the EPA believes these adjustments are consistent with the Court’s decision. rwilkins on PROD1PC63 with RULES II. Analysis of State’s Submittal The State of Alabama submitted a revision to its SIP on February 23, 2005. The revision responds to the NOX SIP Call Phase II (69 FR 21604, April 21, 2004). ADEM is revising its regulations to remain consistent with EPA requirements. The addition of the proposed regulation to Chapter 335–3– 8, specifically Rule 335–3–8–.04, fulfills this requirement. The NOX SIP Call Phase II (69 FR 21604) required NOX reductions for 4,968 tons for Alabama. However, upon further calculation it was determined that the required NOX reduction for Alabama is 4,895 tons. The revision also includes changes to Rule 335–3–3. A typographical error is corrected in Rule 335–3–3–.01(2), changing the word ‘‘not’’ to ‘‘nor’’ in the second sentence and 335–3–3–.01(2)(d) is being revised to delete an expired provision pertaining to open burning in Morgan County in 2003. III. Final Action EPA is approving the aforementioned changes to the SIP. EPA is publishing this rule without prior proposal because the Agency views this as a noncontroversial submittal and anticipates no adverse comments. However, in the proposed rules section of this Federal Register publication, EPA is publishing a separate document that will serve as the proposal to approve the SIP revision should adverse comments be filed. This rule will be effective February 27, 2006 without further notice unless the Agency receives adverse comments by January 27, 2006. If the EPA receives such comments, then EPA will publish a document withdrawing the final rule and informing the public that the rule will not take effect. All public comments received will then be addressed in a subsequent final rule based on the proposed rule. The EPA will not institute a second comment period. Parties interested in commenting should do so at this time. If no such comments are received, the public is advised that VerDate Aug<31>2005 16:43 Dec 27, 2005 Jkt 205001 this rule will be effective on February 27, 2006 and no further action will be taken on the proposed rule. Please note that if we receive adverse comment on an amendment, paragraph, or section of this rule and if that provision may be severed from the remainder of the rule, we may adopt as final those provisions of the rule that are not the subject of an adverse comment. IV. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews Under Executive Order 12866 (58 FR 51735, October 4, 1993), this action is not a ‘‘significant regulatory action’’ and therefore is not subject to review by the Office of Management and Budget. For this reason, this action is also not subject to Executive Order 13211, ‘‘Actions Concerning Regulations That Significantly Affect Energy Supply, Distribution, or Use’’ (66 FR 28355, May 22, 2001). This action merely approves state law as meeting Federal requirements and imposes no additional requirements beyond those imposed by state law. Accordingly, the Administrator certifies that this rule will not have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities under the Regulatory Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 601 et seq.). Because this rule approves pre-existing requirements under state law and does not impose any additional enforceable duty beyond that required by state law, it 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). This rule also does not have tribal implications because it will not have a substantial direct effect on one or more Indian tribes, on the relationship between the Federal Government and Indian tribes, or on the distribution of power and responsibilities between the Federal Government and Indian tribes, as specified by Executive Order 13175 (65 FR 67249, November 9, 2000). This action also does not have Federalism implications because it does not have substantial direct effects on the states, on the relationship between the national government and the states, or on the distribution of power and responsibilities among the various levels of government, as specified in Executive Order 13132 (64 FR 43255, August 10, 1999). This action merely approves a state rule implementing a Federal standard, and does not alter the relationship or the distribution of power and responsibilities established in the Clean Air Act. This rule also is not subject to Executive Order 13045 ‘‘Protection of Children from PO 00000 Frm 00026 Fmt 4700 Sfmt 4700 Environmental Health Risks and Safety Risks’’ (62 FR 19885, April 23, 1997), because it is not economically significant. In reviewing SIP submissions, EPA’s rule is to approve state choices, provided that they meet the criteria of the Clean Air Act. In this context, in the absence of a prior existing requirement for the State to use voluntary consensus standards (VCS), EPA has no authority to disapprove a SIP submission for failure to use VCS. It would thus be inconsistent with applicable law for EPA, when it reviews a SIP submission, to use VCS in place of a SIP submission that otherwise satisfies the provisions of the Clean Air Act. Thus, the requirements of section 12(d) of the National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act of 1995 (15 U.S.C. 272 note) do not apply. This rule does not impose an information collection burden under the provisions of the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.). The Congressional Review Act, 5 U.S.C. 801 et seq., as added by the Small Business Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act of 1996, generally provides that before a rule may take effect, the agency promulgating the rule must submit a rule report, which includes a copy of the rule, to each House of the Congress and to the Comptroller General of the United States. EPA will submit a report containing this rule and other required information to the U.S. Senate, the U.S. House of Representatives, and the Comptroller General of the United States prior to publication of the rule in the Federal Register. A major rule cannot take effect until 60 days after it is published in the Federal Register. This action is not a ‘‘major rule’’ as defined by 5 U.S.C 804(2). Under section 307(b)(1) of the Clean Air Act, petitions for judicial review of this action must be filed in the United States Court of Appeals for the appropriate circuit by February 27, 2006. Filing a petition for reconsideration by the Administrator of this final rule does not affect the finality of this rule for the purposes of judicial review nor does it extend the time within which a petition for judicial review may be filed, and shall not postpone the effectiveness of such rule or action. This action may not be challenged later in proceedings to enforce its requirements. (See section 307(b)(2).) List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52 Environmental protection, Air pollution control, Intergovernmental relations, Nitrogen dioxide, Ozone, Particulate matter, Reporting and E:\FR\FM\28DER1.SGM 28DER1 76697 Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 248 / Wednesday, December 28, 2005 / Rules and Regulations recordkeeping requirements, Volatile organic compounds. 1. The authority citation for part 52 continues to read as follows: I Dated: December 9, 2005. A. Stanley Meiburg, Acting Regional Administrator, Region 4. * * * * BILLING CODE 6560–50–M ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY 40 CFR Part 180 [EPA–HQ–OPP–2005–0477; FRL–7753–9] Dichlormid; Extension of Time-Limited Pesticide Tolerance Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). ACTION: Final rule. AGENCY: SUMMARY: This regulation amends 40 CFR 180.469 by extending the expiration/revocation date of the timelimited tolerances for residues of acetamide, 2,2-dichloro-N,N-di-2propenyl- (dichlormid) in or on field corn (forage, grain, stover), pop corn (grain, stover), and sweet corn (forage, kernel plus cob with husks removed, stover) at 0.05 ppm. The current tolerances are set to expire on December 31, 2005. This rule extends the expiration/revocation date of these timelimited tolerances to December 31, 2008. This regulation is effective December 28, 2005. Objections and requests for hearings must be received on or before February 27, 2006. ADDRESSES: To submit a written objection or hearing request follow the detailed instructions as provided in DATES: rwilkins on PROD1PC63 with RULES EPA approval date Explanation 16:43 Dec 27, 2005 Jkt 205001 * Keri Grinstead, Registration Division (7505C), Office of Pesticide Programs, Environmental Protection Agency, 1200 Pennsylvania Ave., NW., Washington, DC 20460–0001; telephone number: FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Fmt 4700 * * 12/28/05 [insert citation of publication]. * * * * Unit IV. of the SUPPLEMENTARY EPA has established a docket for this action under docket identification (ID) number EPA–HQ– OPP–2005–0477. All documents in the docket are listed on the www.regulations.gov Web site. (EDOCKET, EPA’s electronic public docket and comment system was replaced on November 25, 2005, by an enhanced Federal-wide electronic docket management and comment system located at http:// www.regulations.gov/. Follow the online instructions.) Although listed in the index, some information is not publicly available, i.e., Confidential Business Information (CBI) or other information whose disclosure is restricted by statute. Certain other material, such as copyrighted material, is not placed on the Internet and will be publicly available only in hard copy form. Publicly available docket materials are available either electronically in EDOCKET or in hard copy at the Public Information and Records Integrity Branch (PIRIB), Rm. 119, Crystal Mall #2, 1801 S. Bell St., Arlington, VA. This docket facility is open from 8:30 a.m. to 4 p.m., Monday through Friday, excluding legal holidays. The docket telephone number is (703) 305–5805. Frm 00027 * * * mm/dd/yy INFORMATION. PO 00000 * 12/28/05 [insert citation of publication]. * * * * Standards for Stationary Reciprocating Internal Combustion Engines. [FR Doc. 05–24474 Filed 12–27–05; 8:45 am] VerDate Aug<31>2005 * mm/dd/yy * * Control of Nitrogen Oxide Emissions * * * Control of Open Burning and Incineration * Chapter 335–3–8 * State effective date * * * Open Burning ....................................................................... * * 2. Section 52.50(c) is amended by revising entries for ‘‘Section 335–3– Title/subject * Section 335–3–8–.04 Identification of plan. * * (c) * * * I State citation * * Subpart B—Alabama Chapter I, Title 40, Code of Federal Regulations, is amended as follows: * Section 335–3–3–.01 § 52.50 Authority: 42 U.S.C. 7401 et seq. I Chapter 335–3–3 3.01’’ and ‘‘Section 335–3–8.04’’ to read as follows: PART 52—[AMENDED] Sfmt 4700 (703) 308–8373; e-mail address: grinstead.keri@epa.gov. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: I. General Information A. Does this Action Apply to Me? You may be potentially affected by this action if you are an agricultural producer, food manufacturer, or pesticide manufacturer. Potentially affected entities may include, but are not limited to: • Crop production (NAICS code 111). • Animal production (NAICS code 112). • Food manufacturing (NAICS code 311). • Pesticide manufacturing (NAICS code 32532). This listing is not intended to be exhaustive, but rather provides a guide for readers regarding entities likely to be affected by this action. Other types of entities not listed in this unit could also be affected. The North American Industrial Classification System (NAICS) codes have been provided to assist you and others in determining whether this action might apply to certain entities. If you have any questions regarding the applicability of this action to a particular entity, consult the person listed under FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT. B. How Can I Access Electronic Copies of this Document and Other Related Information? In addition to using EDOCKET (http:// www.epa.gov/edocket/), you may access E:\FR\FM\28DER1.SGM 28DER1

Agencies

[Federal Register Volume 70, Number 248 (Wednesday, December 28, 2005)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 76694-76697]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 05-24474]


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

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

40 CFR Part 52

[R04-OAR-2005-AL-0001-200520a; FRL-8014-9]


Approval and Promulgation of Implementation Plans; Alabama; 
Nitrogen Oxides Budget and Allowance Trading Program, Phase II

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Final rule.

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

SUMMARY: The EPA is approving State Implementation Plan (SIP) revisions 
submitted by the State of Alabama on February 23, 2005. The revision 
responds to the EPA's regulation entitled, ``Interstate Ozone 
Transport: Response to Court Decisions on the Nitrogen Oxides 
(NOX) SIP Call, NOX SIP Call Technical 
Amendments, and Section 126 Rules,'' otherwise known as the 
``NOX SIP Call Phase II.'' This revision satisfies EPA's 
rule that requires Alabama to submit NOX SIP Call Phase II 
revisions needed to achieve the necessary incremental reductions of 
NOX. The intended effect of this SIP revision is to reduce 
emissions of NOX in order to help attain the National 
Ambient Air Quality Standard (NAAQS) for ozone. The revision also 
corrects a typographical error and deletes an expired provision 
pertaining to open burning in Morgan County, Alabama in 2003.

DATES: This direct final rule is effective February 27, 2006 without 
further notice, unless EPA receives adverse comment by January 27, 
2006. If adverse comment is received, EPA will publish a timely 
withdrawal of the direct final rule in the Federal Register and inform 
the public that the rule will not take effect.

ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, identified by Regional Material in 
EDocket (RME) ID No. R04-OAR-2005-AL-0001, by one of the following 
methods:
    1. Federal eRulemaking Portal: http://www.regulations.gov. Follow 
the on-line instructions for submitting comments.
    2. Agency Web site: http://docket.epa.gov/rmepub/ RME, EPA's 
electronic public docket and comment system, is EPA's preferred method 
for receiving comments. Once in the system, select ``quick search,'' 
then key in the appropriate RME Docket identification number. Follow 
the on-line instructions for submitting comments.

[[Page 76695]]

    3. E-mail: difrank.stacy@epa.gov.
    4. Fax: (404) 562-9019.
    5. Mail: ``R04-OAR-2005-AL-0001,'' Regulatory Development Section, 
Air Planning Branch, Air, Pesticides and Toxics Management Division, 
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Region 4, 61 Forsyth Street, SW., 
Atlanta, Georgia 30303-8960.
    6. Hand Delivery or Courier. Deliver your comments to: Stacy 
DiFrank, Regulatory Development Section, Air Planning Branch, Air, 
Pesticides and Toxics Management Division, U.S. Environmental 
Protection Agency, Region 4, 61 Forsyth Street, SW., Atlanta, Georgia 
30303-8960. Such deliveries are only accepted during the Regional 
Office's normal hours of operation. The Regional Office's official 
hours of business are Monday through Friday, 8:30 to 4:30, excluding 
Federal holidays.
    Instructions: Direct your comments to RME ID No. R04-OAR-2005-AL-
0001. EPA's policy is that all comments received will be included in 
the public docket without change and may be made available on-line at 
http://docket.epa.gov/rmepub/, including any personal information 
provided, unless the comment includes information claimed to be 
Confidential Business Information (CBI) or other information whose 
disclosure is restricted by statute. Do not submit information that you 
consider to be CBI or otherwise protected through RME, regulations.gov, 
or e-mail. The EPA RME Web site and the Federal regulations.gov Web 
site are ``anonymous access'' systems, which means EPA will not know 
your identity or contact information unless you provide it in the body 
of your comment. If you send an e-mail comment directly to EPA without 
going through RME or regulations.gov, your e-mail 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, EPA recommends that you include your name 
and other contact information in the body of your comment and with any 
disk or CD-ROM you submit. If EPA cannot read your comment due to 
technical difficulties and cannot contact you for clarification, EPA 
may not be able to consider your comment. Electronic files should avoid 
the use of special characters, any form of encryption, and be free of 
any defects or viruses.
    Docket: All documents in the electronic docket are listed in the 
RME index at http://docket.epa.gov/rmepub/. Although listed in the 
index, some information is not publicly available, i.e., CBI or other 
information whose disclosure is restricted by statute. Certain other 
material, such as copyrighted material, is not placed on the Internet 
and will be publicly available only in hard copy form. Publicly 
available docket materials are available either electronically in RME 
or in hard copy at the Regulatory Development Section, Air planning 
Branch, Air, Pesticides and Toxics Management Division, U.S. 
Environmental Protection Agency, Region 4, 61 Forsyth Street, SW., 
Atlanta, Georgia 30303-8960. EPA requests that if at all possible, you 
contact the person listed in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT 
section to schedule your inspection. The Regional Office's official 
hours of business are Monday through Friday, 8:30 to 4:30, excluding 
Federal holidays.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Stacy DiFrank, Regulatory Development 
Section, Air Planning Branch, Air, Pesticides and Toxics Management 
Division, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Region 4, 61 Forsyth 
Street, SW., Atlanta, Georgia 30303-8960. The telephone number is (404) 
562-9042. Ms. DiFrank can also be reached via electronic mail at 
difrank.stacy@epa.gov.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

I. Background

    On October 27, 1998, EPA published a final rule known as the 
``NOX SIP Call'' (See 63 FR 57356). The NOX SIP 
Call requires 22 states, including the State of Alabama, and the 
District of Columbia (DC) to meet statewide NOX emission 
budgets during the ozone season in order to reduce the amount of ground 
level ozone that is transported across the eastern United States (Phase 
I). EPA identified NOX emission reductions by source 
category that could be achieved by suing cost-effective measures. The 
source categories include electric generating units (EGUs), non-
electric generating units (non-EGUs), internal combustion (IC) engines, 
and cement kilns. EPA determined that state-wide NOX 
emission budgets based on the implementation of these cost effective 
controls for each affected jurisdiction are to be met by the year 2007. 
The Phase I NOX SIP Call gave states the flexibility to 
decide which source categories to regulate in order to meet the 
statewide budgets. IC engines were not addressed by Alabama in response 
to Phase I, but are addressed in Phase II. For more information 
regarding the specifics of these Phase I source categories and budgets, 
see 66 FR 27047, May 16, 2001.
    A number of parties, including certain States as well as industry 
and labor groups, challenged the NOX SIP Call rule. On March 
2, 2000 (65 FR 11222), EPA published additional technical amendments to 
the NOX SIP Call in the Federal Register. On March 3, 2000, 
the D.C. Circuit issued its decision on the NOX SIP Call, 
ruling in favor of EPA on all the major issues. Michigan v. EPA, 213 
F.3d 663 (D.C. Cir. 2000). The DC Circuit Court denied petitioners' 
requests for rehearing or rehearing en banc on July 22, 2000. However, 
the Circuit Court remanded four specific elements to EPA for further 
action: (1) The definition of EGU, (2) the level of control for 
stationary IC engines, (3) the geographic extent of the NOX 
SIP Call for Georgia and Missouri, and (4) the inclusion of Wisconsin. 
On March 5, 2001, the U.S. Supreme Court declined to hear an appeal by 
various utilities, industry groups and a number of upwind states from 
the DC Circuit's ruling on EPA's NOX SIP Call rule.
    On October 13, 2000, the Alabama Department of Environmental 
Management (ADEM) submitted a draft NOX emission control 
rule to the EPA. On March 12, 2001, ADEM submitted final revisions to 
its SIP that complied with the requirements of the NOX SIP 
Call Phase I (see 66 FR 27047, May 16, 2001).
    EPA published a final rule, dated April 21, 2004 (69 FR 21604), 
that addresses the remanded portion of the NOX SIP Call 
Rule. This rule is entitled, ``Interstate Ozone Transport: Response to 
Court Decisions on the NOX SIP Call, NOX SIP Call 
Technical Amendments, and Section 126 Rules,'' otherwise known as the 
``NOX SIP Rule Phase II.'' This action finalizes specific 
changes in response to the Court's rulings on the NOX SIP 
Call. Specifically, it finalizes certain aspects of the definitions of 
EGU and non-EGU, the control level assumed for large stationary IC 
engines in the NOX SIP Call, partial State budgets for 
Georgia, Missouri, Alabama, and Michigan in the NOX SIP 
Call, changes to the statewide NOX budgets, the SIP 
submittal dates for the required States to address the Phase II portion 
of the budget, and for Georgia and Missouri to submit full SIPs meeting 
the NOX SIP Call and the exclusion of Wisconsin from the 
NOX SIP Call (See 69 FR 21604, April 21, 2004). This final 
rule also requires States that submitted NOX SIP Call Phase 
I revisions to submit Phase II SIP Revisions as needed to achieve the 
necessary incremental reductions of NOX.
    Additional emission reductions required as a result of this final 
rulemaking are reflected in the Phase II

[[Page 76696]]

portion of the State's emission budget. On April 11, 2000, in response 
to the Court's decision, EPA notified Alabama of the maximum amount of 
NOX emissions allowed for the State during the ozone season. 
This emission budget reflected adjustments to Alabama's NOX 
emission budget to reflect the Court's decision that Georgia and 
Missouri should not be included in full. Although the Court did not 
order EPA to modify Alabama's budget, the EPA believes these 
adjustments are consistent with the Court's decision.

II. Analysis of State's Submittal

    The State of Alabama submitted a revision to its SIP on February 
23, 2005. The revision responds to the NOX SIP Call Phase II 
(69 FR 21604, April 21, 2004). ADEM is revising its regulations to 
remain consistent with EPA requirements. The addition of the proposed 
regulation to Chapter 335-3-8, specifically Rule 335-3-8-.04, fulfills 
this requirement.
    The NOX SIP Call Phase II (69 FR 21604) required 
NOX reductions for 4,968 tons for Alabama. However, upon 
further calculation it was determined that the required NOX 
reduction for Alabama is 4,895 tons.
    The revision also includes changes to Rule 335-3-3. A typographical 
error is corrected in Rule 335-3-3-.01(2), changing the word ``not'' to 
``nor'' in the second sentence and 335-3-3-.01(2)(d) is being revised 
to delete an expired provision pertaining to open burning in Morgan 
County in 2003.

III. Final Action

    EPA is approving the aforementioned changes to the SIP. EPA is 
publishing this rule without prior proposal because the Agency views 
this as a non-controversial submittal and anticipates no adverse 
comments. However, in the proposed rules section of this Federal 
Register publication, EPA is publishing a separate document that will 
serve as the proposal to approve the SIP revision should adverse 
comments be filed. This rule will be effective February 27, 2006 
without further notice unless the Agency receives adverse comments by 
January 27, 2006.
    If the EPA receives such comments, then EPA will publish a document 
withdrawing the final rule and informing the public that the rule will 
not take effect. All public comments received will then be addressed in 
a subsequent final rule based on the proposed rule. The EPA will not 
institute a second comment period. Parties interested in commenting 
should do so at this time. If no such comments are received, the public 
is advised that this rule will be effective on February 27, 2006 and no 
further action will be taken on the proposed rule. Please note that if 
we receive adverse comment on an amendment, paragraph, or section of 
this rule and if that provision may be severed from the remainder of 
the rule, we may adopt as final those provisions of the rule that are 
not the subject of an adverse comment.

IV. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews

    Under Executive Order 12866 (58 FR 51735, October 4, 1993), this 
action is not a ``significant regulatory action'' and therefore is not 
subject to review by the Office of Management and Budget. For this 
reason, this action is also not subject to Executive Order 13211, 
``Actions Concerning Regulations That Significantly Affect Energy 
Supply, Distribution, or Use'' (66 FR 28355, May 22, 2001). This action 
merely approves state law as meeting Federal requirements and imposes 
no additional requirements beyond those imposed by state law. 
Accordingly, the Administrator certifies that this rule will not have a 
significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities 
under the Regulatory Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 601 et seq.). Because 
this rule approves pre-existing requirements under state law and does 
not impose any additional enforceable duty beyond that required by 
state law, it 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).
    This rule also does not have tribal implications because it will 
not have a substantial direct effect on one or more Indian tribes, on 
the relationship between the Federal Government and Indian tribes, or 
on the distribution of power and responsibilities between the Federal 
Government and Indian tribes, as specified by Executive Order 13175 (65 
FR 67249, November 9, 2000). This action also does not have Federalism 
implications because it does not have substantial direct effects on the 
states, on the relationship between the national government and the 
states, or on the distribution of power and responsibilities among the 
various levels of government, as specified in Executive Order 13132 (64 
FR 43255, August 10, 1999). This action merely approves a state rule 
implementing a Federal standard, and does not alter the relationship or 
the distribution of power and responsibilities established in the Clean 
Air Act. This rule also is not subject to Executive Order 13045 
``Protection of Children from Environmental Health Risks and Safety 
Risks'' (62 FR 19885, April 23, 1997), because it is not economically 
significant.
    In reviewing SIP submissions, EPA's rule is to approve state 
choices, provided that they meet the criteria of the Clean Air Act. In 
this context, in the absence of a prior existing requirement for the 
State to use voluntary consensus standards (VCS), EPA has no authority 
to disapprove a SIP submission for failure to use VCS. It would thus be 
inconsistent with applicable law for EPA, when it reviews a SIP 
submission, to use VCS in place of a SIP submission that otherwise 
satisfies the provisions of the Clean Air Act. Thus, the requirements 
of section 12(d) of the National Technology Transfer and Advancement 
Act of 1995 (15 U.S.C. 272 note) do not apply. This rule does not 
impose an information collection burden under the provisions of the 
Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.).
    The Congressional Review Act, 5 U.S.C. 801 et seq., as added by the 
Small Business Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act of 1996, generally 
provides that before a rule may take effect, the agency promulgating 
the rule must submit a rule report, which includes a copy of the rule, 
to each House of the Congress and to the Comptroller General of the 
United States. EPA will submit a report containing this rule and other 
required information to the U.S. Senate, the U.S. House of 
Representatives, and the Comptroller General of the United States prior 
to publication of the rule in the Federal Register. A major rule cannot 
take effect until 60 days after it is published in the Federal 
Register. This action is not a ``major rule'' as defined by 5 U.S.C 
804(2).
    Under section 307(b)(1) of the Clean Air Act, petitions for 
judicial review of this action must be filed in the United States Court 
of Appeals for the appropriate circuit by February 27, 2006. Filing a 
petition for reconsideration by the Administrator of this final rule 
does not affect the finality of this rule for the purposes of judicial 
review nor does it extend the time within which a petition for judicial 
review may be filed, and shall not postpone the effectiveness of such 
rule or action. This action may not be challenged later in proceedings 
to enforce its requirements. (See section 307(b)(2).)

List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52

    Environmental protection, Air pollution control, Intergovernmental 
relations, Nitrogen dioxide, Ozone, Particulate matter, Reporting and

[[Page 76697]]

recordkeeping requirements, Volatile organic compounds.

    Dated: December 9, 2005.
A. Stanley Meiburg,
Acting Regional Administrator, Region 4.

0
Chapter I, Title 40, Code of Federal Regulations, is amended as 
follows:

PART 52--[AMENDED]

0
1. The authority citation for part 52 continues to read as follows:

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

Subpart B--Alabama

0
2. Section 52.50(c) is amended by revising entries for ``Section 335-3-
3.01'' and ``Section 335-3-8.04'' to read as follows:


Sec.  52.50  Identification of plan.

* * * * *
    (c) * * *

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                        State
       State citation            Title/subject     effective date        EPA approval date          Explanation
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
   Chapter 335-3-3 Control of Open Burning and
                   Incineration
 
                                                  * * * * * * *
Section 335-3-3-.01........  Open Burning........        mm/dd/yy  12/28/05 [insert citation of
                                                                    publication].
 
                                                 * * * * * * *
    Chapter 335-3-8 Control of Nitrogen Oxide
                    Emissions
 
                                                  * * * * * * *
Section 335-3-8-.04........  Standards for               mm/dd/yy  12/28/05 [insert citation of
                              Stationary                            publication].
                              Reciprocating
                              Internal Combustion
                              Engines.
 
                                                  * * * * * * *
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

* * * * *
[FR Doc. 05-24474 Filed 12-27-05; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-M