Approval and Promulgation of Implementation Plans; Nebraska; Interstate Transport of Pollution, 71245-71247 [E7-24231]
Download as PDF
Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 241 / Monday, December 17, 2007 / Rules and Regulations
representatives, or other authorized
persons.
(b) You must retain all data relevant
to the determination of royalty value.
Document retention and recordkeeping
requirements are found at §§ 207.5,
212.50, and 212.51 of this chapter. The
MMS, Indian representatives, or other
authorized persons may review and
audit such data you possess, and MMS
will direct you to use a different value
if it determines that the reported value
is inconsistent with the requirements of
this subpart or the lease.
§ 206.62 Does MMS protect information I
provide?
The MMS will keep confidential, to
the extent allowed under applicable
laws and regulations, any data or other
information you submit that is
privileged, confidential, or otherwise
exempt from disclosure. All requests for
information must be submitted under
the Freedom of Information Act
regulations of the Department of the
Interior, 43 CFR part 2.
[FR Doc. E7–24318 Filed 12–14–07; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4310–MR–P
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION
AGENCY
40 CFR Part 52
[EPA–R07–OAR–2007–1128; FRL–8507–1]
Approval and Promulgation of
Implementation Plans; Nebraska;
Interstate Transport of Pollution
Environmental Protection
Agency (EPA).
ACTION: Direct final rule.
ebenthall on PROD1PC69 with RULES
AGENCY:
SUMMARY: EPA is revising the Nebraska
State Implementation Plan (SIP) for the
purpose of approving the Nebraska
Department of Environmental Quality’s
(NDEQ) actions to address the ‘‘good
neighbor’’ provisions of the Clean Air
Act Section 110(a)(2)(D)(i). These
provisions require each state to submit
a SIP that prohibits emissions that
adversely affect another State’s air
quality through interstate transport.
NDEQ has adequately addressed the
four distinct elements related to the
impact of interstate transport of air
pollutants. These include prohibiting
significant contribution to downwind
nonattainment of the National Ambient
Air Quality Standards (NAAQS),
interference with maintenance of the
NAAQS, interference with plans in
another state to prevent significant
deterioration of air quality, and efforts
of other states to protect visibility. The
VerDate Aug<31>2005
15:24 Dec 14, 2007
Jkt 214001
requirements for public notification
were also met by NDEQ.
DATES: This direct final rule will be
effective February 15, 2008, without
further notice, unless EPA receives
adverse comment by January 16, 2008.
If adverse comment is received, EPA
will publish a timely withdrawal of the
direct final rule in the Federal Register
informing the public that the rule will
not take effect.
ADDRESSES: Submit your comments,
identified by Docket ID No. EPA–R07–
OAR–2007–1128, by one of the
following methods:
1. https://www.regulations.gov. Follow
the on-line instructions for submitting
comments.
2. E-mail: jay.michael@epa.gov.
3. Mail: Michael Jay, Environmental
Protection Agency, Air Planning and
Development Branch, 901 North 5th
Street, Kansas City, Kansas 66101.
4. Hand Delivery or Courier: Deliver
your comments to Michael Jay,
Environmental Protection Agency, Air
Planning and Development Branch, 901
North 5th Street, Kansas City, Kansas
66101.
Instructions: Direct your comments to
Docket ID No. EPA–R07–OAR–2007–
1128. EPA’s policy is that all comments
received 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 information
claimed to be Confidential Business
Information (CBI) or other information
whose disclosure is restricted by statute.
Do not submit through https://
www.regulations.gov or e-mail
information that you consider to be CBI
or otherwise protected. The https://
www.regulations.gov Web site is an
‘‘anonymous access’’ system, which
means EPA will not know your identity
or contact information unless you
provide it in the body of your comment.
If you send an e-mail comment directly
to EPA without going through https://
www.regulations.gov, your e-mail
address will be automatically captured
and included as part of the comment
that is placed in the public docket and
made available on the Internet. If you
submit an electronic comment, EPA
recommends that you include your
name and other contact information in
the body of your comment and with any
disk or CD–ROM you submit. If EPA
cannot read your comment due to
technical difficulties and cannot contact
you for clarification, EPA may not be
able to consider your comment.
Electronic files should avoid the use of
special characters, any form of
PO 00000
Frm 00047
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
71245
encryption, and be free of any defects or
viruses.
Docket: All documents in the
electronic docket are listed in the
https://www.regulations.gov index.
Although listed in the index, some
information is not publicly available,
i.e., CBI or other information whose
disclosure is restricted by statute.
Certain other material, such as
copyrighted material, is not placed on
the Internet and will be publicly
available only in hard copy form.
Publicly available docket materials are
available either electronically in 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 to 4:30 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 email at jay.michael@epa.gov.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Throughout this document whenever
‘‘we,’’ ‘‘us,’’ or ‘‘our’’ is used, we mean
EPA. This section provides additional
information by addressing the following
questions:
What is being addressed in this document?
What action is EPA taking?
What is being addressed in this
document?
EPA is revising the SIP for the
purpose of approving the NDEQ’s
actions to address the requirements of
the Clean Air Act (CAA) section
110(a)(2)(D)(i). This section requires
each state to submit a SIP that prohibits
emissions that could adversely affect
another state. The SIP must prevent
sources in the state from emitting
pollutants in amounts which will: (1)
Contribute significantly to downwind
nonattainment of the NAAQS, (2)
interfere with maintenance of the
NAAQS, (3) interfere with provisions to
prevent significant deterioration of air
quality, and (4) interfere with efforts to
protect visibility.
EPA issued guidance on August 15,
2006, relating to SIP submissions to
meet the requirements of section
110(a)(2)(D)(i). As discussed below,
Nebraska’s analysis of its SIP with
respect to the statutory requirements is
consistent with the guidance.
The NDEQ has addressed the first two
of these elements by submitting a
technical demonstration supporting the
conclusion that emissions from
E:\FR\FM\17DER1.SGM
17DER1
ebenthall on PROD1PC69 with RULES
71246
Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 241 / Monday, December 17, 2007 / Rules and Regulations
Nebraska do not significantly contribute
to downwind nonattainment or interfere
with maintenance of the NAAQS in
another state. For PM2.5, the state has
relied upon existing EPA Clean Air
Interstate Rule (CAIR) modeling that
determined impacts from the state do
not meet or exceed the 0.2 µg/m3
average annual threshold that EPA
established to determine significant
impact on another state in the projection
year 2010. The state indicated that in
EPA’s CAIR modeling, Nebraska’s
maximum downwind contribution to
average annual nonattainment was 0.07
µg/m3 (70 FR 25247). The state has
relied on this result to demonstrate that
emissions from the state do not
contribute significantly to downwind
nonattainment of the annual PM2.5
standard.
For 8-hour ozone, the state was
unable to rely on EPA CAIR modeling
to determine the state’s impact on
projected 8-hour ozone nonattainment
in downwind states. The EPA CAIR 8hour ozone modeling domain did not
include the entire state. As a result,
impacts from the state were not
provided in the analysis. Therefore, the
state has provided additional analysis,
as part of the technical demonstration,
to support a determination that the state
does not contribute significantly to
projected downwind 8-hour ozone
nonattainment and maintenance in the
year 2010.
The State’s additional analysis
includes a modeling demonstration that
supports this conclusion. The modeling
demonstration relies on the source
apportionment technique, consistent
with the technical analysis in support of
CAIR, to evaluate the State’s
contribution to nearby downwind
metropolitan statistical areas (MSAs)
and nearby counties. These areas
include Chicago and additional counties
in Wisconsin along Lake Michigan, St.
Louis, Kansas City, and Denver.
The determination of significance in
the State’s analysis was based upon
three contribution factors as determined
in CAIR:
• The magnitude of the contribution;
• The frequency of the contribution;
and
• The relative amount of
contribution.
The source apportionment modeling
analysis yielded consistent results
showing Nebraska does not contribute
significantly to downwind 8-hour ozone
nonattainment in any of the receptor
counties analyzed. For example,
Nebraska’s contribution to total
nonattainment in Chicago is 0.36%,
with a contribution average of 0.3 ppb,
and a 1.74% relative contribution
VerDate Aug<31>2005
15:24 Dec 14, 2007
Jkt 214001
during exceedance periods. By EPA’s
own metrics, these impacts are
considered to be small and infrequent.
Moreover, not a single metric of the
three contribution factors was found to
be above the significance threshold
established by EPA for any of the
downwind counties. (See Technical
Support Document for the Final Clean
Air Interstate Rule—Air Quality
Modeling). Based on this information
provided by the State, EPA believes the
State has sufficiently demonstrated that
emissions from the State do not
significantly contribute to downwind
nonattainment or interfere with
maintenance of the NAAQs. Additional
supporting information on Nebraska’s
modeling demonstration can be found
in its technical support document
provided in the docket.
The third element NDEQ addressed
was prevention of significant
deterioration (PSD). For 8-hour ozone,
the state has met the obligation by
confirming that major sources in the
state are currently subject to PSD
programs that implement the 8-hour
ozone standard. For PM2.5, the state has
confirmed that the state’s PSD program
is being implemented in accordance
with EPA’s interim guidance calling for
the use of PM10 as a surrogate for PM2.5
for the purposes of PSD review. Once
PM2.5 guidance is finalized by EPA,
NDEQ commits to transitioning from
use of the interim PM2.5 guidance to the
final PM2.5 implementation guidance
after approval of the PM2.5 SIP revision.
EPA proposed regulations to establish
this guidance on September 21, 2007 (72
FR 54112).
It should be noted that Nebraska is
currently designated with attainment for
both the 8-hour ozone and PM2.5
National Ambient Air Quality
Standards.
At this time, it is not possible for
NDEQ to accurately determine whether
there is interference with measures in
another state’s SIP designed to protect
visibility, which is the fourth element
that was addressed. Technical projects
relating to visibility degradation are
under development. Nebraska will be in
a more advantageous position to address
the visibility projection requirements
once the initial regional haze SIP has
been developed.
A public hearing with regard to this
action was held by the state. No
comments were received.
With this action, the non-regulatory
text in 40 CFR 52.1420(e) is revised to
reflect that NDEQ addressed the
elements of the CAA section
110(a)(2)(D)(i) submittal.
PO 00000
Frm 00048
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
What action is EPA taking?
EPA is approving this revision
submitted by Nebraska and is revising
40 CFR 52.1420(e) to reflect that the
NDEQ has adequately addressed the
required elements of the CAA section
110(a)(2)(D)(i) SIP. Please note that if
EPA receives adverse comments on part
of this rule, and if that part can be
severed from the remainder of the rule,
EPA may adopt as final those parts of
the rule that are not the subject of an
adverse comment.
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 action
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
action 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 action 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
E:\FR\FM\17DER1.SGM
17DER1
71247
Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 241 / Monday, December 17, 2007 / Rules and Regulations
CAA. This action 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 state submissions, EPA’s
role is to approve state choices,
provided that they meet the criteria of
the CAA. 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 state submission for
failure to use VCS. It would thus be
inconsistent with applicable law for
EPA, when it reviews a state
submission, to use VCS in place of a
state submission that otherwise satisfies
the provisions of the CAA. 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 action 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 CAA,
petitions for judicial review of this
action must be filed in the United States
Court of Appeals for the appropriate
circuit by February 15, 2008. 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,
Nitrogen dioxide, Ozone, Particulate
matter, Reporting and recordkeeping
requirements, Sulfur oxides, Volatile
organic compounds.
Dated: November 29, 2007.
William Rice,
Acting Regional Administrator, Region 7.
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 CC—Nebraska
2. In § 52.1420(e) the table is amended
by adding an entry in numerical order
to read as follows:
I
§ 52.1420
*
Identification of Plan.
*
*
(e) * * *
*
*
EPA-APPROVED NEBRASKA NONREGULATORY PROVISIONS
Name of nonregulatory SIP provision
Applicable geographic or nonattainment area
*
*
(23) CAA 110(a)(2)(D)(i) SIP—
Interstate Transport.
*
Statewide ..................................
[FR Doc. E7–24231 Filed 12–14–07; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560–50–P
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
Federal Motor Carrier Safety
Administration
49 CFR Parts 385 and 395
[Docket No. FMCSA–2004–19608]
RIN–2126-AB14
Hours of Service of Drivers
Federal Motor Carrier Safety
Administration (FMCSA), DOT.
ACTION: Interim final rule (IFR); request
for comments.
ebenthall on PROD1PC69 with RULES
AGENCY:
SUMMARY: FMCSA amends the Federal
Motor Carrier Safety Regulations
effective December 27 to allow
VerDate Aug<31>2005
15:24 Dec 14, 2007
Jkt 214001
State submittal
date
*
5/18/07
EPA approval date
*
*
12/17/07 [insert FR page number where the document begins].
commercial motor vehicle (CMV)
drivers up to 11 hours of driving time
within a 14-hour, non-extendable
window from the start of the workday,
following 10 consecutive hours off duty
(11-hour limit). This interim rule also
allows motor carriers and drivers to
restart calculations of the weekly onduty time limits after the driver has at
least 34 consecutive hours off duty (34hour restart). An IFR is necessary to
prevent disruption to enforcement and
compliance with the hours-of-service
(HOS) rules when the stay expires, as
well as possible effects on the timely
delivery of essential goods and services.
This IFR will ensure that a familiar and
uniform set of national rules governs
motor carrier transportation, while
FMCSA gathers public comments on all
aspects of this interim final rule,
conducts peer review of our analysis,
and considers the appropriate final rule
PO 00000
Frm 00049
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
Explanation
*
that addresses the issues identified by
the Court. FMCSA is fully committed to
issuing a final rule in 2008.
DATES: This rule is effective December
27, 2007. Comments must be received
on or before February 15, 2008.
ADDRESSES: You may submit comments
identified by Federal Docket
Management System Number FMCSA–
2004–19608 by any of the following
methods:
• Web Site: https://
www.regulations.gov. Follow the
instructions for submitting comments
on the Federal electronic docket site.
• Fax: 1–202–493–2251.
• Mail: Docket Management Facility,
U.S. Department of Transportation,
Room W12–140, 1200 New Jersey
Avenue, SE., Washington, DC 20590–
0001.
• Hand Delivery: Ground Floor, Room
W12–140, DOT Building, 1200 New
E:\FR\FM\17DER1.SGM
17DER1
Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 72, Number 241 (Monday, December 17, 2007)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 71245-71247]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: E7-24231]
=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
40 CFR Part 52
[EPA-R07-OAR-2007-1128; FRL-8507-1]
Approval and Promulgation of Implementation Plans; Nebraska;
Interstate Transport of Pollution
AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).
ACTION: Direct final rule.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: EPA is revising the Nebraska State Implementation Plan (SIP)
for the purpose of approving the Nebraska Department of Environmental
Quality's (NDEQ) actions to address the ``good neighbor'' provisions of
the Clean Air Act Section 110(a)(2)(D)(i). These provisions require
each state to submit a SIP that prohibits emissions that adversely
affect another State's air quality through interstate transport. NDEQ
has adequately addressed the four distinct elements related to the
impact of interstate transport of air pollutants. These include
prohibiting significant contribution to downwind nonattainment of the
National Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS), interference with
maintenance of the NAAQS, interference with plans in another state to
prevent significant deterioration of air quality, and efforts of other
states to protect visibility. The requirements for public notification
were also met by NDEQ.
DATES: This direct final rule will be effective February 15, 2008,
without further notice, unless EPA receives adverse comment by January
16, 2008. If adverse comment is received, EPA will publish a timely
withdrawal of the direct final rule in the Federal Register informing
the public that the rule will not take effect.
ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, identified by Docket ID No. EPA-R07-
OAR-2007-1128, by one of the following methods:
1. https://www.regulations.gov. Follow the on-line instructions for
submitting comments.
2. E-mail: jay.michael@epa.gov.
3. Mail: Michael Jay, Environmental Protection Agency, Air Planning
and Development Branch, 901 North 5th Street, Kansas City, Kansas
66101.
4. Hand Delivery or Courier: Deliver your comments to Michael Jay,
Environmental Protection Agency, Air Planning and Development Branch,
901 North 5th Street, Kansas City, Kansas 66101.
Instructions: Direct your comments to Docket ID No. EPA-R07-OAR-
2007-1128. EPA's policy is that all comments received 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 information claimed to be
Confidential Business Information (CBI) or other information whose
disclosure is restricted by statute. Do not submit through https://
www.regulations.gov or e-mail information that you consider to be CBI
or otherwise protected. The https://www.regulations.gov Web site is an
``anonymous access'' system, which means EPA will not know your
identity or contact information unless you provide it in the body of
your comment. If you send an e-mail comment directly to EPA without
going through https://www.regulations.gov, your e-mail address will be
automatically captured and included as part of the comment that is
placed in the public docket and made available on the Internet. If you
submit an electronic comment, EPA recommends that you include your name
and other contact information in the body of your comment and with any
disk or CD-ROM you submit. If EPA cannot read your comment due to
technical difficulties and cannot contact you for clarification, EPA
may not be able to consider your comment. Electronic files should avoid
the use of special characters, any form of encryption, and be free of
any defects or viruses.
Docket: All documents in the electronic docket are listed in the
https://www.regulations.gov index. Although listed in the index, some
information is not publicly available, i.e., CBI or other information
whose disclosure is restricted by statute. Certain other material, such
as copyrighted material, is not placed on the Internet and will be
publicly available only in hard copy form. Publicly available docket
materials are available either electronically in 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 to 4:30 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. This section provides
additional information by addressing the following questions:
What is being addressed in this document?
What action is EPA taking?
What is being addressed in this document?
EPA is revising the SIP for the purpose of approving the NDEQ's
actions to address the requirements of the Clean Air Act (CAA) section
110(a)(2)(D)(i). This section requires each state to submit a SIP that
prohibits emissions that could adversely affect another state. The SIP
must prevent sources in the state from emitting pollutants in amounts
which will: (1) Contribute significantly to downwind nonattainment of
the NAAQS, (2) interfere with maintenance of the NAAQS, (3) interfere
with provisions to prevent significant deterioration of air quality,
and (4) interfere with efforts to protect visibility.
EPA issued guidance on August 15, 2006, relating to SIP submissions
to meet the requirements of section 110(a)(2)(D)(i). As discussed
below, Nebraska's analysis of its SIP with respect to the statutory
requirements is consistent with the guidance.
The NDEQ has addressed the first two of these elements by
submitting a technical demonstration supporting the conclusion that
emissions from
[[Page 71246]]
Nebraska do not significantly contribute to downwind nonattainment or
interfere with maintenance of the NAAQS in another state. For
PM2.5, the state has relied upon existing EPA Clean Air
Interstate Rule (CAIR) modeling that determined impacts from the state
do not meet or exceed the 0.2 [mu]g/m\3\ average annual threshold that
EPA established to determine significant impact on another state in the
projection year 2010. The state indicated that in EPA's CAIR modeling,
Nebraska's maximum downwind contribution to average annual
nonattainment was 0.07 [mu]g/m\3\ (70 FR 25247). The state has relied
on this result to demonstrate that emissions from the state do not
contribute significantly to downwind nonattainment of the annual
PM2.5 standard.
For 8-hour ozone, the state was unable to rely on EPA CAIR modeling
to determine the state's impact on projected 8-hour ozone nonattainment
in downwind states. The EPA CAIR 8-hour ozone modeling domain did not
include the entire state. As a result, impacts from the state were not
provided in the analysis. Therefore, the state has provided additional
analysis, as part of the technical demonstration, to support a
determination that the state does not contribute significantly to
projected downwind 8-hour ozone nonattainment and maintenance in the
year 2010.
The State's additional analysis includes a modeling demonstration
that supports this conclusion. The modeling demonstration relies on the
source apportionment technique, consistent with the technical analysis
in support of CAIR, to evaluate the State's contribution to nearby
downwind metropolitan statistical areas (MSAs) and nearby counties.
These areas include Chicago and additional counties in Wisconsin along
Lake Michigan, St. Louis, Kansas City, and Denver.
The determination of significance in the State's analysis was based
upon three contribution factors as determined in CAIR:
The magnitude of the contribution;
The frequency of the contribution; and
The relative amount of contribution.
The source apportionment modeling analysis yielded consistent
results showing Nebraska does not contribute significantly to downwind
8-hour ozone nonattainment in any of the receptor counties analyzed.
For example, Nebraska's contribution to total nonattainment in Chicago
is 0.36%, with a contribution average of 0.3 ppb, and a 1.74% relative
contribution during exceedance periods. By EPA's own metrics, these
impacts are considered to be small and infrequent. Moreover, not a
single metric of the three contribution factors was found to be above
the significance threshold established by EPA for any of the downwind
counties. (See Technical Support Document for the Final Clean Air
Interstate Rule--Air Quality Modeling). Based on this information
provided by the State, EPA believes the State has sufficiently
demonstrated that emissions from the State do not significantly
contribute to downwind nonattainment or interfere with maintenance of
the NAAQs. Additional supporting information on Nebraska's modeling
demonstration can be found in its technical support document provided
in the docket.
The third element NDEQ addressed was prevention of significant
deterioration (PSD). For 8-hour ozone, the state has met the obligation
by confirming that major sources in the state are currently subject to
PSD programs that implement the 8-hour ozone standard. For
PM2.5, the state has confirmed that the state's PSD program
is being implemented in accordance with EPA's interim guidance calling
for the use of PM10 as a surrogate for PM2.5 for
the purposes of PSD review. Once PM2.5 guidance is finalized
by EPA, NDEQ commits to transitioning from use of the interim
PM2.5 guidance to the final PM2.5 implementation
guidance after approval of the PM2.5 SIP revision. EPA
proposed regulations to establish this guidance on September 21, 2007
(72 FR 54112).
It should be noted that Nebraska is currently designated with
attainment for both the 8-hour ozone and PM2.5 National
Ambient Air Quality Standards.
At this time, it is not possible for NDEQ to accurately determine
whether there is interference with measures in another state's SIP
designed to protect visibility, which is the fourth element that was
addressed. Technical projects relating to visibility degradation are
under development. Nebraska will be in a more advantageous position to
address the visibility projection requirements once the initial
regional haze SIP has been developed.
A public hearing with regard to this action was held by the state.
No comments were received.
With this action, the non-regulatory text in 40 CFR 52.1420(e) is
revised to reflect that NDEQ addressed the elements of the CAA section
110(a)(2)(D)(i) submittal.
What action is EPA taking?
EPA is approving this revision submitted by Nebraska and is
revising 40 CFR 52.1420(e) to reflect that the NDEQ has adequately
addressed the required elements of the CAA section 110(a)(2)(D)(i) SIP.
Please note that if EPA receives adverse comments on part of this rule,
and if that part can be severed from the remainder of the rule, EPA may
adopt as final those parts of the rule that are not the subject of an
adverse comment.
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 action 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 action 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 action 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
[[Page 71247]]
CAA. This action 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 state submissions, EPA's role is to approve state
choices, provided that they meet the criteria of the CAA. 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 state submission for failure to use VCS. It would thus be
inconsistent with applicable law for EPA, when it reviews a state
submission, to use VCS in place of a state submission that otherwise
satisfies the provisions of the CAA. 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 action 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 CAA, petitions for judicial review
of this action must be filed in the United States Court of Appeals for
the appropriate circuit by February 15, 2008. 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, Nitrogen dioxide, Ozone,
Particulate matter, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements, Sulfur
oxides, Volatile organic compounds.
Dated: November 29, 2007.
William Rice,
Acting Regional Administrator, Region 7.
0
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 CC--Nebraska
0
2. In Sec. 52.1420(e) the table is amended by adding an entry in
numerical order to read as follows:
Sec. 52.1420 Identification of Plan.
* * * * *
(e) * * *
EPA-Approved Nebraska Nonregulatory Provisions
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Applicable
Name of nonregulatory SIP geographic or State EPA approval
provision nonattainment submittal date date Explanation
area
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
* * * * * * *
(23) CAA 110(a)(2)(D)(i) SIP-- Statewide....... 5/18/07 12/17/07 [insert
Interstate Transport. FR page number
where the
document
begins].
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
[FR Doc. E7-24231 Filed 12-14-07; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P