Final Rule Making Findings of Failure To Submit Required State Implementation Plans for Phase II of the NOX, 6347-6350 [06-1175]
Download as PDF
Federal Register / Vol. 71, No. 26 / Wednesday, February 8, 2006 / Rules and Regulations
Toksook Bay, AK, Toksook Bay, Takeoff
Minimums and Textual DPs, Orig
Payson, AZ, Payson, Takeoff Minimums and
Textual DP, Amdt 1
San Bernardino, CA, San Bernardino Intl, ILS
OR LOC RWY 6, Amdt 1
Chicago, IL, Chicago Midway Intl, RNAV
(GPS) Z RWY 22L, Orig
Chicago, IL, Chicago Midway Intl, VOR/DME
RNAV OR GPS RWY 22L, Amdt 3B,
CANCELLED
Moline, IL, Quad City Intl, NDB RWY 9,
Amdt 28, CANCELLED
Boston, MA, General Edward Lawrence
Logan Intl, VOR/DME RNAV RWY 4R,
Amdt 1A, CANCELLED
Bangor, ME, Bangor Intl, ILS OR LOC RWY
33, Amdt 11
Polson, MT, Polson, RNAV (GPS) RWY 18,
Orig-A
Keene, NH, Dillant-Hopkins, ILS OR LOC
RWY 2, Amdt 3
Socorro, NM, Socorro Muni, NDB–B, Orig-A,
CANCELLED
Idabel, OK, McCurtain County Regional,
NDB–A, Orig, CANCELLED
Chester, SC, Chester Catawba Regional, VOR/
DME–A, Amdt 1, CANCELLED
Lancaster, SC, Lancaster County-McWhirter
Fld, VOR/DME–A, Amdt 6, CANCELLED
Pierre, SD, Pierre Regional, RNAV (GPS)
RWY 7, Amdt 1
Pierre, SD, Pierre Regional, RNAV (GPS)
RWY 13, Amdt 1
Pierre, SD, Pierre Regional, RNAV (GPS)
RWY 25, Amdt 1
Pierre, SD, Pierre Regional, RNAV (GPS)
RWY 31, Orig
Pierre, SD, Pierre Regional, ILS OR LOC RWY
31, Amdt 12
Salt Lake City, UT, Salt Lake City Intl, VOR/
DME RWY 34R, Amdt 9
The FAA published an Amendment in
Docket No. 30475, Amdt No. 3150 to Part 97
of the Federal Aviation Regulations (Vol 71,
FR No. 17, page 4244; dated Jan 26, 2006)
under section 97.33 effective 16 FEB 2006,
which is hereby rescinded:
Chicago, IL, Chicago Midway Intl, RNAV
(RNP) Y RWY 13C, Orig
Chicago, IL, Chicago Midway Intl, RNAV
(RNP) Y RWY 22L, Orig
[FR Doc. 06–1119 Filed 2–7–06; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910–13–P
DEPARTMENT OF HOUSING AND
URBAN DEVELOPMENT
24 CFR Part 203
[Docket No. FR–4169–F–04]
rmajette on PROD1PC67 with RULES1
RIN 2502–AG87
Delegation of Insuring Authority To
Direct Endorsement Mortgages;
Announcement of Information
Collection Effective Date
Office of the Assistant
Secretary for Housing—Federal Housing
Commissioner, HUD.
AGENCY:
VerDate Aug<31>2005
15:23 Feb 07, 2006
Jkt 208001
Final rule; announcement of
effective date.
ACTION:
SUMMARY: This document announces the
effective date for the information
collection statement contained in a HUD
interim rule published in the Federal
Register on June 2, 1997. An
information collection requirement
cannot be instituted unless it is cleared
by the Office of Management and
Budget (OMB) and assigned an OMB
control number. The information
collection requirements of the June 2,
1997 interim rule were cleared by OMB
on July 10, 1997, and are currently
covered by OMB Control Number 2502–
0059. Accordingly, the information
collection statement in HUD’s June 2,
1997, interim rule took effect upon
approval by OMB on July 10, 1997.
Effective Date: The amendment
to § 203.255(f), published in the Federal
Register on June 2, 1997, at 62 FR
30222, is effective as of July 10, 1997.
DATES:
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Kathleen O. McDermott, Senior
Management Analyst, Policy Planning
and Analysis Division, Office of
Housing, Department of Housing and
Urban Development, 451 Seventh Street,
SW., Room 9116, Washington, DC
20410–7000, telephone (202) 708–0826
(this is not a toll free number).
Individuals with speech or hearing
impairments may access this number
through TTY by calling the toll-free
Federal Information Relay Service at
800–877–8339.
On June 2,
1997 (62 FR 30222), HUD published an
interim rule, entitled ‘‘Delegation of
Insuring Authority to Direct
Endorsement Mortgagees,’’ which, in
part, provided that Lender Insurance
mortgagees must maintain records,
including origination files, in a manner
and for a time period to be prescribed
by the Assistant Secretary for Housing—
Federal Housing Commissioner, and
must make them available to authorized
HUD staff upon request (24 CFR
203.255(f)).
At the time of the publication of the
interim rule, the information collection
requirements contained in § 203.255(f)
had been submitted to, but not yet
approved by, the Office of Management
and Budget (OMB) for review in
accordance with the Paperwork
Reduction Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. 3501–
3520). Under the Paperwork Reduction
Act, an agency may not conduct or
sponsor, and a person is not required to
respond to, a collection of information
unless and until the collection displays
a valid OMB control number.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
PO 00000
Frm 00011
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
6347
OMB approved the information
collection contained in 24 CFR
203.255(f), as amended by HUD’s June
2, 1997, interim rule, on July 10, 1997.
Accordingly, the information collection
requirements were effective upon that
date. The information collection
requirements at § 203.255(f) were
originally assigned OMB control
number 2502–0365. In July 2000, OMB
control number 2502–0059 replaced
OMB control number 2502–0365 as the
valid control number that authorizes the
information collection requirements.
OMB control number 2502–0059
remains the currently approved control
number for § 203.255(f).
Dated: January 30, 2006.
Frank L. Davis,
General Deputy Assistant Secretary for
Housing.
[FR Doc. 06–1121 Filed 2–7–06; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4210–67–P
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION
AGENCY
40 CFR Part 51
[Docket No. OAR–2005–0154; FRL–8028–8]
Final Rule Making Findings of Failure
To Submit Required State
Implementation Plans for Phase II of
the NOX SIP Call
Environmental Protection
Agency (EPA).
ACTION: Final rule.
AGENCY:
SUMMARY: The EPA is taking final action
making findings, under the Clean Air
Act (CAA), that Indiana, Illinois,
Kentucky, Michigan, and Virginia failed
to make complete State implementation
plan (SIP) submittals required under the
CAA. Under the CAA and Phase II of
EPA’s nitrogen oxides (NOX) SIP Call
regulations, these States were required
to submit SIP measures providing for
reductions in the emissions of NOX, an
ozone precursor.
DATES: Effective Date: This final rule is
effective on March 10, 2006.
ADDRESSES: EPA has established a
docket for this action under Docket ID
No. EPA–OAR–2005–0514. All
documents in the docket are listed on
the https://www.regulations.gov Web
site. Although listed in the index, some
information is not publicly available,
e.g., 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
E:\FR\FM\08FER1.SGM
08FER1
6348
Federal Register / Vol. 71, No. 26 / Wednesday, February 8, 2006 / Rules and Regulations
available either electronically through
https://www.regulations.gov or in hard
copy at the Air Docket, EPA/DC, EPA
West, Room B102, 1301 Constitution
Ave., NW., Washington, DC. The public
reading room is open from 8:30 a.m. to
4:30 p.m., Monday through Friday,
excluding holidays. The telephone
number for the public reading room is
(202) 566–1744, and the Air Docket
telephone number is (202) 566–1742.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
General questions concerning this
notice should be addressed to Jan King,
Office of Air Quality Planning and
Standards, Air Quality Strategies and
Standards Division, C539–02, Research
Triangle Park, NC 27711; telephone
number (919) 541–5665; fax number
(919) 541–0824; e-mail
king.jan@epa.gov. Legal questions
should be addressed to Winifred Okoye,
Office of General Counsel, (2344A),
1200 Pennsylvania Avenue, NW.,
Washington, DC 20460; telephone
number: (202) 564–5446; e-mail
okoye.winifred@epa.gov.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
rmajette on PROD1PC67 with RULES1
Outline
I. Background
II. What Action Is EPA Taking Today?
III. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews
A. Notice and Comment Under the
Administrative Procedures Act
B. Executive Order 12866: Regulatory
Planning and Review
C. Paperwork Reduction Act
D. Regulatory Flexibility Act
E. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act
F. Executive Order 13132: Federalism
G. Executive Order 13175: Consultation
and Coordination With Indian Tribal
Governments
H. Executive Order 13045: Protection of
Children From Environmental Health
and Safety Risks
I. Executive Order 13211: Actions That
Significantly Affect Energy Supply,
Distribution, or Use
J. National Technology Transfer
Advancement Act
K. Congressional Review Act
I. Background
On October 27, 1998 (63 FR 57356),
we took final action in the NOX SIP Call
Rule, under sections 110(a)(2)(D) and
110(k)(5) of the CAA, to prohibit
specified amounts of emissions of one of
the main precursors of ground-level
ozone, NOX, in order to reduce ozone
transport across State boundaries in the
eastern half of the United States. Based
on extensive air quality modeling and
analyses, we found that sources in 22
States and the District of Columbia (DC)
(23 States) emit NOX in amounts that
significantly contribute to
nonattainment of both the 1-hour and 8hour ozone national ambient air quality
VerDate Aug<31>2005
15:23 Feb 07, 2006
Jkt 208001
standards (NAAQS) in downwind
States. We set forth requirements for
each of the affected upwind States to
submit SIP revisions prohibiting those
amounts of NOX emissions which
significantly contribute to downwind air
quality problems. In the NOX SIP Call
Rule, as modified by the March 2, 2000,
technical amendments (65 FR 11222),
we also established statewide NOX
emissions budgets for the affected
States. The budgets were calculated by
assuming the emissions reductions that
would be achieved by applying
available, highly cost-effective controls
to source categories of NOX emissions.
States had the flexibility to adopt the
appropriate mix of controls to meet their
statewide NOX emissions budgets.
A number of parties, including certain
States as well as industry and labor
groups, challenged our NOX SIP Call
Rule by filing petitions for review in the
U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of
Columbia (DC Circuit or Court). On
March 3, 2000, the DC Circuit issued an
opinion, largely upholding the 1-hour
basis for the NOX SIP Call.1
In response to the Court decision,
EPA divided the NOX SIP Call Rule into
two phases, now known as Phase I and
Phase II. Under Phase I of the rule, EPA
moved ahead with implementing those
aspects of the rule that were upheld by
the Court for 19 States and the District
of Columbia. The EPA required these
States to submit SIPs that comply with
Phase I by October 30, 2000. Because
the Court vacated the rule as to
Wisconsin, Georgia, and Missouri, these
States were not required to submit
Phase I SIPs.
On April 21, 2004, EPA published a
final response to the Court decision that
addressed the outstanding issues
remanded or otherwise vacated by the
Court, and which is Phase II of the NOX
SIP Call rule. The affected States were
required to submit Phase II SIPs by
April 1, 2005.2
II. What Action Is EPA Taking Today?
Today, EPA is making findings of
failure to submit complete SIP revisions,
1 In light of various legal challenges to our
promulgation of the 8-hour ozone NAAQS (62 FR
38856; July 18, 1997), we requested, and the Court
granted our motion to stay consideration of issues
regarding the 8-hour basis for the NOX SIP Call.
Additionally, on September 18, 2000, we stayed the
8-hour basis for the NOX SIP Call indefinitely. (65
FR 56245). See also 40 CFR 51.121(q).
2 The States which are required to submit Phase
II SIPs are Alabama, Georgia, Illinois, Indiana,
Kentucky, Michigan, Missouri, Ohio, Pennsylvania,
South Carolina, Tennessee, Virginia, and West
Virginia. With respect to Georgia, however, EPA has
stayed this requirement in order to respond to a
petition of reconsideration filed by the Georgia
Coalition for Sound Environmental Policy. (70 FR
5159; August 31, 2005).
PO 00000
Frm 00012
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
including adopted rules, in response to
Phase II of the NOX SIP Call.3 The States
that are receiving findings of failure to
submit Phase II SIP revisions are
Indiana, Illinois, Kentucky, Michigan,
and Virginia. This finding defines the
start of a clock for EPA to develop a
federal implementation plan (FIP) under
section 110(c) of the CAA.
Recently, EPA sent letters to State
officials of the affected States describing
the status of the States’ effort in
completing a Phase II SIP. The letters
also noted that we would be publishing
findings of failure to submit in the
Federal Register. (These letters are
included in the docket for this
rulemaking). The EPA intends to
continue working with these States so
that they can submit approvable
adopted rules as soon as possible.
III. Statutory and Executive Order
Reviews
A. Notice and Comment Under the
Administrative Procedures Act
This is a final EPA action, but is not
subject to notice-and-comment
requirements of the Administrative
Procedures Act (APA), 5 U.S.C. 553(b).
The EPA invokes, consistent with past
practice (see for example, 61 FR 36294,
July 10, 1996), the good cause exception
pursuant to the APA, 5 U.S.C.
553(b)(3)(B). Notice and comment are
unnecessary because no significant EPA
judgment is involved in making a
finding of failure to submit SIPs or
elements of SIPs required by the CAA,
where States have made no submissions
to meet the requirement by the statutory
date.
B. Executive Order 12866: Regulatory
Planning and Review
Under Executive Order 12866 (58 FR
51735, October 4, 1993), EPA must
determine whether the regulatory action
is ‘‘significant’’ and, therefore, subject to
OMB review and the requirements of
the Executive Order. The order defines
‘‘significant regulatory action’’ as one
that is likely to result in a rule that may:
(1) Have an annual effect on the
economy of $100 million or more or
adversely affect in a material way the
economy, a sector of the economy,
productivity, competition, jobs, the
environment, public health or safety, or
State, local, or Tribal governments or
communities;
3 Our stay of the 8-hour basis of the NO SIP Call
X
Rule is with respect to all aspects of the rule as they
relate to the 8-hour requirements, thus, the affected
States remain under no obligation to submit SIP
revisions that address the 8-hour basis for the NOX
SIP Call. Today’s findings, therefore, are only for
purposes of the 1-hour basis, and not the 8-hour
basis of the NOX SIP Call Rule.
E:\FR\FM\08FER1.SGM
08FER1
Federal Register / Vol. 71, No. 26 / Wednesday, February 8, 2006 / Rules and Regulations
(2) Create a serious inconsistency or
otherwise interfere with an action taken
or planned by another agency;
(3) Materially alter the budgetary
impact of entitlements, grants, user fees,
or loan programs or the rights and
obligations of recipients thereof; or
(4) Raise novel legal or policy issues
arising out of legal mandates, the
President’s priorities, or the principles
set forth in the Executive Order.
Pursuant to the terms of Executive
Order 12866, a determination has been
made that this rule is not a ‘‘significant
regulatory action’’ because none of the
above factors apply. As such, this final
action was not formally submitted to the
Office of Management and Budget
(OMB) for review.
C. Paperwork Reduction Act
This action does not impose an
information collection burden under the
provisions of the Paperwork Reduction
Act, 44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.
rmajette on PROD1PC67 with RULES1
D. Regulatory Flexibility Act
Today’s final rule is not subject to the
Regulatory Flexibility Act (RFA), which
generally requires an agency to prepare
a regulatory flexibility analysis for any
rule that will have a significant
economic impact on a substantial
number of small entities. The RFA
applies only to rules subject to noticeand-comment rulemaking requirements
under the APA or any other statute. This
rule is not subject to notice-andcomment requirements under the APA
or any other statute because although
the rule is subject to the APA, the
Agency has invoked the ‘‘good cause’’
exemption under 5 U.S.C. 553(b),
therefore it is not subject to the notice
and comment requirement.
E. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act
Title II of the Unfunded Mandates
Reform Act of 1995 (UMRA), Public
Law 104–4, establishes requirements for
Federal Agencies to assess the effects of
their regulatory actions on State, local
and Tribal governments and the private
sector. Under section 202 of the UMRA,
EPA generally must prepare a written
statement, including a cost-benefit
analysis, for proposed and final rules
with ‘‘Federal mandates’’ that may
result in expenditures to State, local,
and Tribal governments, in the
aggregate, or to the private sector, of
$100 million or more in any 1 year.
Before promulgating an EPA rule for
which a written statement is needed,
section 205 of the UMRA generally
requires EPA to identify and consider a
reasonable number of regulatory
alternatives and adopt the least costly,
most cost-effective or least burdensome
VerDate Aug<31>2005
15:23 Feb 07, 2006
Jkt 208001
alternative that achieves the objectives
of the rule. The provisions of section
205 do not apply when they are
inconsistent with applicable law.
Moreover, section 205 allows EPA to
adopt an alternative other than the least
costly, most cost-effective or least
burdensome alternative if the
Administrator publishes with the final
rule an explanation of why that
alternative was not adopted. Before EPA
establishes any regulatory requirements
that may significantly or uniquely affect
small governments, including Tribal
governments, it must have developed
under section 203 of the UMRA a small
government agency plan. The plan must
provide for notifying potentially
affected small governments to have
meaningful and timely input in the
development of EPA regulatory
proposals with significant Federal
intergovernmental mandates, and
informing, educating, and advising
small government on compliance with
regulatory requirements.
The EPA has determined that this rule
does not contain a Federal mandate that
may result in expenditures of $100
million or more in any 1 year by either
State, local, or Tribal governments in
the aggregate or to the private sector in
any 1 year. It does not create any
additional requirements beyond those of
the NOX SIP Call (63 FR 57356). This
rule responds to the requirement in the
CAA for States to submit SIPs to satisfy
requirements of the NOX SIP Call. This
action simply finds that States have
failed to submit SIPs to address a preexisting statutory requirement under the
CAA. Thus, today’s rule is not subject
to the requirements of sections 202 and
205 of the UMRA.
F. Executive Order 13132: Federalism
Executive Order 13132, entitled
‘‘Federalism’’ (64 FR 43255, August 10,
1999), requires EPA to develop an
accountable process to ensure
‘‘meaningful and timely input by State
and local officials in the development of
regulatory policies that have federalism
implications.’’ ‘‘Policies that have
federalism implications’’ is defined in
the Executive Order to include
regulations that have ‘‘substantial direct
effects on the States, or the relationship
between the national government and
the States, or on the distribution of
power and responsibilities among the
various levels of government.’’
This final rule does not have
federalism implications. It will 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
PO 00000
Frm 00013
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
6349
levels of government, as specified in
Executive Order 13132.
G. Executive Order 13175: Consultation
and Coordination With Indian Tribal
Governments
Executive Order 13175, entitled
‘‘Consultation and Coordination with
Indian Tribal Governments’’ (65 FR
67249, November 9, 2000), requires EPA
to develop an accountable process to
ensure ‘‘meaningful and timely input by
Tribal officials in the development of
regulatory policies that have Tribal
implications.’’ This final rule does not
have ‘‘Tribal implications’’ as specified
in Executive Order 13175. This rule
responds to the requirement in the CAA
for States to submit SIPs to satisfy
certain elements required under section
110(a)(2) of the CAA for the NOX SIP
Call. Thus, Executive Order 13175 does
not apply to this rule.
H. Executive Order 13045: Protection of
Children From Environmental Health
and Safety Risks
Executive Order 13045: ‘‘Protection of
Children From Environmental Health
and Safety Risks’’ (62 FR 19885, April
23, 1997) applies to any rule that (1) is
determined to be ‘‘economically
significant’’ as defined under Executive
Order 12866, and (2) concerns an
environmental health and safety risk
that EPA has reason to believe may have
a disproportionate effect on children. If
the regulatory action meets both criteria,
EPA must evaluate the environmental
health or safety effects of the planned
rule on children, and explain why the
planned regulation is preferable to other
potentially effective and reasonably
feasible alternatives considered by EPA.
This action is not subject to Executive
Order 13045 because it is not
economically significant as defined in
Executive Order 12866, and because
EPA does not have reason to believe that
the environmental health risks or safety
risks addressed by this rule present a
disproportionate risk or safety risk to
children.
I. Executive Order 13211: Actions That
Significantly Affect Energy Supply,
Distribution, or Use
This rule is not subject to Executive
Order 13211, ‘‘Actions That
Significantly Affect Energy Supply,
Distribution, or Use,’’ (66 FR 28355,
May 22, 2001) because it is not a
significant regulatory action under
Executive Order 12866.
J. National Technology Transfer
Advancement Act
Section 12(d) of the National
Technology Transfer Advancement Act
E:\FR\FM\08FER1.SGM
08FER1
6350
Federal Register / Vol. 71, No. 26 / Wednesday, February 8, 2006 / Rules and Regulations
of 1995 (NTTAA), Public Law No. 104–
113, section 12(d) (15 U.S.C. 272 note)
directs EPA to use voluntary consensus
standards (VCS) in its regulatory
activities unless to do so would be
inconsistent with applicable law or
otherwise impracticable. Voluntary
consensus standards are technical
standards (e.g., materials specifications,
test methods, sampling procedures, and
business practices) that are developed or
adopted by VCS bodies. The NTTAA
directs EPA to provide Congress,
through OMB, explanations when EPA
decides not to use available and
applicable VCS.
This action does not involve technical
standards. Therefore, EPA did not
consider the use of any VCS.
K. Congressional Review Act
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. The 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). This rule will be effective March
10, 2006.
List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 51
Environmental protection,
Administrative practice and procedure,
Air pollution control, Intergovernmental
relations, Ozone, Reporting and
recordkeeping requirements.
Dated: January 27, 2006.
William L. Wehrum,
Acting Assistant Administrator for Air and
Radiation.
[FR Doc. 06–1175 Filed 2–7–06; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560–50–P
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION
AGENCY
40 CFR Part 52
[EPA–R09–OAR–2005–CA–0014; FRL–
8027–9]
Revisions to the California State
Implementation Plan, South Coast Air
Quality Management District
Environmental Protection
Agency (EPA).
ACTION: Direct final rule.
AGENCY:
SUMMARY: EPA is taking direct final
action to approve revisions to the South
Coast Air Quality Management District
(SCAQMD) portion of the California
State Implementation Plan (SIP). These
revisions concern volatile organic
compound (VOC) emissions from
solvent degreasers. We are approving a
local rule that regulates these emission
sources under the Clean Air Act as
amended in 1990 (CAA or the Act).
DATES: This rule is effective on April 10,
2006 without further notice, unless EPA
receives adverse comments by March
10, 2006. If we receive such comments,
we will publish a timely withdrawal in
the Federal Register to notify the public
that this direct final rule will not take
effect.
ADDRESSES: Submit comments,
identified by docket number EPA–R09–
OAR–2005–CA–0014, by one of the
following methods:
1. Federal eRulemaking Portal:
https://www.regulations.gov. Follow the
on-line instructions.
2. E-mail: steckel.andrew@epa.gov.
3. Mail or deliver: Andrew Steckel
(Air-4), U.S. Environmental Protection
Agency Region IX, 75 Hawthorne Street,
San Francisco, CA 94105–3901.
Instructions: All comments will be
included in the public docket without
change and may be made available
online at https://www.regulations.gov,
including any personal information
provided, unless the comment includes
Confidential Business Information (CBI)
or other information whose disclosure is
restricted by statute. Information that
you consider CBI or otherwise protected
should be clearly identified as such and
should not be submitted through
www.regulations.gov or e-mail.
www.regulations.gov is an ‘‘anonymous
access’’ system, and EPA will not know
your identity or contact information
unless you provide it in the body of
your comment. If you send e-mail
directly to EPA, your e-mail address
will be automatically captured and
included as part of the public comment.
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.
Docket: The index to the docket for
this action is available electronically at
www.regulations.gov and in hard copy
at EPA Region IX, 75 Hawthorne Street,
San Francisco, California. While all
documents in the docket are listed in
the index, some information may be
publicly available only at the hard copy
location (e.g., copyrighted material), and
some may not be publicly available in
either location (e.g., CBI). To inspect the
hard copy materials, please schedule an
appointment during normal business
hours with the contact listed in the FOR
FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
´˜
Francisco Donez, EPA Region IX, (415)
972–3956, Donez.Francisco@epa.gov.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Throughout this document, ‘‘we,’’ ‘‘us’’
and ‘‘our’’refer to EPA.
Table of Contents
I. The State’s Submittal
A. What Rule Did the State Submit?
B. Are There Other Versions of This Rule?
C. What Is the Purpose of the Submitted
Rule Revisions?
II. EPA’s Evaluation and Action
A. How Is EPA Evaluating the Rule?
B. Does the Rule Meet the Evaluation
Criteria?
C. EPA Recommendations to Further
Improve the Rule.
D. Public Comment and Final Action.
III. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews
I. The State’s Submittal
A. What Rule Did the State Submit?
Table 1 lists the rule we are approving
with the dates that it was adopted by the
local air agency and submitted by the
California Air Resources Board (CARB).
TABLE 1.—SUBMITTED RULE
Local agency
rmajette on PROD1PC67 with RULES1
SCAQMD .................................
VerDate Aug<31>2005
15:23 Feb 07, 2006
Rule No.
1122
Jkt 208001
Rule title
Adopted
Solvent Degreasers ...................................................................
PO 00000
Frm 00014
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
E:\FR\FM\08FER1.SGM
08FER1
10/01/04
Submitted
01/13/05
Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 71, Number 26 (Wednesday, February 8, 2006)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 6347-6350]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 06-1175]
=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
40 CFR Part 51
[Docket No. OAR-2005-0154; FRL-8028-8]
Final Rule Making Findings of Failure To Submit Required State
Implementation Plans for Phase II of the NOX SIP Call
AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).
ACTION: Final rule.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: The EPA is taking final action making findings, under the
Clean Air Act (CAA), that Indiana, Illinois, Kentucky, Michigan, and
Virginia failed to make complete State implementation plan (SIP)
submittals required under the CAA. Under the CAA and Phase II of EPA's
nitrogen oxides (NOX) SIP Call regulations, these States
were required to submit SIP measures providing for reductions in the
emissions of NOX, an ozone precursor.
DATES: Effective Date: This final rule is effective on March 10, 2006.
ADDRESSES: EPA has established a docket for this action under Docket ID
No. EPA-OAR-2005-0514. All documents in the docket are listed on the
https://www.regulations.gov Web site. Although listed in the index, some
information is not publicly available, e.g., 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
[[Page 6348]]
available either electronically through https://www.regulations.gov or
in hard copy at the Air Docket, EPA/DC, EPA West, Room B102, 1301
Constitution Ave., NW., Washington, DC. The public reading room is open
from 8:30 a.m. to 4:30 p.m., Monday through Friday, excluding holidays.
The telephone number for the public reading room is (202) 566-1744, and
the Air Docket telephone number is (202) 566-1742.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: General questions concerning this
notice should be addressed to Jan King, Office of Air Quality Planning
and Standards, Air Quality Strategies and Standards Division, C539-02,
Research Triangle Park, NC 27711; telephone number (919) 541-5665; fax
number (919) 541-0824; e-mail king.jan@epa.gov. Legal questions should
be addressed to Winifred Okoye, Office of General Counsel, (2344A),
1200 Pennsylvania Avenue, NW., Washington, DC 20460; telephone number:
(202) 564-5446; e-mail okoye.winifred@epa.gov.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Outline
I. Background
II. What Action Is EPA Taking Today?
III. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews
A. Notice and Comment Under the Administrative Procedures Act
B. Executive Order 12866: Regulatory Planning and Review
C. Paperwork Reduction Act
D. Regulatory Flexibility Act
E. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act
F. Executive Order 13132: Federalism
G. Executive Order 13175: Consultation and Coordination With
Indian Tribal Governments
H. Executive Order 13045: Protection of Children From
Environmental Health and Safety Risks
I. Executive Order 13211: Actions That Significantly Affect
Energy Supply, Distribution, or Use
J. National Technology Transfer Advancement Act
K. Congressional Review Act
I. Background
On October 27, 1998 (63 FR 57356), we took final action in the
NOX SIP Call Rule, under sections 110(a)(2)(D) and 110(k)(5)
of the CAA, to prohibit specified amounts of emissions of one of the
main precursors of ground-level ozone, NOX, in order to
reduce ozone transport across State boundaries in the eastern half of
the United States. Based on extensive air quality modeling and
analyses, we found that sources in 22 States and the District of
Columbia (DC) (23 States) emit NOX in amounts that
significantly contribute to nonattainment of both the 1-hour and 8-hour
ozone national ambient air quality standards (NAAQS) in downwind
States. We set forth requirements for each of the affected upwind
States to submit SIP revisions prohibiting those amounts of
NOX emissions which significantly contribute to downwind air
quality problems. In the NOX SIP Call Rule, as modified by
the March 2, 2000, technical amendments (65 FR 11222), we also
established statewide NOX emissions budgets for the affected
States. The budgets were calculated by assuming the emissions
reductions that would be achieved by applying available, highly cost-
effective controls to source categories of NOX emissions.
States had the flexibility to adopt the appropriate mix of controls to
meet their statewide NOX emissions budgets.
A number of parties, including certain States as well as industry
and labor groups, challenged our NOX SIP Call Rule by filing
petitions for review in the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of
Columbia (DC Circuit or Court). On March 3, 2000, the DC Circuit issued
an opinion, largely upholding the 1-hour basis for the NOX
SIP Call.\1\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ In light of various legal challenges to our promulgation of
the 8-hour ozone NAAQS (62 FR 38856; July 18, 1997), we requested,
and the Court granted our motion to stay consideration of issues
regarding the 8-hour basis for the NOX SIP Call.
Additionally, on September 18, 2000, we stayed the 8-hour basis for
the NOX SIP Call indefinitely. (65 FR 56245). See also 40
CFR 51.121(q).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
In response to the Court decision, EPA divided the NOX
SIP Call Rule into two phases, now known as Phase I and Phase II. Under
Phase I of the rule, EPA moved ahead with implementing those aspects of
the rule that were upheld by the Court for 19 States and the District
of Columbia. The EPA required these States to submit SIPs that comply
with Phase I by October 30, 2000. Because the Court vacated the rule as
to Wisconsin, Georgia, and Missouri, these States were not required to
submit Phase I SIPs.
On April 21, 2004, EPA published a final response to the Court
decision that addressed the outstanding issues remanded or otherwise
vacated by the Court, and which is Phase II of the NOX SIP
Call rule. The affected States were required to submit Phase II SIPs by
April 1, 2005.\2\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\2\ The States which are required to submit Phase II SIPs are
Alabama, Georgia, Illinois, Indiana, Kentucky, Michigan, Missouri,
Ohio, Pennsylvania, South Carolina, Tennessee, Virginia, and West
Virginia. With respect to Georgia, however, EPA has stayed this
requirement in order to respond to a petition of reconsideration
filed by the Georgia Coalition for Sound Environmental Policy. (70
FR 5159; August 31, 2005).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
II. What Action Is EPA Taking Today?
Today, EPA is making findings of failure to submit complete SIP
revisions, including adopted rules, in response to Phase II of the
NOX SIP Call.\3\ The States that are receiving findings of
failure to submit Phase II SIP revisions are Indiana, Illinois,
Kentucky, Michigan, and Virginia. This finding defines the start of a
clock for EPA to develop a federal implementation plan (FIP) under
section 110(c) of the CAA.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\3\ Our stay of the 8-hour basis of the NOX SIP Call
Rule is with respect to all aspects of the rule as they relate to
the 8-hour requirements, thus, the affected States remain under no
obligation to submit SIP revisions that address the 8-hour basis for
the NOX SIP Call. Today's findings, therefore, are only
for purposes of the 1-hour basis, and not the 8-hour basis of the
NOX SIP Call Rule.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Recently, EPA sent letters to State officials of the affected
States describing the status of the States' effort in completing a
Phase II SIP. The letters also noted that we would be publishing
findings of failure to submit in the Federal Register. (These letters
are included in the docket for this rulemaking). The EPA intends to
continue working with these States so that they can submit approvable
adopted rules as soon as possible.
III. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews
A. Notice and Comment Under the Administrative Procedures Act
This is a final EPA action, but is not subject to notice-and-
comment requirements of the Administrative Procedures Act (APA), 5
U.S.C. 553(b). The EPA invokes, consistent with past practice (see for
example, 61 FR 36294, July 10, 1996), the good cause exception pursuant
to the APA, 5 U.S.C. 553(b)(3)(B). Notice and comment are unnecessary
because no significant EPA judgment is involved in making a finding of
failure to submit SIPs or elements of SIPs required by the CAA, where
States have made no submissions to meet the requirement by the
statutory date.
B. Executive Order 12866: Regulatory Planning and Review
Under Executive Order 12866 (58 FR 51735, October 4, 1993), EPA
must determine whether the regulatory action is ``significant'' and,
therefore, subject to OMB review and the requirements of the Executive
Order. The order defines ``significant regulatory action'' as one that
is likely to result in a rule that may:
(1) Have an annual effect on the economy of $100 million or more or
adversely affect in a material way the economy, a sector of the
economy, productivity, competition, jobs, the environment, public
health or safety, or State, local, or Tribal governments or
communities;
[[Page 6349]]
(2) Create a serious inconsistency or otherwise interfere with an
action taken or planned by another agency;
(3) Materially alter the budgetary impact of entitlements, grants,
user fees, or loan programs or the rights and obligations of recipients
thereof; or
(4) Raise novel legal or policy issues arising out of legal
mandates, the President's priorities, or the principles set forth in
the Executive Order.
Pursuant to the terms of Executive Order 12866, a determination has
been made that this rule is not a ``significant regulatory action''
because none of the above factors apply. As such, this final action was
not formally submitted to the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) for
review.
C. Paperwork Reduction Act
This action does not impose an information collection burden under
the provisions of the Paperwork Reduction Act, 44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.
D. Regulatory Flexibility Act
Today's final rule is not subject to the Regulatory Flexibility Act
(RFA), which generally requires an agency to prepare a regulatory
flexibility analysis for any rule that will have a significant economic
impact on a substantial number of small entities. The RFA applies only
to rules subject to notice-and-comment rulemaking requirements under
the APA or any other statute. This rule is not subject to notice-and-
comment requirements under the APA or any other statute because
although the rule is subject to the APA, the Agency has invoked the
``good cause'' exemption under 5 U.S.C. 553(b), therefore it is not
subject to the notice and comment requirement.
E. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act
Title II of the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995 (UMRA), Public
Law 104-4, establishes requirements for Federal Agencies to assess the
effects of their regulatory actions on State, local and Tribal
governments and the private sector. Under section 202 of the UMRA, EPA
generally must prepare a written statement, including a cost-benefit
analysis, for proposed and final rules with ``Federal mandates'' that
may result in expenditures to State, local, and Tribal governments, in
the aggregate, or to the private sector, of $100 million or more in any
1 year. Before promulgating an EPA rule for which a written statement
is needed, section 205 of the UMRA generally requires EPA to identify
and consider a reasonable number of regulatory alternatives and adopt
the least costly, most cost-effective or least burdensome alternative
that achieves the objectives of the rule. The provisions of section 205
do not apply when they are inconsistent with applicable law. Moreover,
section 205 allows EPA to adopt an alternative other than the least
costly, most cost-effective or least burdensome alternative if the
Administrator publishes with the final rule an explanation of why that
alternative was not adopted. Before EPA establishes any regulatory
requirements that may significantly or uniquely affect small
governments, including Tribal governments, it must have developed under
section 203 of the UMRA a small government agency plan. The plan must
provide for notifying potentially affected small governments to have
meaningful and timely input in the development of EPA regulatory
proposals with significant Federal intergovernmental mandates, and
informing, educating, and advising small government on compliance with
regulatory requirements.
The EPA has determined that this rule does not contain a Federal
mandate that may result in expenditures of $100 million or more in any
1 year by either State, local, or Tribal governments in the aggregate
or to the private sector in any 1 year. It does not create any
additional requirements beyond those of the NOX SIP Call (63
FR 57356). This rule responds to the requirement in the CAA for States
to submit SIPs to satisfy requirements of the NOX SIP Call.
This action simply finds that States have failed to submit SIPs to
address a pre-existing statutory requirement under the CAA. Thus,
today's rule is not subject to the requirements of sections 202 and 205
of the UMRA.
F. Executive Order 13132: Federalism
Executive Order 13132, entitled ``Federalism'' (64 FR 43255, August
10, 1999), requires EPA to develop an accountable process to ensure
``meaningful and timely input by State and local officials in the
development of regulatory policies that have federalism implications.''
``Policies that have federalism implications'' is defined in the
Executive Order to include regulations that have ``substantial direct
effects on the States, or the relationship between the national
government and the States, or on the distribution of power and
responsibilities among the various levels of government.''
This final rule does not have federalism implications. It will 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.
G. Executive Order 13175: Consultation and Coordination With Indian
Tribal Governments
Executive Order 13175, entitled ``Consultation and Coordination
with Indian Tribal Governments'' (65 FR 67249, November 9, 2000),
requires EPA to develop an accountable process to ensure ``meaningful
and timely input by Tribal officials in the development of regulatory
policies that have Tribal implications.'' This final rule does not have
``Tribal implications'' as specified in Executive Order 13175. This
rule responds to the requirement in the CAA for States to submit SIPs
to satisfy certain elements required under section 110(a)(2) of the CAA
for the NOX SIP Call. Thus, Executive Order 13175 does not
apply to this rule.
H. Executive Order 13045: Protection of Children From Environmental
Health and Safety Risks
Executive Order 13045: ``Protection of Children From Environmental
Health and Safety Risks'' (62 FR 19885, April 23, 1997) applies to any
rule that (1) is determined to be ``economically significant'' as
defined under Executive Order 12866, and (2) concerns an environmental
health and safety risk that EPA has reason to believe may have a
disproportionate effect on children. If the regulatory action meets
both criteria, EPA must evaluate the environmental health or safety
effects of the planned rule on children, and explain why the planned
regulation is preferable to other potentially effective and reasonably
feasible alternatives considered by EPA.
This action is not subject to Executive Order 13045 because it is
not economically significant as defined in Executive Order 12866, and
because EPA does not have reason to believe that the environmental
health risks or safety risks addressed by this rule present a
disproportionate risk or safety risk to children.
I. Executive Order 13211: Actions That Significantly Affect Energy
Supply, Distribution, or Use
This rule is not subject to Executive Order 13211, ``Actions That
Significantly Affect Energy Supply, Distribution, or Use,'' (66 FR
28355, May 22, 2001) because it is not a significant regulatory action
under Executive Order 12866.
J. National Technology Transfer Advancement Act
Section 12(d) of the National Technology Transfer Advancement Act
[[Page 6350]]
of 1995 (NTTAA), Public Law No. 104-113, section 12(d) (15 U.S.C. 272
note) directs EPA to use voluntary consensus standards (VCS) in its
regulatory activities unless to do so would be inconsistent with
applicable law or otherwise impracticable. Voluntary consensus
standards are technical standards (e.g., materials specifications, test
methods, sampling procedures, and business practices) that are
developed or adopted by VCS bodies. The NTTAA directs EPA to provide
Congress, through OMB, explanations when EPA decides not to use
available and applicable VCS.
This action does not involve technical standards. Therefore, EPA
did not consider the use of any VCS.
K. Congressional Review Act
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. The 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). This rule will be effective March 10, 2006.
List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 51
Environmental protection, Administrative practice and procedure,
Air pollution control, Intergovernmental relations, Ozone, Reporting
and recordkeeping requirements.
Dated: January 27, 2006.
William L. Wehrum,
Acting Assistant Administrator for Air and Radiation.
[FR Doc. 06-1175 Filed 2-7-06; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P