Revisions to the Arizona State Implementation Plan, Maricopa County, 43537-43539 [E7-15118]
Download as PDF
Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 150 / Monday, August 6, 2007 / Rules and Regulations
This rule does not use technical
standards. Therefore, we did not
consider the use of voluntary consensus
standards.
Environment
We have analyzed this rule under
Commandant Instruction M16475.lD
and Department of Homeland Security
Management Directive 5100.1, which
guide the Coast Guard in complying
with the National Environmental Policy
Act of 1969 (NEPA) (42 U.S.C. 4321–
4370f), and have concluded that there
are no factors in this case that would
limit the use of a categorical exclusion
under section 2.B.2 of the Instruction.
Therefore, this rule is categorically
excluded, under figure 2–1, paragraph
(34)(g), of the Instruction, from further
environmental documentation. A final
‘‘Environmental Analysis Check List’’
and a final ‘‘Categorical Exclusion
Determination’’ are available in the
docket where indicated under
ADDRESSES.
List of Subjects in 33 CFR Part 165
1. The authority citation for part 165
continues to read as follows:
I
Authority: 33 U.S.C. 1226, 1231; 46 U.S.C.
Chapter 701; 50 U.S.C. 191, 195; 33 CFR
1.05–1, 6.04–1, 6.04–6, and 160.5; Pub. L.
107–295, 116 Stat. 2064; Department of
Homeland Security Delegation No. 0170.1.
2. Add § 165.766 to read as follows:
§ 165.766 Security Zone: HOVENSA
Refinery, St. Croix, U.S. Virgin Islands
cprice-sewell on PROD1PC62 with RULES
Environmental Protection
Agency (EPA).
ACTION: Direct final rule.
AGENCY:
PART 165—REGULATED NAVIGATION
AREAS AND LIMITED ACCESS AREAS
(a) Regulated area. The Coast Guard is
establishing a security zone in and
around the HOVENSA Refinery on the
south coast of St. Croix, U.S. Virgin
Islands. This security zone includes all
waters from surface to bottom,
encompassed by an imaginary line
connecting the following points: Point
1: 17°41′31″ North, 64°45′09″ West,
Point 2: 17°39′36″ North, 64°44′12″
West, Point 3: 17°40′00″ North,
64°43′36″ West, Point 4: 17°41′48″
North, 64°44′25″ West, and returning to
the point of origin. These coordinates
are based upon North American Datum
1983 (NAD 1983).
(b) Regulations. (1) Under § 165.33,
entry into or remaining in the security
zone in paragraph (a) of this section is
Jkt 211001
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION
AGENCY
Revisions to the Arizona State
Implementation Plan, Maricopa County
For the reasons discussed in the
preamble, the Coast Guard amends 33
CFR part 165 as follows:
15:24 Aug 03, 2007
BILLING CODE 4910–15–P
[EPA–R09–OAR–2007–0610; FRL–8448–6]
I
VerDate Aug<31>2005
Dated: July 23, 2007.
J.E. Tunstall,
Captain, U.S. Coast Guard, Captain of the
Port San Juan.
[FR Doc. E7–15160 Filed 8–3–07; 8:45 am]
40 CFR Part 52
Harbors, Marine safety, Navigation
(water), Reporting and recordkeeping
requirements, Security measures,
Waterways.
I
prohibited unless authorized by the
Coast Guard Captain of the Port San
Juan or vessels have a scheduled arrival
in accordance with the Notice of Arrival
requirements of 33 CFR part 160,
subpart C.
(2) Persons and vessels desiring to
transit the Regulated Area may contact
the U.S. Coast Guard Captain of the
Port, San Juan, at telephone number
787–289–2041 or on VHF channel 16
(156.8 MHz) to seek permission to
transit the area. If permission is granted,
all persons and vessels must comply
with the instructions of the Captain of
the Port.
SUMMARY: EPA is taking direct final
action to approve a revision to the
Maricopa County portion of the Arizona
State Implementation Plan (SIP). This
revision concerns reductions of
particulate matter (PM) emissions from
the paving of unpaved roads and the use
of these reductions to satisfy the offset
requirements under the new source
review provisions of the Clean Air Act
as amended in 1990 (CAA or the Act).
We are approving a local rule which
assures that the PM emission reductions
resulting from the road paving meet the
criteria for valid offsets under the Act.
DATES: This rule is effective on October
5, 2007 without further notice, unless
EPA receives adverse comments by
September 5, 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–2007–0610, 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.
PO 00000
Frm 00035
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
43537
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 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.
Electronic files should avoid the use of
special characters, any form of
encryption, and be free of any defects or
viruses.
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.
Lily
Wong, EPA Region IX, (415) 947–4114,
wong.lily@epa.gov.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
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?
II. EPA’s Evaluation and Action
A. How is EPA evaluating the rule?
B. Does the rule meet the evaluation
criteria?
C. Public Comment and Final Action
III. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews
E:\FR\FM\06AUR1.SGM
06AUR1
43538
Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 150 / Monday, August 6, 2007 / Rules and Regulations
I. The State’s Submittal
A. What rule did the State submit?
Table 1 lists the rule we are approving
with the date that it was adopted by the
Maricopa Air Quality Department and
submitted to us by the Arizona
Department of Environmental Quality.
Local agency
Rule No.
Maricopa County Air Quality Department .............
On July 12, 2007, this rule submittal
was found to meet the completeness
criteria in 40 CFR Part 51, Appendix V,
which must be met before formal EPA
review.
B. Are there other versions of this rule?
There are no previous versions of
Rule 242 in the SIP, and the Maricopa
County Air Quality Department has not
adopted any earlier version of this rule.
C. What is the purpose of the submitted
rule?
PM contributes to effects that are
harmful to human health and the
environment, including premature
mortality, aggravation of respiratory and
cardiovascular disease, decreased lung
function, visibility impairment, and
damage to vegetation and ecosystems.
Section 173(c) of the CAA requires,
among other things, that major new
sources of PM and major modifications
of existing sources of PM offset their
increases of PM emissions. Rule 242
creates a mechanism for owners and
operators of such sources to offset their
PM emissions increases through the
paving of unpaved public roads in the
PM non-attainment area of Maricopa
County. EPA’s technical support
document (TSD) has more information
about this rule.
cprice-sewell on PROD1PC62 with RULES
II. EPA’s Evaluation and Action
A. How is EPA evaluating the rule?
Generally, SIP rules must be
enforceable (see section 110(a) of the
Act) and must not relax existing
requirements (see sections 110(l) and
193). In addition, an offset generating
rule of this type must meet the criteria
for generating valid offsets and should
meet the criteria set forth in our
guidance concerning economic
incentive programs.
Guidance and policy documents that
we use to help evaluate specific
enforceability requirements and
economic incentive rules or programs
consistently include the following:
1. ‘‘Issues Relating to VOC Regulation
Cutpoints, Deficiencies, and Deviations;
Clarification to Appendix D of
November 24, 1987 Federal Register
Notice,’’ (Blue Book), notice of
VerDate Aug<31>2005
15:24 Aug 03, 2007
Jkt 211001
242
Rule title
Emission Offsets Generated by the Voluntary
Paving of Unpaved Roads.
availability published in the May 25,
1988 Federal Register.
2. ‘‘Guidance Document for Correcting
Common VOC & Other Rule
Deficiencies,’’ EPA Region 9, August 21,
2001 (the Little Bluebook).
3. AP–42, Fifth edition, ‘‘Compilation
of Air Pollutant Emission Factors,
Volume I, Stationary and Point Area
Sources, Miscellaneous Sources,
Chapter 13,’’ December 2003.
4. ‘‘Emission Offset Interpretative
Ruling,’’ 40 CFR part 51, appendix S.
5. ‘‘Improving Air Quality with
Economic Incentive Programs,’’ EPA
452/R–01–001, January 2001.
B. Does the rule meet the evaluation
criteria?
We believe this rule is consistent with
the relevant policy and guidance
regarding enforceability and economic
incentive programs and ensures that the
emission reductions are surplus,
quantifiable, enforceable, and
permanent. The TSD 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 rule because we believe it
fulfills 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 rule. If we receive adverse
comments by September 5, 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 October 5,
2007. This will incorporate the rule into
the federally enforceable SIP.
III. Statutory and Executive Order
Reviews
Under Executive Order 12866 (58 FR
51735, October 4, 1993), this action is
PO 00000
Frm 00036
Adopted
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
06/20/07
Submitted
07/05/07
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),
E:\FR\FM\06AUR1.SGM
06AUR1
Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 150 / Monday, August 6, 2007 / Rules and Regulations
cprice-sewell on PROD1PC62 with RULES
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 October 5, 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, Incorporation by
reference, Intergovernmental relations,
Particulate matter, and Reporting and
recordkeeping requirements.
VerDate Aug<31>2005
15:24 Aug 03, 2007
Jkt 211001
Dated: July 20, 2007.
Keith Takata,
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
Authority: 42 U.S.C. 7401 et seq.
Subpart D—Arizona
2. Section 52.120 is amended by
adding paragraph (c)(139) to read as
follows:
I
§ 52.120
Identification of plan.
*
*
*
*
*
(c) * * *
(139) The following plan was
submitted on July 5, 2007 by the
Governor’s designee.
(i) Incorporation by reference.
(A) Maricopa County Air Quality
Department
(1) Rule 242, adopted on June 20,
2007.
[FR Doc. E7–15118 Filed 8–3–07; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560–50–P
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION
AGENCY
40 CFR Part 52
[EPA–R07–OAR–2007–0347; FRL–8450–1]
Approval and Promulgation of
Implementation Plans; Iowa; Clean Air
Interstate Rule
Environmental Protection
Agency (EPA).
ACTION: Final rule.
AGENCY:
SUMMARY: EPA is taking final action to
approve a revision to the Iowa State
Implementation Plan (SIP) submitted on
August 15, 2006. This revision
addresses the requirements of EPA’s
Clean Air Interstate Rule (CAIR)
promulgated on May 12, 2005, and
subsequently revised on April 28, 2006,
and December 13, 2006. EPA has
determined that the SIP revision fully
implements the CAIR requirements for
Iowa. As a result of this action, EPA will
also withdraw, through a separate
rulemaking, the CAIR Federal
Implementation Plans (FIPs) concerning
SO2, NOX annual, and NOX ozone
season emissions for Iowa. The CAIR
FIPs for all States in the CAIR region
were promulgated on April 28, 2006,
and subsequently revised on December
13, 2006.
PO 00000
Frm 00037
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
43539
CAIR requires States to reduce
emissions of sulfur dioxide (SO2) and
nitrogen oxides (NOX) that significantly
contribute to, and interfere with
maintenance of, the national ambient air
quality standards for fine particulates
and/or ozone in any downwind state.
CAIR establishes State budgets for SO2
and NOX and requires States to submit
SIP revisions that implement these
budgets in States that EPA concluded
did contribute to nonattainment in
downwind states. States have the
flexibility to choose which control
measures to adopt to achieve the
budgets, including participating in the
EPA-administered cap-and-trade
programs. In the SIP revision that EPA
is approving today, Iowa has met the
CAIR requirements by electing to
participate in the EPA-administered
cap-and-trade programs addressing SO2,
NOX annual, and NOX ozone season
emissions.
This rule is effective on
September 5, 2007.
ADDRESSES: EPA has established a
docket for this action under Docket ID
No. EPA–R07–OAR–2007–0347. 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,
i.e., CBI or other information whose
disclosure is restricted by statute.
Certain other material, such as
copyrighted material, is not placed on
the Internet and will be publicly
available only in hard copy form.
Publicly available docket materials are
available either electronically through
https://www.regulations.gov or in hard
copy at the Environmental Protection
Agency, Air Planning and Development
Branch, 901 North 5th Street, Kansas
City, Kansas 66101. The Regional
Office’s official hours of business are
Monday through Friday, 8 a.m. to 4:30
p.m. excluding Federal holidays. The
interested persons wanting to examine
these documents should make an
appointment with the office at least 24
hours in advance.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Michael Jay at (913) 551–7460 or by
e-mail at jay.michael@epa.gov.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Throughout this document whenever
‘‘we,’’ ‘‘us,’’ or ‘‘our’’ is used, we mean
EPA.
DATES:
Table of Contents
I. What Action Is EPA Taking?
II. What Is the Regulatory History of CAIR
and the CAIR FIPs?
III. What Are the General Requirements of
CAIR and the CAIR FIPs?
IV. Analysis of Iowa’s CAIR SIP Submittal
E:\FR\FM\06AUR1.SGM
06AUR1
Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 72, Number 150 (Monday, August 6, 2007)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 43537-43539]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: E7-15118]
=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
40 CFR Part 52
[EPA-R09-OAR-2007-0610; FRL-8448-6]
Revisions to the Arizona State Implementation Plan, Maricopa
County
AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).
ACTION: Direct final rule.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: EPA is taking direct final action to approve a revision to the
Maricopa County portion of the Arizona State Implementation Plan (SIP).
This revision concerns reductions of particulate matter (PM) emissions
from the paving of unpaved roads and the use of these reductions to
satisfy the offset requirements under the new source review provisions
of the Clean Air Act as amended in 1990 (CAA or the Act). We are
approving a local rule which assures that the PM emission reductions
resulting from the road paving meet the criteria for valid offsets
under the Act.
DATES: This rule is effective on October 5, 2007 without further
notice, unless EPA receives adverse comments by September 5, 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-
2007-0610, 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 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. Electronic files should avoid the use of special characters,
any form of encryption, and be free of any defects or viruses.
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: Lily Wong, EPA Region IX, (415) 947-
4114, wong.lily@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?
II. EPA's Evaluation and Action
A. How is EPA evaluating the rule?
B. Does the rule meet the evaluation criteria?
C. Public Comment and Final Action
III. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews
[[Page 43538]]
I. The State's Submittal
A. What rule did the State submit?
Table 1 lists the rule we are approving with the date that it was
adopted by the Maricopa Air Quality Department and submitted to us by
the Arizona Department of Environmental Quality.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Local agency Rule No. Rule title Adopted Submitted
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Maricopa County Air Quality Department.... 242 Emission Offsets Generated by 06/20/07 07/05/07
the Voluntary Paving of
Unpaved Roads.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
On July 12, 2007, this rule submittal was found to meet the
completeness criteria in 40 CFR Part 51, Appendix V, which must be met
before formal EPA review.
B. Are there other versions of this rule?
There are no previous versions of Rule 242 in the SIP, and the
Maricopa County Air Quality Department has not adopted any earlier
version of this rule.
C. What is the purpose of the submitted rule?
PM contributes to effects that are harmful to human health and the
environment, including premature mortality, aggravation of respiratory
and cardiovascular disease, decreased lung function, visibility
impairment, and damage to vegetation and ecosystems. Section 173(c) of
the CAA requires, among other things, that major new sources of PM and
major modifications of existing sources of PM offset their increases of
PM emissions. Rule 242 creates a mechanism for owners and operators of
such sources to offset their PM emissions increases through the paving
of unpaved public roads in the PM non-attainment area of Maricopa
County. EPA's technical support document (TSD) has more information
about this rule.
II. EPA's Evaluation and Action
A. How is EPA evaluating the rule?
Generally, SIP rules must be enforceable (see section 110(a) of the
Act) and must not relax existing requirements (see sections 110(l) and
193). In addition, an offset generating rule of this type must meet the
criteria for generating valid offsets and should meet the criteria set
forth in our guidance concerning economic incentive programs.
Guidance and policy documents that we use to help evaluate specific
enforceability requirements and economic incentive rules or programs
consistently include the following:
1. ``Issues Relating to VOC Regulation Cutpoints, Deficiencies, and
Deviations; Clarification to Appendix D of November 24, 1987 Federal
Register Notice,'' (Blue Book), notice of availability published in the
May 25, 1988 Federal Register.
2. ``Guidance Document for Correcting Common VOC & Other Rule
Deficiencies,'' EPA Region 9, August 21, 2001 (the Little Bluebook).
3. AP-42, Fifth edition, ``Compilation of Air Pollutant Emission
Factors, Volume I, Stationary and Point Area Sources, Miscellaneous
Sources, Chapter 13,'' December 2003.
4. ``Emission Offset Interpretative Ruling,'' 40 CFR part 51,
appendix S.
5. ``Improving Air Quality with Economic Incentive Programs,'' EPA
452/R-01-001, January 2001.
B. Does the rule meet the evaluation criteria?
We believe this rule is consistent with the relevant policy and
guidance regarding enforceability and economic incentive programs and
ensures that the emission reductions are surplus, quantifiable,
enforceable, and permanent. The TSD 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 rule because we believe it fulfills 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 rule. If we
receive adverse comments by September 5, 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 October 5, 2007. This will incorporate the
rule into the federally enforceable SIP.
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),
[[Page 43539]]
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 October 5, 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, Incorporation by
reference, Intergovernmental relations, Particulate matter, and
Reporting and recordkeeping requirements.
Dated: July 20, 2007.
Keith Takata,
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:
Authority: 42 U.S.C. 7401 et seq.
Subpart D--Arizona
0
2. Section 52.120 is amended by adding paragraph (c)(139) to read as
follows:
Sec. 52.120 Identification of plan.
* * * * *
(c) * * *
(139) The following plan was submitted on July 5, 2007 by the
Governor's designee.
(i) Incorporation by reference.
(A) Maricopa County Air Quality Department
(1) Rule 242, adopted on June 20, 2007.
[FR Doc. E7-15118 Filed 8-3-07; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P