Approval and Promulgation of Implementation Plans; Revisions to the Nevada State Implementation Plan; Definition, Emergency Episode, and Monitoring Regulations, 19801-19804 [E7-7546]
Download as PDF
Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 76 / Friday, April 20, 2007 / Rules and Regulations
with regard to any matter arising out of
the employee’s official duties or the
functions of the BBG unless testimony
is being given on behalf of the United
States (see also 5 CFR 2635.805).
(d) The scheduling of an employee’s
testimony, including the amount of time
that the employee will be made
available for testimony, will be subject
to the BBG’s approval.
§ 504.11 Restrictions that apply to
released records.
(a) The General Counsel may impose
conditions or restrictions on the release
of official records and information,
including the requirement that parties to
the proceeding obtain a protective order
or execute a confidentiality agreement
to limit access and any further
disclosure. The terms of the protective
order or of a confidentiality agreement
must be acceptable to the General
Counsel. In cases where protective
orders or confidentiality agreements
have already been executed, the BBG
may condition the release of official
records and information on an
amendment to the existing protective
order or confidentiality agreement.
(b) If the General Counsel so
determines, original BBG records may
be presented for examination in
response to a request, but they may not
be presented as evidence or otherwise
used in a manner by which they could
lose their identity as official BBG
records, nor may they be marked or
altered. In lieu of the original records,
certified copies may be presented for
evidentiary purposes.
§ 504.12 Procedure when a decision is not
made prior to the time a response is
required.
If a response to a demand or request
is required before the General Counsel
can make the determination referred to
in § 504.9, the General Counsel, when
necessary, will provide the court or
other competent authority with a copy
of this part, inform the court or other
competent authority that the request is
being reviewed, provide an estimate as
to when a decision will be made, and
seek a stay of the demand or request
pending a final determination.
cprice-sewell on PRODPC61 with RULES
§ 504.13 Procedure in the event of an
adverse ruling.
If the court or other competent
authority fails to stay a demand or
request, the employee upon whom the
demand or request is made, unless
otherwise advised by the General
Counsel, will appear, if necessary, at the
stated time and place, produce a copy
of this part, state that the employee has
been advised by counsel not to provide
the requested testimony or produce
VerDate Aug<31>2005
15:15 Apr 19, 2007
Jkt 211001
documents, and respectfully decline to
comply with the demand or request,
citing United States ex rel. Touhy v.
Ragen, 340 U.S. 462 (1951).
Subpart C—Schedule of Fees
§ 504.14
Fees.
(a) Generally. The General Counsel
may condition the production of records
or appearance for testimony upon
advance payment of a reasonable
estimate of the costs to the BBG.
(b) Fees for records. Fees for
producing records will include fees for
searching, reviewing, and duplicating
records, costs of attorney time spent in
reviewing the request, and expenses
generated by materials and equipment
used to search for, produce, and copy
the responsive information. Costs for
employee time will be calculated on the
basis of the hourly pay of the employee
(including all pay, allowances, and
benefits). Fees for duplication will be
the same as those charged by the BBG
in its Freedom of Information Act
regulations at 22 CFR Part 503.
(c) Witness fees. Fees for attendance
by a witness will include fees, expenses,
and allowances prescribed by the
court’s rules. If no such fees are
prescribed, witness fees will be
determined based upon the rule of the
Federal district court closest to the
location where the witness will appear
and on 28 U.S.C. 1821, as applicable.
Such fees will include cost of time spent
by the witness to prepare for testimony,
in travel and for attendance in the legal
proceeding, plus travel costs.
(d) Payment of fees. A requester must
pay witness fees for current BBG
employees and any record certification
fees by submitting to the General
Counsel a check or money order for the
appropriate amount made payable to the
Treasury of the United States. In the
case of testimony of former BBG
employees, the requester must pay
applicable fees directly to the former
BBG employee in accordance with 28
U.S.C. 1821 or other applicable statutes.
(e) Waiver or reduction of fees. The
General Counsel, in his or her sole
discretion, may, upon a showing of
reasonable cause, waive or reduce any
fees in connection with the testimony,
production, or certification of records.
(f) De minimis fees. Fees will not be
assessed if the total charge would be
$10.00 or less.
Subpart D—Penalties
§ 504.15
Penalties.
(a) An employee who discloses
official records or information or gives
testimony relating to official
PO 00000
Frm 00019
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
19801
information, except as expressly
authorized by the BBG, or as ordered by
a Federal court after the BBG has had
the opportunity to be heard, may face
penalties as provided in any applicable
enforcement statute.
(b) A current BBG employee who
testifies or produces official records and
information in violation of this part
shall be subject to disciplinary action
and, if done for a valuable
consideration, may subject that person
to criminal prosecution.
Dated: April 16, 2007.
Carol F. Baker,
Director, Office of Administration.
[FR Doc. E7–7559 Filed 4–19–07; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 8610–01–P
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION
AGENCY
40 CFR Part 52
[EPA–R09–OAR–2007–0197; FRL–8300–5]
Approval and Promulgation of
Implementation Plans; Revisions to the
Nevada State Implementation Plan;
Definition, Emergency Episode, and
Monitoring Regulations
Environmental Protection
Agency (EPA).
ACTION: Direct final rule.
AGENCY:
SUMMARY: EPA is taking direct final
action to approve revisions to the
Nevada Department of Conservation and
Natural Resources portion of the Nevada
State Implementation Plan (SIP). These
revisions concern a definition, an
emergency episode regulation, and
various monitoring regulations. We are
approving state provisions that regulate
emission sources under the Clean Air
Act as amended in 1990 (Act or CAA).
DATES: This rule is effective on June 19,
2007 without further notice, unless EPA
receives adverse comments by May 21,
2007. 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–2007–0197, 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.
E:\FR\FM\20APR1.SGM
20APR1
19802
Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 76 / Friday, April 20, 2007 / Rules and Regulations
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
https://www.regulations.gov or e-mail.
https://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 email 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
https://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:
Julie
A. Rose, EPA Region IX, (415) 947–
4126.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Throughout this document, ‘‘we,’’ ‘‘us’’
and ‘‘our’’ refer to EPA.
Table of Contents
I. The State’s Submittal
A. What Regulations Did the State Submit?
B. What Is the Regulatory History of the
Nevada SIP?
C. What Is the Purpose of This
Rulemaking?
II. EPA’s Evaluation and Action
A. How Is EPA Evaluating the Regulations?
B. Do the Regulations Meet the Evaluation
Criteria?
C. Public Comment and Final Action
III. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews
I. The State’s Submittal
A. What Regulations Did the State
Submit?
The Governor’s designee, the Nevada
Department of Conservation and Natural
Resources, Division of Environmental
Protection (NDEP), submitted a revision
to the applicable state implementation
plan (SIP) on December 8, 2006.
Most of the provisions submitted on
December 8, 2006 concern permitting
regulations which are the subject of a
separate Federal Register proposed rule.
The remaining regulations are being
acted on in this rulemaking and concern
clarifications made to harmonize State
and Federally-enforceable requirements.
The following table lists the
provisions of the Nevada Administrative
Code (NAC) addressed by this
rulemaking with the dates they were
submitted by NDEP.
SUBMITTED PROVISIONS
NAC No.
445B.134
445B.230
445B.258
445B.259
445B.260
NAC title
..........
..........
..........
..........
..........
‘‘Person’’ defined ......................................................................................................................
Plan for reduction of emissions ................................................................................................
Monitoring systems: Verification of operational status .............................................................
Monitoring systems: Performance evaluations .........................................................................
Monitoring systems: Components contracted for before September 11, 1974 .......................
The Nevada SIP includes previous
versions of these regulations. We
approved NAC 445B.134, 445B.258,
445B.259, and 445B.260 on December
11, 2006 (71 FR 71486) and approved
NAC 445B.230 on March 27, 2006 (71
FR 15040). The amended regulations
submitted by NDEP on December 8,
2006 were included as sections 2, 5, 6,
7, and 8 of Regulation R151–06, which
was adopted by the State Environmental
Commission on September 6, 2006.
Pursuant to the Clean Air
Amendments of 1970, the Governor of
Nevada submitted the original Nevada
SIP to EPA in January 1972. EPA
approved certain portions of the original
SIP and disapproved other portions
under CAA section 110(a). See 37 FR
10842 (May 31, 1972). For some of the
disapproved portions of the original SIP,
EPA promulgated substitute provisions
under CAA § 110(c).1 This original SIP
included various rules, codified as
articles within the Nevada Air Quality
Regulations (NAQR), and various
statutory provisions codified in chapter
445 of the Nevada Revised Statutes
(NRS). In the early 1980’s, Nevada
reorganized and re-codified its air
quality rules into sections within
chapter 445 of the Nevada
Administrative Code (NAC). Today,
Nevada codifies its air quality
regulations in chapter 445B of the NAC.
Nevada adopted and submitted many
revisions to the original set of
regulations and statutes in the SIP, some
of which EPA approved on February 6,
1975 at 40 FR 5508; on March 26, 1975
at 40 FR 13306; on January 9, 1978 at
43 FR 1341; on January 24, 1978 at 43
FR 3278; on August 21, 1978 at 43 FR
36932; on July 10, 1980 at 45 FR 46384;
on April 14, 1981 at 46 FR 21758; on
August 27, 1981 at 46 FR 43141; on
March 8, 1982 at 47 FR 9833; on April
13, 1982 at 47 FR 15790; on June 18,
1982 at 47 FR 26386; on June 23, 1982
1 Provisions that EPA promulgated under CAA
section 110(c) in substitution of disapproved State
provisions are referred to as Federal
Implementation Plans (FIPs).
B. What Is the Regulatory History of the
Nevada SIP?
cprice-sewell on PRODPC61 with RULES
Adopted
VerDate Aug<31>2005
15:15 Apr 19, 2007
Jkt 211001
PO 00000
Frm 00020
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
09/06/06
09/06/06
09/06/06
09/06/06
09/06/06
Submitted
12/08/06
12/08/06
12/08/06
12/08/06
12/08/06
at 47 FR 27070; on March 27, 1984 at
49 FR 11626. Between 1984 and 2005,
EPA approved very few revisions to
Nevada’s applicable SIP despite
numerous changes that have been
adopted by the State Environmental
Commission. As a result, the version of
the rules enforceable by NDEP was often
quite different from the SIP version
enforceable by EPA.
Recently, Nevada submitted revisions
to their SIP on February 16, 2005,
January 12, 2006, and March 24, 2006.
EPA approved various portions of these
submittals on March 27, 2006 at 71 FR
15040; on August 31, 2006 at 71 FR
51766; on December 11, 2006 at 71 FR
71486; and on January 3, 2007 at 72 FR
11.
C. What Is the Purpose of this
Rulemaking?
The purpose of this rulemaking is to
bring the applicable SIP up to date. The
regulations that are the subject of this
rulemaking include a definition, a
general rule for emergency episodes,
and various monitoring regulations.
E:\FR\FM\20APR1.SGM
20APR1
Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 76 / Friday, April 20, 2007 / Rules and Regulations
II. EPA’s Evaluation and Action
A. How Is EPA Evaluating the
Regulations?
Generally, SIP regulations must be
enforceable (see section 110(a) of the
Act) and must not relax existing
requirements (see sections 110(l) and
193). Relevant EPA guidance and policy
documents that we used to help
evaluate enforceability include ‘‘Review
of State Implementation Plans and
Revisions for Enforceability and Legal
Sufficiency,’’ dated September 23, 1987,
from J. Craig Potter, Assistant
Administrator for Air and Radiation, et
al.
B. Do the Regulations Meet the
Evaluation Criteria?
We believe the following provisions
are consistent with the relevant policy
and guidance regarding enforceability
and SIP relaxations: NAC 445B.134,
NAC 445B.230, NAC 445B.258, NAC
445B.259, and NAC 445B.260.
Generally, these provisions have been
revised by the addition of certain
clarifications and enhancements. The
Technical Support Document (TSD)
dated March 5, 2007 has more
information on our evaluation.
cprice-sewell on PRODPC61 with RULES
C. Public Comment and Final Action.
As authorized in section 110(k)(3) of
the Act, EPA is fully approving the
submitted rules because we believe they
fulfill all relevant requirements. We do
not think anyone will object to this
approval, so we are finalizing it without
proposing it in advance. However, in
the Proposed Rules section of this
Federal Register, we are simultaneously
proposing approval of the same
submitted rules. If we receive adverse
comments by May 21, 2007, we will
publish a timely withdrawal in the
Federal Register to notify the public
that the direct final approval will not
take effect and we will address the
comments in a subsequent final action
based on the proposal. If we do not
receive timely adverse comments, the
direct final approval will be effective
without further notice on June 19, 2007.
This will incorporate these rules into
the federally enforceable SIP.
Please note that if EPA receives
adverse comment on an amendment,
paragraph, or section of this rule and if
that provision may be severed from the
remainder of the rule, EPA may adopt
as final those provisions of the rule that
are not the subject of an adverse
comment.
VerDate Aug<31>2005
15:15 Apr 19, 2007
Jkt 211001
III. 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 approves a state rule
implementing a Federal standard.
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
PO 00000
Frm 00021
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
19803
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 June 19, 2007.
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, Reporting and recordkeeping
requirements.
Dated: April 4, 2007.
Jane Diamond,
Acting Regional Administrator, Region IX.
Part 52, chapter I, 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
E:\FR\FM\20APR1.SGM
20APR1
19804
Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 76 / Friday, April 20, 2007 / Rules and Regulations
Authority: 42 U.S.C. 7401 et seq.
Subpart DD—Nevada
2. Section 52.1470 is amended by
adding paragraph (c)(62) to read as
follows:
I
§ 52.1470
Identification of plan.
*
*
*
*
*
(c) * * *
(62) The following plan revision was
submitted on December 8, 2006, by the
Governor’s designee.
(i) Incorporation by reference.
(A) Nevada Division of Environmental
Protection.
(1) The following sections of Chapter
445B of the Nevada Administrative
Code were adopted on September 6,
2006: 445B.134, 445B.230, 445B.258,
445B.259, and 445B.260.
[FR Doc. E7–7546 Filed 4–19–07; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560–50–P
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION
AGENCY
40 CFR Part 70
[EPA–R09–OAR–2007–0090; FRL–8303–5]
Clean Air Act Full Approval of
Revisions to the State of Hawaii
Operating Permit Program
Environmental Protection
Agency (EPA).
ACTION: Direct final rule.
cprice-sewell on PRODPC61 with RULES
AGENCY:
SUMMARY: EPA is approving revisions to
the State of Hawaii’s (‘‘Hawaii’’ or
‘‘State’’) operating permit program that
amend Hawaii’s regulations for
insignificant emissions units (IEUs). In
an April 1, 2002 Notice of Deficiency
published in the Federal Register, EPA
notified Hawaii of EPA’s finding that
Hawaii’s provisions for IEUs did not
meet minimum Federal requirements.
Hawaii has revised its program to
correct the deficiency identified in the
Notice of Deficiency and this action
fully approves of those revisions.
DATES: This operating permits program
rule is effective on June 19, 2007
without further notice, unless EPA
receives adverse comments by May 21,
2007. If we receive such comment, we
will publish a timely withdrawal in the
Federal Register to notify the public
that these revisions will not take effect.
ADDRESSES: Submit comments,
identified by docket number EPA–R09–
OAR–2007–0090, by one of the
following methods:
1. Federal eRulemaking Portal:
www.regulations.gov. Follow the on-line
instructions.
VerDate Aug<31>2005
15:15 Apr 19, 2007
Jkt 211001
2. E-mail: Rios.Gerardo@epa.gov.
3. Mail or deliver to Gerardo Rios,
Permits Office Chief, Air Division (AIR–
3), EPA Region IX, 75 Hawthorne Street,
San Francisco, California, 94105.
Instructions: All comments will be
included in the public docket without
change and may be made available
online at www.regulations.gov,
including any personal information
provided, unless the comment includes
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:
Robert Baker, EPA Region IX, at (415)
972–3979, (Baker.Robert@epa.gov).
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Throughout this document, ‘‘we,’’ ‘‘us’’
and ‘‘our’’ refer to EPA.
Table of Contents
I. What Is the Operating Permit Program?
II. What Is Being Addressed in This
Document?
III. What Are the Program Changes That EPA
Is Approving?
IV. What Is Involved in This Action?
V. Public Comment and Final Action
VI. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews
I. What Is the Operating Permit
Program?
The Clean Air Act Amendments of
1990 required all state and local
permitting authorities to develop
operating permit programs that met
certain federal criteria. In implementing
PO 00000
Frm 00022
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
the operating permit programs, the
permitting authorities require certain
sources of air pollution to obtain
permits that contain all applicable
requirements under the Clean Air Act
(CAA). The focus of the operating
permit program is to improve
enforcement by issuing each source a
permit that consolidates all of the
applicable CAA requirements into a
federally enforceable document. By
consolidating all of the applicable
requirements for a facility, the source,
the public, and the permitting
authorities can more easily determine
what CAA requirements apply and how
compliance with those requirements is
determined.
Sources required to obtain an
operating permit under this program
include ‘‘major’’ sources of air pollution
and certain other sources specified in
the CAA or in EPA’s implementing
regulations. Examples of major sources
include those that have the potential to
emit 100 tons per year or more of
volatile organic compounds, carbon
monoxide, lead, sulfur dioxide, nitrogen
oxides (NOX), or particulate matter
(PM10); those that emit 10 tons per year
or more of any single hazardous air
pollutant (HAP) listed under the CAA;
or those that emit 25 tons per year or
more of a combination of HAPs.
Hawaii’s operating permits program
was submitted to EPA in response to
this directive. EPA granted interim
approval to Hawaii’s air operating
permits program on December 1, 1994
(59 FR 61549). After Hawaii revised its
program to address the conditions of the
interim approval, EPA promulgated
final full approval of Hawaii’s title V
operating permits program on November
26, 2001 (66 FR 62945).
II. What Is Being Addressed in This
Document?
When an operating permit program
does not fully meet the criteria outlined
in the implementing regulations
codified at 40 Code of Federal
Regulations (CFR) part 70, EPA may
withdraw part 70 program approval if
the permitting authority fails to take
corrective action. 40 CFR 70.10(b) sets
forth the procedures for program
withdrawal, and requires as a
prerequisite to withdrawal that the
permitting authority be notified of any
finding of deficiency by the
Administrator and that the notice be
published in the Federal Register.
Deficiencies involving the provisions
in the State’s program that exempt
insignificant activities from part 70
permitting requirements came to light as
a result of the court decision in Western
States Petroleum Association (WSPA) v.
E:\FR\FM\20APR1.SGM
20APR1
Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 72, Number 76 (Friday, April 20, 2007)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 19801-19804]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: E7-7546]
=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
40 CFR Part 52
[EPA-R09-OAR-2007-0197; FRL-8300-5]
Approval and Promulgation of Implementation Plans; Revisions to
the Nevada State Implementation Plan; Definition, Emergency Episode,
and Monitoring Regulations
AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).
ACTION: Direct final rule.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: EPA is taking direct final action to approve revisions to the
Nevada Department of Conservation and Natural Resources portion of the
Nevada State Implementation Plan (SIP). These revisions concern a
definition, an emergency episode regulation, and various monitoring
regulations. We are approving state provisions that regulate emission
sources under the Clean Air Act as amended in 1990 (Act or CAA).
DATES: This rule is effective on June 19, 2007 without further notice,
unless EPA receives adverse comments by May 21, 2007. 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-
2007-0197, 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.
[[Page 19802]]
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 https://
www.regulations.gov or e-mail. https://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 https://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: Julie A. Rose, EPA Region IX, (415)
947-4126.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Throughout this document, ``we,'' ``us'' and
``our'' refer to EPA.
Table of Contents
I. The State's Submittal
A. What Regulations Did the State Submit?
B. What Is the Regulatory History of the Nevada SIP?
C. What Is the Purpose of This Rulemaking?
II. EPA's Evaluation and Action
A. How Is EPA Evaluating the Regulations?
B. Do the Regulations Meet the Evaluation Criteria?
C. Public Comment and Final Action
III. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews
I. The State's Submittal
A. What Regulations Did the State Submit?
The Governor's designee, the Nevada Department of Conservation and
Natural Resources, Division of Environmental Protection (NDEP),
submitted a revision to the applicable state implementation plan (SIP)
on December 8, 2006.
Most of the provisions submitted on December 8, 2006 concern
permitting regulations which are the subject of a separate Federal
Register proposed rule. The remaining regulations are being acted on in
this rulemaking and concern clarifications made to harmonize State and
Federally-enforceable requirements.
The following table lists the provisions of the Nevada
Administrative Code (NAC) addressed by this rulemaking with the dates
they were submitted by NDEP.
Submitted Provisions
------------------------------------------------------------------------
NAC No. NAC title Adopted Submitted
------------------------------------------------------------------------
445B.134.............. ``Person'' 09/06/06 12/08/06
defined.
445B.230.............. Plan for 09/06/06 12/08/06
reduction of
emissions.
445B.258.............. Monitoring 09/06/06 12/08/06
systems:
Verification of
operational
status.
445B.259.............. Monitoring 09/06/06 12/08/06
systems:
Performance
evaluations.
445B.260.............. Monitoring 09/06/06 12/08/06
systems:
Components
contracted for
before
September 11,
1974.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
The Nevada SIP includes previous versions of these regulations. We
approved NAC 445B.134, 445B.258, 445B.259, and 445B.260 on December 11,
2006 (71 FR 71486) and approved NAC 445B.230 on March 27, 2006 (71 FR
15040). The amended regulations submitted by NDEP on December 8, 2006
were included as sections 2, 5, 6, 7, and 8 of Regulation R151-06,
which was adopted by the State Environmental Commission on September 6,
2006.
B. What Is the Regulatory History of the Nevada SIP?
Pursuant to the Clean Air Amendments of 1970, the Governor of
Nevada submitted the original Nevada SIP to EPA in January 1972. EPA
approved certain portions of the original SIP and disapproved other
portions under CAA section 110(a). See 37 FR 10842 (May 31, 1972). For
some of the disapproved portions of the original SIP, EPA promulgated
substitute provisions under CAA Sec. 110(c).\1\ This original SIP
included various rules, codified as articles within the Nevada Air
Quality Regulations (NAQR), and various statutory provisions codified
in chapter 445 of the Nevada Revised Statutes (NRS). In the early
1980's, Nevada reorganized and re-codified its air quality rules into
sections within chapter 445 of the Nevada Administrative Code (NAC).
Today, Nevada codifies its air quality regulations in chapter 445B of
the NAC.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ Provisions that EPA promulgated under CAA section 110(c) in
substitution of disapproved State provisions are referred to as
Federal Implementation Plans (FIPs).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Nevada adopted and submitted many revisions to the original set of
regulations and statutes in the SIP, some of which EPA approved on
February 6, 1975 at 40 FR 5508; on March 26, 1975 at 40 FR 13306; on
January 9, 1978 at 43 FR 1341; on January 24, 1978 at 43 FR 3278; on
August 21, 1978 at 43 FR 36932; on July 10, 1980 at 45 FR 46384; on
April 14, 1981 at 46 FR 21758; on August 27, 1981 at 46 FR 43141; on
March 8, 1982 at 47 FR 9833; on April 13, 1982 at 47 FR 15790; on June
18, 1982 at 47 FR 26386; on June 23, 1982 at 47 FR 27070; on March 27,
1984 at 49 FR 11626. Between 1984 and 2005, EPA approved very few
revisions to Nevada's applicable SIP despite numerous changes that have
been adopted by the State Environmental Commission. As a result, the
version of the rules enforceable by NDEP was often quite different from
the SIP version enforceable by EPA.
Recently, Nevada submitted revisions to their SIP on February 16,
2005, January 12, 2006, and March 24, 2006. EPA approved various
portions of these submittals on March 27, 2006 at 71 FR 15040; on
August 31, 2006 at 71 FR 51766; on December 11, 2006 at 71 FR 71486;
and on January 3, 2007 at 72 FR 11.
C. What Is the Purpose of this Rulemaking?
The purpose of this rulemaking is to bring the applicable SIP up to
date. The regulations that are the subject of this rulemaking include a
definition, a general rule for emergency episodes, and various
monitoring regulations.
[[Page 19803]]
II. EPA's Evaluation and Action
A. How Is EPA Evaluating the Regulations?
Generally, SIP regulations must be enforceable (see section 110(a)
of the Act) and must not relax existing requirements (see sections
110(l) and 193). Relevant EPA guidance and policy documents that we
used to help evaluate enforceability include ``Review of State
Implementation Plans and Revisions for Enforceability and Legal
Sufficiency,'' dated September 23, 1987, from J. Craig Potter,
Assistant Administrator for Air and Radiation, et al.
B. Do the Regulations Meet the Evaluation Criteria?
We believe the following provisions are consistent with the
relevant policy and guidance regarding enforceability and SIP
relaxations: NAC 445B.134, NAC 445B.230, NAC 445B.258, NAC 445B.259,
and NAC 445B.260. Generally, these provisions have been revised by the
addition of certain clarifications and enhancements. The Technical
Support Document (TSD) dated March 5, 2007 has more information on our
evaluation.
C. Public Comment and Final Action.
As authorized in section 110(k)(3) of the Act, EPA is fully
approving the submitted rules because we believe they fulfill all
relevant requirements. We do not think anyone will object to this
approval, so we are finalizing it without proposing it in advance.
However, in the Proposed Rules section of this Federal Register, we are
simultaneously proposing approval of the same submitted rules. If we
receive adverse comments by May 21, 2007, we will publish a timely
withdrawal in the Federal Register to notify the public that the direct
final approval will not take effect and we will address the comments in
a subsequent final action based on the proposal. If we do not receive
timely adverse comments, the direct final approval will be effective
without further notice on June 19, 2007. This will incorporate these
rules into the federally enforceable SIP.
Please note that if EPA receives adverse comment on an amendment,
paragraph, or section of this rule and if that provision may be severed
from the remainder of the rule, EPA may adopt as final those provisions
of the rule that are not the subject of an adverse comment.
III. 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 approves a state rule
implementing a Federal standard.
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. 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 June 19, 2007. 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, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements.
Dated: April 4, 2007.
Jane Diamond,
Acting Regional Administrator, Region IX.
0
Part 52, chapter I, 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:
[[Page 19804]]
Authority: 42 U.S.C. 7401 et seq.
Subpart DD--Nevada
0
2. Section 52.1470 is amended by adding paragraph (c)(62) to read as
follows:
Sec. 52.1470 Identification of plan.
* * * * *
(c) * * *
(62) The following plan revision was submitted on December 8, 2006,
by the Governor's designee.
(i) Incorporation by reference.
(A) Nevada Division of Environmental Protection.
(1) The following sections of Chapter 445B of the Nevada
Administrative Code were adopted on September 6, 2006: 445B.134,
445B.230, 445B.258, 445B.259, and 445B.260.
[FR Doc. E7-7546 Filed 4-19-07; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P