Approval and Promulgation of Air Quality Implementation Plans; Michigan, 32448-32450 [06-4986]
Download as PDF
32448
Federal Register / Vol. 71, No. 108 / Tuesday, June 6, 2006 / Rules and Regulations
Approved: May 22, 2006.
Mark E. Matthews,
Deputy Commissioner for Services and
Enforcement.
Eric Solomon,
Acting Deputy Assistant Secretary of the
Treasury.
[FR Doc. E6–8699 Filed 6–5–06; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4830–01–P
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION
AGENCY
40 CFR Part 52
[EPA–R05–OAR–2005–MI–0001; FRL–8176–
6]
Approval and Promulgation of Air
Quality Implementation Plans;
Michigan
Environmental Protection
Agency (EPA).
ACTION: Final rule.
wwhite on PROD1PC61 with RULES
AGENCY:
SUMMARY: EPA is approving a June 17,
2005, Michigan petition for exemptions
from the Reasonably Available Control
Technology (RACT) and New Source
Review (NSR) requirements for major
sources of nitrogen oxides (NOX). The
petition is for sources in six of
Michigan’s eight-hour ozone
nonattainment areas, which comprise
eleven counties. EPA proposed approval
of the petition in a January 5, 2006
rulemaking action. Section 182(f) of the
Clean Air Act allows this exemption for
areas where additional reductions in
NOX will not contribute to attainment of
the ozone standard. The Grand Rapids,
Kalamazoo/Battle Creek, Lansing/East
Lansing, Benzie County, Huron County,
and Mason County nonattainment areas
will each receive an exemption.
DATES: This final rule is effective on July
6, 2006.
ADDRESSES: EPA has established a
docket for this action under Docket ID
No. EPA–R05–OAR–2005–0001. All
documents in the docket are listed on
the www.regulations.gov Web site.
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 through
https://www.regulations.gov or in hard
copy at the Environmental Protection
Agency, Region 5, Air and Radiation
Division, 77 West Jackson Boulevard,
VerDate Aug<31>2005
16:35 Jun 05, 2006
Jkt 208001
Chicago, Illinois 60604. This facility is
open from 8:30 a.m. to 4:30 p.m.,
Monday through Friday, excluding
Federal holidays. We recommend that
you telephone Matt Rau, Environmental
Engineer, at (312) 886–6524 before
visiting the Region 5 office.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Matt
Rau, Environmental Engineer, Criteria
Pollutant Section, Air Programs Branch
(AR–18J), U.S. Environmental
Protection Agency, Region 5, 77 West
Jackson Boulevard, Chicago, Illinois
60604, (312) 886–6524,
rau.matthew@epa.gov.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Throughout this document whenever
‘‘we,’’ ‘‘us,’’ or ‘‘our’’ is used, we mean
EPA. This supplementary information
section is arranged as follows:
I. What Is EPA’s Analysis of the Supporting
Materials?
II. What Are the Environmental Effects of
These Actions?
III. What Is EPA’s Response to Comments?
IV. What Action Is EPA Taking Today?
V. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews
I. What Is EPA’s Analysis of the
Supporting Materials?
Michigan submitted the 2002–04
monitoring data for the six ozone
nonattainment areas. The eight-hour
ozone concentrations for these areas
were all below the National Ambient
Air Quality Standard (NAAQS)for
ozone. EPA records indicate the 2003–
05 monitoring data is also below the
eight-hour ozone NAAQS for all six
areas. Michigan has not implemented
NOX control provisions in the areas.
EPA’s January 14, 2005 document,
‘‘Guidance on Limiting Nitrogen Oxides
Requirements Related to 8-Hour Ozone
Implementation’’ gives the requirements
for demonstrating that further NOX
reduction in an ozone nonattainment
area will not contribute to ozone
attainment. The guidance provides that
three consecutive years of monitoring
data below the standard in areas that
have not implemented NOX controls
adequately demonstrates that additional
NOX reductions will not aid attainment.
EPA’s approval of the petition is granted
on a contingent basis. Michigan must
continue to monitor the ozone levels in
the areas. Each of the six areas receives
its own exemption. If an area violates
the standard, EPA will remove the
exemption for that area.
II. What Are the Environmental Effects
of These Actions?
Nitrogen oxides are a precursor in
ozone formation. Volatile organic
compounds (VOC) are another ozone
precursor. The photochemical reactions
that form ozone are complex. Reducing
PO 00000
Frm 00034
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
NOX (NO and NO2) emissions will not
always reduce ozone levels. When the
ratio of NO to VOC emissions is high,
the NO will react with ozone (O3) to
form NO2 and oxygen (O2). In this
environment, the NO2 will react with
hydroxyl (OH) radicals instead of
forming ozone. A decrease in NOX
emissions would cause an increase in
ozone formation when these conditions
exist. This effect is usually localized.
Because of this chemical reaction, the
section 182(f) exemptions should not
interfere with attainment of the standard
NAAQS for ozone in the six Michigan
ozone nonattainment areas. The state
demonstrated that the areas were able to
hold ozone levels under the NAAQS
without employing NOX controls. Thus,
additional NOX controls would not be
expected to contribute to attainment.
Ozone levels are expected to remain
below the standard which will protect
human health. If a violation occurs in
one of the areas, EPA will remove the
exemption for that area and will require
additional control measures.
III. What Is EPA’s Response to
Comments?
EPA received one comment on the
January 5, 2006 (71 FR 577–579),
proposed approval of Michigan’s
petition. That comment came from the
New York State Department of
Environmental Conservation (New
York). New York was concerned that
EPA did not evaluate the impact of the
NOX waivers on its ozone
nonattainment areas. It cited the results
of ozone contribution modeling from
another EPA program, the Clean Air
Interstate Rule. The contribution
modeling shows a link between statewide Michigan NOX and VOC emissions
and nineteen counties, including the
New York ozone nonattainment
counties of Erie, Richmond, and Suffolk.
In considering this petition, EPA did
not evaluate the impact of the NOX
waivers on downwind ozone
nonattainment areas. This is not a part
of the process for evaluating section
182(f) waiver requests. The NOX
emission reductions required from
Michigan under other EPA programs are
not affected by granting of the waivers.
Also, reductions of other ozone
precursors, such as VOC, are unaffected
by this action. If called for under other
programs, Michigan will be required to
reduce its state-wide emissions to
address its contribution to
nonattainment counties in other states.
The Clean Air Interstate Rule will
address the specific concern New York
expressed by requiring ozone precursor
reductions in Michigan and other states
E:\FR\FM\06JNR1.SGM
06JNR1
Federal Register / Vol. 71, No. 108 / Tuesday, June 6, 2006 / Rules and Regulations
that contribute to the New York ozone
nonattainment areas.
Regulatory Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 601
et seq.).
IV. What Action Is EPA Taking Today?
EPA is approving a Michigan petition
for exemptions from the RACT and NSR
requirements for major NOX sources in
six of the state’s eight-hour ozone
nonattainment areas. These
nonattainment areas encompass eleven
counties. The Grand Rapids area
includes Kent and Ottawa counties.
Calhoun, Kalamazoo, and Van Buren
counties make up the Kalamazoo/Battle
Creek area. The Lansing/East Lansing
area consists of Clinton, Eaton, and
Ingham counties. Benzie, Huron, and
Mason counties are all single county
nonattainment areas.
Section 182(f) of the Clean Air Act
allows this exemption for areas where a
state demonstrates that additional
reductions in NOX will not contribute to
attainment of the NAAQS for ozone.
Monitoring data shows the ozone levels
in the six areas are now below the
NAAQS without utilizing NOX controls.
These exemptions from the NOX
requirements in section 182(f) are on a
contingent basis. The state used
monitoring data to demonstrate that it
meets the requirements for the
exemption. If an area’s monitored level
of ozone violates the NAAQS in the
future, EPA will remove its exemption.
Unfunded Mandates Reform Act
Because this rule approves preexisting 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).
V. Statutory and Executive Order
Reviews
Executive Order 12866: Regulatory
Planning and Review
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.
wwhite on PROD1PC61 with RULES
Executive Order 13211: Actions
Concerning Regulations That
Significantly Affect Energy Supply,
Distribution, or Use
Because it is not a ‘‘significant
regulatory action’’ under Executive
Order 12866 or a ‘‘significant energy
action,’’ 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).
Regulatory Flexibility Act
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
VerDate Aug<31>2005
16:35 Jun 05, 2006
Jkt 208001
Executive Order 13175: Consultation
and Coordination With Indian Tribal
Governments
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).
Executive Order 13132: Federalism
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.
Executive Order 13045: Protection of
Children From Environmental Health
and Safety Risks
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.
National Technology Transfer
Advancement Act
In reviewing SIP submissions, EPA’s
role 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
PO 00000
Frm 00035
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
32449
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.
Paperwork Reduction Act
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.).
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. 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 August 7, 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.
Dated: May 18, 2006.
Bharat Mathur,
Acting Regional Administrator, Region 5.
For the reasons stated in the preamble,
part 52, chapter I, of title 40 of the Code
of Federal Regulations is amended as
follows:
I
PART 52—[AMENDED]
1. The authority citation for part 52
continues to read as follows:
I
Authority: 42 U.S.C. 7401 et seq.
E:\FR\FM\06JNR1.SGM
06JNR1
32450
Federal Register / Vol. 71, No. 108 / Tuesday, June 6, 2006 / Rules and Regulations
Final rule.
Subpart X—Michigan
ACTION:
2. Section 52.1174 is amended as
follows:
I A. The first paragraph designated as
paragraph (c) is redesignated as
paragraph (c)(1).
I B. The second paragraph designated
as paragraph (c) is redesignated as
paragraph (c)(2).
I C. Paragraph (w) is added to read as
follows:
SUMMARY: This final rule will implement
the requirements for sulfur, cetane and
aromatics for highway, nonroad,
locomotive and marine diesel fuel
produced in, imported into, and
distributed or used in the rural areas of
Alaska. Beginning June 1, 2010, diesel
fuel used in these applications must
meet a 15 ppm (maximum) sulfur
content standard. This rule will assist
the implementation of the programs for
highway and nonroad diesel fuels in
Alaska and provide some limited
additional lead time for development of
any necessary changes to the fuel
distribution system in Alaska’s rural
areas. We believe this additional lead
time is appropriate given the
circumstances in the rural areas. In
2010, highway and nonroad fuel in rural
Alaska will be required to meet the 15
ppm sulfur standard, providing the full
environmental benefits of these
programs to rural Alaska as well. In
addition, fuel used by engines in rural
Alaska covered by the new source
performance standard (NSPS) for new
stationary diesel engines will also be
required to meet the 15 ppm sulfur
standard in 2010.
DATES: This final rule is effective on July
6, 2006.
ADDRESSES: EPA has established a
docket for this action under Docket ID
No. EPA–HQ–OAR–2004–0229. 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
I
§ 52.1174
Control strategy: Ozone.
*
*
*
*
*
(w) Approval—On June 17, 2005, the
Michigan Department of Environmental
Quality submitted a petition requesting
the exemption from Clean Air Act
oxides of nitrogen control requirements
in six 8-hour ozone nonattainment
areas. The Grand Rapids, Kalamazoo/
Battle Creek, Lansing/East Lansing,
Benzie County, Huron County, and
Mason County nonattainment areas each
receive an exemption. Section 182(f) of
the 1990 amended Clean Air Act
authorizes the exceptions. The
exemption will no longer apply in an
area if it experiences a violation of the
8-hour ozone standard.
[FR Doc. 06–4986 Filed 6–5–06; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560–50–P
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION
AGENCY
40 CFR Part 69
[EPA–HQ–OAR–2004–0229; FRL–8178–3]
RIN 2060–AJ72
Control of Air Pollution From Motor
Vehicles and Nonroad Diesel Engines:
Alternative Low-Sulfur Diesel Fuel
Transition Program for Alaska
Environmental Protection
Agency (EPA).
AGENCY:
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 legal holidays. The telephone
number for the Public Reading Room is
(202) 566–1744, and the telephone
number for the Air Docket is (202) 566–
1742.
Jeff
Herzog or Tia Sutton, Assessment and
Standards Division, Office of
Transportation and Air Quality,
Environmental Protection Agency, 2000
Traverwood Drive, Ann Arbor, MI
48105; fax number: (734) 214–4816;
telephone numbers: (734) 214–4227 or
(734) 214–4018, respectively; e-mail
addresses: Herzog.jeff@epa.gov or
Sutton.tia@epa.gov, respectively.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
I. General Information
A. Does This Action Apply to Me?
You are regulated by this rule if you
produce, import, distribute, or sell
diesel fuel for use in the rural areas of
Alaska. The following table gives some
examples of entities that must follow
the regulations. However, because these
are only examples, you should carefully
examine the regulations in 40 CFR part
80. If you have questions, call the
person listed in the FOR FURTHER
INFORMATION CONTACT section of this
preamble:
NAICS codes a
Examples of potentially regulated entities
Petroleum Refiners ..........................................................................................................................................
Petroleum Bulk Stations, Terminals ................................................................................................................
Petroleum and Products Wholesalers .............................................................................................................
Diesel Fuel Trucking ........................................................................................................................................
Diesel Service Stations ....................................................................................................................................
a North
32411
42271
42272
48422
48423
44711
44719
SIC codes b
2911
5171
5172
4212
4213
5541
............................
American Industry Classification System (NAICS).
Industrial Classification (SIC) system code.
wwhite on PROD1PC61 with RULES
b Standard
Electronic Access. You may access
this Federal Register document
electronically through the EPA Internet
under the ‘‘Federal Register’’ listings at
https://www.epa.gov/fedrgstr/. An
electronic version of the public docket
VerDate Aug<31>2005
16:35 Jun 05, 2006
Jkt 208001
is available through EPA’s electronic
public docket and comment system,
EPA Dockets. You may use EPA Dockets
at https://www.epa.gov/edocket/ view
public comments, access the index
listing of the contents of the official
PO 00000
Frm 00036
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
public docket, and to access those
documents in the public docket that are
available electronically. Once in the
system, select ‘‘search,’’ then key in the
appropriate docket identification
number.
E:\FR\FM\06JNR1.SGM
06JNR1
Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 71, Number 108 (Tuesday, June 6, 2006)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 32448-32450]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 06-4986]
=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
40 CFR Part 52
[EPA-R05-OAR-2005-MI-0001; FRL-8176-6]
Approval and Promulgation of Air Quality Implementation Plans;
Michigan
AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).
ACTION: Final rule.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: EPA is approving a June 17, 2005, Michigan petition for
exemptions from the Reasonably Available Control Technology (RACT) and
New Source Review (NSR) requirements for major sources of nitrogen
oxides (NOX). The petition is for sources in six of
Michigan's eight-hour ozone nonattainment areas, which comprise eleven
counties. EPA proposed approval of the petition in a January 5, 2006
rulemaking action. Section 182(f) of the Clean Air Act allows this
exemption for areas where additional reductions in NOX will
not contribute to attainment of the ozone standard. The Grand Rapids,
Kalamazoo/Battle Creek, Lansing/East Lansing, Benzie County, Huron
County, and Mason County nonattainment areas will each receive an
exemption.
DATES: This final rule is effective on July 6, 2006.
ADDRESSES: EPA has established a docket for this action under Docket ID
No. EPA-R05-OAR-2005-0001. All documents in the docket are listed on
the www.regulations.gov Web site. 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 through https://www.regulations.gov or in hard copy at
the Environmental Protection Agency, Region 5, Air and Radiation
Division, 77 West Jackson Boulevard, Chicago, Illinois 60604. This
facility is open from 8:30 a.m. to 4:30 p.m., Monday through Friday,
excluding Federal holidays. We recommend that you telephone Matt Rau,
Environmental Engineer, at (312) 886-6524 before visiting the Region 5
office.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Matt Rau, Environmental Engineer,
Criteria Pollutant Section, Air Programs Branch (AR-18J), U.S.
Environmental Protection Agency, Region 5, 77 West Jackson Boulevard,
Chicago, Illinois 60604, (312) 886-6524, rau.matthew@epa.gov.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Throughout this document whenever ``we,''
``us,'' or ``our'' is used, we mean EPA. This supplementary information
section is arranged as follows:
I. What Is EPA's Analysis of the Supporting Materials?
II. What Are the Environmental Effects of These Actions?
III. What Is EPA's Response to Comments?
IV. What Action Is EPA Taking Today?
V. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews
I. What Is EPA's Analysis of the Supporting Materials?
Michigan submitted the 2002-04 monitoring data for the six ozone
nonattainment areas. The eight-hour ozone concentrations for these
areas were all below the National Ambient Air Quality Standard
(NAAQS)for ozone. EPA records indicate the 2003-05 monitoring data is
also below the eight-hour ozone NAAQS for all six areas. Michigan has
not implemented NOX control provisions in the areas.
EPA's January 14, 2005 document, ``Guidance on Limiting Nitrogen
Oxides Requirements Related to 8-Hour Ozone Implementation'' gives the
requirements for demonstrating that further NOX reduction in
an ozone nonattainment area will not contribute to ozone attainment.
The guidance provides that three consecutive years of monitoring data
below the standard in areas that have not implemented NOX
controls adequately demonstrates that additional NOX
reductions will not aid attainment. EPA's approval of the petition is
granted on a contingent basis. Michigan must continue to monitor the
ozone levels in the areas. Each of the six areas receives its own
exemption. If an area violates the standard, EPA will remove the
exemption for that area.
II. What Are the Environmental Effects of These Actions?
Nitrogen oxides are a precursor in ozone formation. Volatile
organic compounds (VOC) are another ozone precursor. The photochemical
reactions that form ozone are complex. Reducing NOX (NO and
NO2) emissions will not always reduce ozone levels. When the
ratio of NO to VOC emissions is high, the NO will react with ozone
(O3) to form NO2 and oxygen (O2). In
this environment, the NO2 will react with hydroxyl (OH)
radicals instead of forming ozone. A decrease in NOX
emissions would cause an increase in ozone formation when these
conditions exist. This effect is usually localized.
Because of this chemical reaction, the section 182(f) exemptions
should not interfere with attainment of the standard NAAQS for ozone in
the six Michigan ozone nonattainment areas. The state demonstrated that
the areas were able to hold ozone levels under the NAAQS without
employing NOX controls. Thus, additional NOX
controls would not be expected to contribute to attainment. Ozone
levels are expected to remain below the standard which will protect
human health. If a violation occurs in one of the areas, EPA will
remove the exemption for that area and will require additional control
measures.
III. What Is EPA's Response to Comments?
EPA received one comment on the January 5, 2006 (71 FR 577-579),
proposed approval of Michigan's petition. That comment came from the
New York State Department of Environmental Conservation (New York). New
York was concerned that EPA did not evaluate the impact of the
NOX waivers on its ozone nonattainment areas. It cited the
results of ozone contribution modeling from another EPA program, the
Clean Air Interstate Rule. The contribution modeling shows a link
between state-wide Michigan NOX and VOC emissions and
nineteen counties, including the New York ozone nonattainment counties
of Erie, Richmond, and Suffolk.
In considering this petition, EPA did not evaluate the impact of
the NOX waivers on downwind ozone nonattainment areas. This
is not a part of the process for evaluating section 182(f) waiver
requests. The NOX emission reductions required from Michigan
under other EPA programs are not affected by granting of the waivers.
Also, reductions of other ozone precursors, such as VOC, are unaffected
by this action. If called for under other programs, Michigan will be
required to reduce its state-wide emissions to address its contribution
to nonattainment counties in other states. The Clean Air Interstate
Rule will address the specific concern New York expressed by requiring
ozone precursor reductions in Michigan and other states
[[Page 32449]]
that contribute to the New York ozone nonattainment areas.
IV. What Action Is EPA Taking Today?
EPA is approving a Michigan petition for exemptions from the RACT
and NSR requirements for major NOX sources in six of the
state's eight-hour ozone nonattainment areas. These nonattainment areas
encompass eleven counties. The Grand Rapids area includes Kent and
Ottawa counties. Calhoun, Kalamazoo, and Van Buren counties make up the
Kalamazoo/Battle Creek area. The Lansing/East Lansing area consists of
Clinton, Eaton, and Ingham counties. Benzie, Huron, and Mason counties
are all single county nonattainment areas.
Section 182(f) of the Clean Air Act allows this exemption for areas
where a state demonstrates that additional reductions in NOX
will not contribute to attainment of the NAAQS for ozone. Monitoring
data shows the ozone levels in the six areas are now below the NAAQS
without utilizing NOX controls. These exemptions from the
NOX requirements in section 182(f) are on a contingent
basis. The state used monitoring data to demonstrate that it meets the
requirements for the exemption. If an area's monitored level of ozone
violates the NAAQS in the future, EPA will remove its exemption.
V. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews
Executive Order 12866: Regulatory Planning and Review
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.
Executive Order 13211: Actions Concerning Regulations That
Significantly Affect Energy Supply, Distribution, or Use
Because it is not a ``significant regulatory action'' under
Executive Order 12866 or a ``significant energy action,'' 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).
Regulatory Flexibility Act
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.).
Unfunded Mandates Reform Act
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).
Executive Order 13175: Consultation and Coordination With Indian Tribal
Governments
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).
Executive Order 13132: Federalism
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.
Executive Order 13045: Protection of Children From Environmental Health
and Safety Risks
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.
National Technology Transfer Advancement Act
In reviewing SIP submissions, EPA's role 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.
Paperwork Reduction Act
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.).
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. 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 August 7, 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.
Dated: May 18, 2006.
Bharat Mathur,
Acting Regional Administrator, Region 5.
0
For the reasons stated in the preamble, part 52, chapter I, of title 40
of the 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.
[[Page 32450]]
Subpart X--Michigan
0
2. Section 52.1174 is amended as follows:
0
A. The first paragraph designated as paragraph (c) is redesignated as
paragraph (c)(1).
0
B. The second paragraph designated as paragraph (c) is redesignated as
paragraph (c)(2).
0
C. Paragraph (w) is added to read as follows:
Sec. 52.1174 Control strategy: Ozone.
* * * * *
(w) Approval--On June 17, 2005, the Michigan Department of
Environmental Quality submitted a petition requesting the exemption
from Clean Air Act oxides of nitrogen control requirements in six 8-
hour ozone nonattainment areas. The Grand Rapids, Kalamazoo/Battle
Creek, Lansing/East Lansing, Benzie County, Huron County, and Mason
County nonattainment areas each receive an exemption. Section 182(f) of
the 1990 amended Clean Air Act authorizes the exceptions. The exemption
will no longer apply in an area if it experiences a violation of the 8-
hour ozone standard.
[FR Doc. 06-4986 Filed 6-5-06; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P