Approval and Promulgation of Implementation Plans; New York Reasonably Available Control Technology and Reasonably Available Control Measures, 43066-43069 [2010-18074]
Download as PDF
43066
Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 141 / Friday, July 23, 2010 / Rules and Regulations
EPA APPROVED REGULATIONS IN THE TEXAS SIP—Continued
State citation
State approval/submittal date
Title/subject
EPA approval date
Explanation
Subchapter B—Electronic Reporting Requirements
Section 19.10 ............
2/7/2007
Section 19.12 ............
Use of Electronic Document Receiving System.
Authorized Electronic Signature .........
Section 19.14 ............
Enforcement ........................................
2/7/2007
2/7/2007
July 23, 2010 [Insert FR page number
where document begins.
July 23, 2010 [Insert FR page number
where document begins.
July 23, 2010 [Insert FR page number
where document begins.
Chapter 101—General Air Quality Rules
Subchapter A—General Rules
*
Section 101.10 ..........
*
*
Emissions Inventory Requirements ....
*
12/1/1999
*
*
July 23, 2010 [Insert FR page number
where document begins.
*
*
Section 101.30 ..........
*
*
Conformity of General Federal Actions to State Implementation Plans.
*
12/1/1999
*
*
July 23, 2010 [Insert FR page number
where document begins.
*
*
*
*
[FR Doc. 2010–17975 Filed 7–22–10; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560–50–P
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION
AGENCY
40 CFR Part 52
[EPA–R02–OAR–2009–0462, FRL–9178–5]
Approval and Promulgation of
Implementation Plans; New York
Reasonably Available Control
Technology and Reasonably Available
Control Measures
Environmental Protection
Agency (EPA).
ACTION: Final rule.
AGENCY:
EPA is conditionally
approving the reasonably available
control technology requirement which
applies to the entire State of New York,
including the New York portion of the
New York-Northern New Jersey-Long
Island, NY-NJ-CT and the Poughkeepsie
8-hour ozone moderate nonattainment
areas. In addition, EPA is conditionally
approving the reasonably available
control measure analysis which applies
to the New York portion of the New
York-Northern New Jersey-Long Island,
NY-NJ-CT 8-hour ozone moderate
nonattainment area.
DATES: Effective Date: This rule is
effective on August 23, 2010.
ADDRESSES: EPA has established a
docket for this action under Docket ID
No. EPA–R02–OAR–2009–0462. All
documents in the docket are listed on
WReier-Aviles on DSKGBLS3C1PROD with RULES
SUMMARY:
VerDate Mar<15>2010
15:09 Jul 22, 2010
Jkt 220001
*
*
the https://www.regulations.gov Web
site. Although listed in the index, some
information is not publicly available,
e.g., CBI or other information whose
disclosure is restricted by statute.
Certain other material, such as
copyrighted material, is not placed on
the Internet and will be publicly
available only in hard copy form.
Publicly available docket materials are
available either electronically through
https://www.regulations.gov or in hard
copy at the Environmental Protection
Agency, Region II Office, Air Programs
Branch, 290 Broadway, 25th Floor, New
York, New York 10007–1866. This
Docket Facility is open from 8:30 a.m.
to 4:30 p.m., Monday through Friday,
excluding legal holidays. The Docket
telephone number is 212–637–4249.
Kirk
Wieber (wieber.kirk@epa.gov), Air
Programs Branch, Environmental
Protection Agency, 290 Broadway, 25th
Floor, New York, New York 10007–
1866, (212) 637–4249.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Table of Contents
I. What comments did EPA receive in
response to its proposal and what action
is EPA taking in this final rule?
II. What was included in New York’s SIP
submittals?
III. What is the rationale for this approval
action?
IV. What are EPA’s conclusions?
V. What are the consequences if a final
conditional approval is converted to a
disapproval?
VI. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews
PO 00000
Frm 00036
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
*
*
I. What comments did EPA receive in
response to its proposal and what
action is EPA taking in this final rule?
On May 4, 2010 (75 FR 23640) the
Environmental Protection Agency (EPA)
proposed to conditionally approve New
York’s reasonably available control
measure (RACM) analysis and New
York’s efforts to meet the reasonably
available control technology (RACT)
requirement. The reader is referred to
that rulemaking action for a more
detailed discussion of New York’s
RACT and RACM plans. EPA received
no comments in response to the May 4,
2010 proposal. Therefore, in this action,
EPA is conditionally approving New
York’s RACT and RACM plans.
II. What was included in New York’s
SIP submittals?
On September 1, 2006, New York
submitted its State-wide 8-hour ozone
RACT SIP, which included a
determination that many of the RACT
rules currently contained in its SIP meet
the RACT obligation for the 8-hour
standard. On February 8, 2008, New
York submitted two comprehensive 8hour ozone SIPs—one for the New York
portion of the New York-Northern New
Jersey-Long Island, NY-NJ-CT
nonattainment area, entitled, ‘‘New York
SIP for Ozone—Attainment
Demonstration for New York Metro
Area’’ and one for the Poughkeepsie
nonattainment area, entitled, ‘‘New York
SIP for Ozone—Attainment
Demonstration for Poughkeepsie, NY
Area.’’ The submittals included the 2002
base year emissions inventory,
E:\FR\FM\23JYR1.SGM
23JYR1
Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 141 / Friday, July 23, 2010 / Rules and Regulations
WReier-Aviles on DSKGBLS3C1PROD with RULES
projection year emissions, attainment
demonstrations, Reasonable Further
Progress (RFP) plans, RACT analysis,
RACM analysis, contingency measures,
new source review and on-road motor
vehicle emission budgets. These
proposed SIP revisions were subject to
notice and comment by the public and
the State addressed the comments
received on the proposed SIP revisions
before adopting the plans and
submitting them for EPA review and
rulemaking action.
Included in New York’s February 8,
2008 8-hour Ozone SIP submittal was a
list of additional control measures
identified by the State as RACT and
RACM. The State committed to adopt
additional control measures applicable
to the following source categories:
Adhesives and Sealants, Consumer
Products, Portable Fuel Containers,
Graphic Arts, Asphalt Formulation,
Asphalt Paving Production, Portland
Cement Plants, Glass Manufacturing,
and NOx RACT.
Of the source categories identified by
New York, the State adopted rules for
Portable Fuel Containers on July 15,
2009, and for Consumer Products on
September 30, 2009. New York
submitted the Consumer Products rule
(on October 21, 2009) and the Portable
Fuel Container rule (on November 23,
2009) to EPA, for review and approval
into the SIP. On May 28, 2010 (75 FR
29897), EPA approved New York’s
Consumer Products and Portable Fuel
Container rules.
On April 15, 2010, New York
submitted a letter committing to adopt
the necessary control measures that will
satisfy the RACT and RACM
requirement by August 31, 2010, which
is no more than one year from our final
action on the RACT and RACM SIP
submittals.
III. What is the rationale for this
approval action?
On August 25, 2009 (74 FR 42813),
EPA proposed to disapprove New
York’s RACT and RACM plans. In that
proposed rulemaking action, EPA made
suggestions for how New York could
correct the identified deficiencies and
strengthen the 8-hour ozone SIP (see 74
FR 42819). As discussed in Section II,
New York adopted and submitted for
inclusion in the SIP two of the control
measures it had adopted. On December
23, 2009, New York proposed adoption
of all but one of the remaining
additional control measures that it
committed to adopt as satisfying the
RACT and RACM requirement. On April
21, 2010, New York proposed adoption
of that one remaining control measure.
Based on this recent progress and on
VerDate Mar<15>2010
15:09 Jul 22, 2010
Jkt 220001
New York’s April 15, 2010 letter
committing to submit adopted RACT/
RACM rules by August 31, 2010, EPA
proposed a conditional approval of the
RACT and RACM SIPs for the 8-hour
ozone NAAQS on May 4, 2010. EPA has
determined that New York should be
able to meet this commitment because
the State has already adopted rules for
two of the source categories and
proposed RACT/RACM provisions for
all of the remaining source categories.
IV. What are EPA’s conclusions?
EPA is conditionally approving the
moderate area RACM analysis for the
New York portion of the New YorkNorthern New Jersey-Long Island, NYNJ-CT 8-hour ozone moderate
nonattainment area as presented in the
February 8, 2008 ‘‘New York SIP for
Ozone—Attainment Demonstration for
New York Metro Area’’ SIP submittal.
EPA is also conditionally approving
the September 1, 2006 New York RACT
analysis SIP submittal, supplemented
on February 8, 2008 and September 16,
2008, which applies to the entire State
and to the New York portion of the New
York-Northern New Jersey-Long Island,
NY-NJ-CT and the Poughkeepsie 8-hour
ozone moderate nonattainment areas.
EPA is conditionally approving the
RACT and RACM analyses for the 8hour ozone NAAQS based on New
York’s letter committing to submit
adopted RACT/RACM rules for several
source categories by August 31, 2010.
EPA has determined that New York
should be able to meet this commitment
because the State has already adopted
rules for two of the source categories
and proposed RACT/RACM provisions
for all of the remaining source
categories.
Under section 110(k)(4) of the Act,
EPA may conditionally approve a plan
based on a commitment from the State
to adopt specific enforceable measures
by a date certain, but not later than 1
year from the date of approval. If EPA
conditionally approves the commitment
in a final rulemaking action, the State
must meet its commitment to adopt the
identified regulations. If the State fails
to do so, this action will become a
disapproval upon the State’s failure to
meet its commitment. EPA will notify
the State by letter that this action has
occurred. If the conditional approval
converts to a disapproval, the
commitment will no longer be a part of
the approved New York SIP. Upon
notification to the State that the
conditional approval has converted to a
disapproval, EPA will publish a notice
in the Federal Register notifying the
public that the conditional approval
automatically converted to a
PO 00000
Frm 00037
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
43067
disapproval. If EPA disapproves the
RACT and RACM SIP submittals, such
action will start a sanctions and FIP
clock (see section V). If the State meets
its commitment, within the applicable
time frame, the conditionally approved
submission will remain a part of the SIP
until EPA takes final action approving
or disapproving the RACT and RACM
submittals. If EPA approves the
submittals, the RACT and RACM
analyses will be fully approved into the
SIP in their entirety.
V. What are the consequences if a final
conditional approval is converted to a
disapproval?
The Act provides for the imposition of
sanctions and the promulgation of a
Federal Implementation Plan (FIP) if
States fail to correct any deficiencies
identified by EPA in a final disapproval
action within certain timeframes.
A. What are the Act’s provisions for
sanctions?
If EPA disapproves a required SIP
submittal or component of a SIP
submittal, section 179(a) provides for
the imposition of sanctions unless the
deficiency is corrected within 18
months of the final rulemaking of
disapproval. The first sanction would
apply 18 months after EPA disapproves
the SIP submittal if a State fails to make
the required submittal. Under EPA’s
sanctions regulations, 40 CFR 52.31, the
first sanction would be 2:1 offsets for
sources subject to the new source
review requirements under section 173
of the Act. If the State has still failed to
submit a SIP for which EPA proposes
full or conditional approval 6 months
after the first sanction is imposed, the
second sanction will apply. The second
sanction is a limitation on the receipt of
Federal highway funds. EPA also has
authority under section 110(m) to
sanction a broader area.
B. What Federal implementation plan
provisions apply if a state fails to submit
an approvable plan?
In addition to sanctions, if EPA finds
that a State failed to submit the required
SIP revision or disapproves the required
SIP revision, or a portion thereof, EPA
must promulgate a FIP no later than 2
years from the date of the finding if the
deficiency has not been corrected.
VI. Statutory and Executive Order
Reviews
A. Executive Order 12866, Regulatory
Planning and Review
This action is not a ‘‘significant
regulatory action’’ under the terms of
Executive Order (EO) 12866 (58 FR
E:\FR\FM\23JYR1.SGM
23JYR1
43068
Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 141 / Friday, July 23, 2010 / Rules and Regulations
51735, October 4, 1993) and is therefore
not subject to review under the EO.
WReier-Aviles on DSKGBLS3C1PROD with RULES
B. Paperwork Reduction Act
This action does not impose an
information collection burden under the
provisions of the Paperwork Reduction
Act, 44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq., because this
SIP conditional approval under section
110 and subchapter I, part D of the
Clean Air Act will not in-and-of itself
create any new information collection
burdens but simply conditionally
approves certain State requirements for
inclusion into the SIP. Burden is
defined at 5 CFR 1320.3(b).
C. Regulatory Flexibility Act
The Regulatory Flexibility Act (RFA)
generally requires an agency to conduct
a regulatory flexibility analysis of any
rule subject to notice and comment
rulemaking requirements unless the
agency certifies that the rule will not
have a significant economic impact on
a substantial number of small entities.
Small entities include small businesses,
small not-for-profit enterprises, and
small governmental jurisdictions. For
purposes of assessing the impacts of
today’s rule on small entities, small
entity is defined as: (1) A small business
as defined by the Small Business
Administration’s (SBA) regulations at 13
CFR 121.201; (2) a small governmental
jurisdiction that is a government of a
city, county, town, school district or
special district with a population of less
than 50,000; and (3) a small
organization that is any not-for-profit
enterprise which is independently
owned and operated and is not
dominant in its field.
After considering the economic
impacts of today’s final rule on small
entities, I certify that this action will not
have a significant impact on a
substantial number of small entities.
This rule does not impose any
requirements or create impacts on small
entities. This SIP conditional approval
under section 110 and subchapter I, part
D of the Clean Air Act will not in-andof itself create any new requirements
but simply disapproves certain State
requirements for inclusion into the SIP.
Accordingly, it affords no opportunity
for EPA to fashion for small entities less
burdensome compliance or reporting
requirements or timetables or
exemptions from all or part of the rule.
The fact that the Clean Air Act
prescribes that various consequences
(e.g., higher offset requirements) may or
will flow from this conditional approval
does not mean that EPA either can or
must conduct a regulatory flexibility
analysis for this action. Therefore, this
action will not have a significant
VerDate Mar<15>2010
15:09 Jul 22, 2010
Jkt 220001
economic impact on a substantial
number of small entities.
We continue to be interested in the
potential impacts of this final rule on
small entities and welcome comments
on issues related to such impacts.
apply in Indian country located in the
State, and EPA notes that it will not
impose substantial direct costs on Tribal
governments or preempt Tribal law.
Thus, Executive Order 13175 does not
apply to this action.
D. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act
This action contains no Federal
mandates under the provisions of Title
II of the Unfunded Mandates Reform
Act of 1995 (UMRA), 2 U.S.C. 1531–
1538 for State, local, or Tribal
governments or the private sector. EPA
has determined that the final
conditional approval action does not
include a Federal mandate that may
result in estimated costs of $100 million
or more to either State, local, or Tribal
governments in the aggregate, or to the
private sector. This action conditionally
approves pre-existing requirements
under State or local law, and imposes
no new requirements. Accordingly, no
additional costs to State, local, or Tribal
governments, or to the private sector,
result from this action.
G. Executive Order 13045, Protection of
Children From Environmental Health
Risks and Safety Risks
E. Executive Order 13132, Federalism
Executive Order 13132, entitled
‘‘Federalism’’ (64 FR 43255, August 10,
1999), requires EPA to develop an
accountable process to ensure
‘‘meaningful and timely input by State
and local officials in the development of
regulatory policies that have federalism
implications.’’ ‘‘Policies that have
federalism implications’’ is defined in
the Executive Order to include
regulations that have ‘‘substantial direct
effects on the States, on the relationship
between the national government and
the States, or on the distribution of
power and responsibilities among the
various levels of government.’’
This action does not have federalism
implications. It will not have substantial
direct effects on the States, on the
relationship between the national
government and the States, or on the
distribution of power and
responsibilities among the various
levels of government, as specified in
Executive Order 13132, because it
merely conditionally approves certain
State requirements for inclusion into the
SIP and does not alter the relationship
or the distribution of power and
responsibilities established in the Clean
Air Act. Thus, Executive Order 13132
does not apply to this action.
F. Executive Order 13175, Coordination
With Indian Tribal Governments
This action does not have Tribal
implications, as specified in Executive
Order 13175 (65 FR 67249, November 9,
2000), because the SIP EPA is
conditionally approving would not
PO 00000
Frm 00038
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
EPA interprets EO 13045 (62 FR
19885, April 23, 1997) as applying only
to those regulatory actions that concern
health or safety risks, such that the
analysis required under section 5–501 of
the EO has the potential to influence the
regulation. This action is not subject to
EO 13045 because it is not an
economically significant regulatory
action based on health or safety risks
subject to Executive Order 13045 (62 FR
19885, April 23, 1997). This SIP
conditional approval under section 110
and subchapter I, part D of the Clean Air
Act will not in-and-of itself create any
new regulations but simply
conditionally approves certain State
requirements for inclusion into the SIP.
H. Executive Order 13211, Actions That
Significantly Affect Energy Supply,
Distribution, or Use
This final rule is not subject to
Executive Order 13211 (66 FR 28355,
May 22, 2001) because it is not a
significant regulatory action under
Executive Order 12866.
I. National Technology Transfer and
Advancement Act
Section 12(d) of the National
Technology Transfer and Advancement
Act of 1995 (‘‘NTTAA’’), Public Law No.
104–113, 12(d) (15 U.S.C. 272 note)
directs EPA to use voluntary consensus
standards in its regulatory activities
unless to do so would be inconsistent
with applicable law or otherwise
impractical. Voluntary consensus
standards are technical standards (e.g.,
materials specifications, test methods,
sampling procedures, and business
practices) that are developed or adopted
by voluntary consensus standards
bodies. NTTAA directs EPA to provide
Congress, through OMB, explanations
when the Agency decides not to use
available and applicable voluntary
consensus standards.
The EPA believes this action is not
subject to requirements of Section 12(d)
of NTTAA because application of those
requirements would be inconsistent
with the Clean Air Act.
E:\FR\FM\23JYR1.SGM
23JYR1
Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 141 / Friday, July 23, 2010 / Rules and Regulations
J. Executive Order 12898: Federal
Actions To Address Environmental
Justice in Minority Populations and
Low-Income Populations
Executive Order (EO) 12898 (59 FR
7629 (Feb. 16, 1994)) establishes Federal
executive policy on environmental
justice. Its main provision directs
Federal agencies, to the greatest extent
practicable and permitted by law, to
make environmental justice part of their
mission by identifying and addressing,
as appropriate, disproportionately high
and adverse human health or
environmental effects of their programs,
policies, and activities on minority
populations and low-income
populations in the United States.
EPA lacks the discretionary authority
to address environmental justice in this
final action. In reviewing SIP
submissions, EPA’s role is to approve or
disapprove State choices, based on the
criteria of the Clean Air Act.
Accordingly, this action merely
conditionally approves certain State
requirements for inclusion into the SIP
under section 110 and subchapter I, part
D of the Clean Air Act and will not inand-of itself create any new
requirements. Accordingly, it does not
provide EPA with the discretionary
authority to address, as appropriate,
disproportionate human health or
environmental effects, using practicable
and legally permissible methods, under
Executive Order 12898.
K. Congressional Review Act
WReier-Aviles on DSKGBLS3C1PROD with RULES
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 action 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).
L. Petitions for Judicial Review
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 September 21,
2010. Filing a petition for
reconsideration by the Administrator of
VerDate Mar<15>2010
15:09 Jul 22, 2010
Jkt 220001
43069
this final rule does not affect the finality
of this action 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).)
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION
AGENCY
List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52
AGENCY:
Environmental protection, Air
pollution control, Incorporation by
reference, Intergovernmental relations,
Ozone, Reporting and recordkeeping
requirements, Volatile organic
compounds.
Dated: July 13, 2010.
Judith A. Enck,
Regional Administrator, Region 2.
Part 52, chapter I, title 40 of the Code
of Federal Regulations is amended as
follows:
■
PART 52—[AMENDED]
1. The authority citation for part 52
continues to read as follows:
■
Authority: 42 U.S.C. 7401 et seq.
Subpart HH—New York
2. Section 52.1683 is amended by
adding new paragraph (k) to read as
follows:
Control strategy: Ozone.
*
*
*
*
*
(k)(1) The September 1, 2006 New
York reasonably available control
technology (RACT) analysis plan
submittal, supplemented on February 8,
2008 and September 16, 2008, which
applies to the entire State and to the
New York portion of the New YorkNorthern New Jersey-Long Island, NYNJ-CT and the Poughkeepsie 8-hour
ozone moderate nonattainment areas is
conditionally approved.
(2) The moderate area reasonably
available control measure (RACM)
analysis for the New York portion of the
New York-Northern New Jersey-Long
Island, NY-NJ-CT 8-hour ozone
moderate nonattainment area as
presented in the February 8, 2008 ‘‘New
York SIP for Ozone—Attainment
Demonstration for New York Metro
Area’’ submittal is conditionally
approved.
[FR Doc. 2010–18074 Filed 7–22–10; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560–50–P
PO 00000
Frm 00039
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
[EPA–R03–OAR–2010–0431; FRL–9179–1]
Approval of One-Year Extension for
Attaining the 1997 8-Hour Ozone
Standard in the Baltimore Moderate
Nonattainment Area
Environmental Protection
Agency (EPA).
ACTION: Direct final rule.
EPA is taking direct final
action to extend the attainment date
from June 15, 2010 to June 15, 2011 for
the Baltimore nonattainment area,
which is classified as moderate for the
1997 8-hour ozone national ambient air
quality standard (NAAQS). This
extension is based in part on air quality
data for the 4th highest daily 8-hour
monitored value during the 2009 ozone
season. Accordingly, EPA is revising the
table in our regulations concerning the
8-hour ozone attainment dates in the
State of Maryland. EPA is approving the
extension of the attainment date for the
Baltimore moderate ozone
nonattainment area in accordance with
the requirements of the Clean Air Act
(CAA).
SUMMARY:
Effective Date: This rule is
effective on September 21, 2010 without
further notice, unless EPA receives
adverse written comment by August 23,
2010. If EPA receives such comments, it
will publish a timely withdrawal of the
direct final rule in the Federal Register
and inform the public that the rule will
not take effect.
ADDRESSES: EPA has established a
docket for this action under Docket ID
Number EPA–R03–OAR–2010–0431. All
documents in the docket are listed in
the https://www.regulations.gov Web
site. Although listed in the electronic
docket, some information is not publicly
available, i.e., confidential business
information (CBI) or other information
whose disclosure is restricted by statute.
Certain other material, such as
copyrighted material, is not placed on
the Internet and will be publicly
available only in hard copy form.
Publicly available docket materials are
available either electronically through
https://www.regulations.gov or in hard
copy for public inspection during
normal business hours at the Air
Protection Division, U.S. Environmental
Protection Agency, Region III, 1650
Arch Street, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania
19103. Copies of the State submittal are
available at Maryland Department of the
Environment, 1800 Washington
DATES:
■
52.1683
40 CFR Part 81
E:\FR\FM\23JYR1.SGM
23JYR1
Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 75, Number 141 (Friday, July 23, 2010)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 43066-43069]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2010-18074]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
40 CFR Part 52
[EPA-R02-OAR-2009-0462, FRL-9178-5]
Approval and Promulgation of Implementation Plans; New York
Reasonably Available Control Technology and Reasonably Available
Control Measures
AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).
ACTION: Final rule.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: EPA is conditionally approving the reasonably available
control technology requirement which applies to the entire State of New
York, including the New York portion of the New York-Northern New
Jersey-Long Island, NY-NJ-CT and the Poughkeepsie 8-hour ozone moderate
nonattainment areas. In addition, EPA is conditionally approving the
reasonably available control measure analysis which applies to the New
York portion of the New York-Northern New Jersey-Long Island, NY-NJ-CT
8-hour ozone moderate nonattainment area.
DATES: Effective Date: This rule is effective on August 23, 2010.
ADDRESSES: EPA has established a docket for this action under Docket ID
No. EPA-R02-OAR-2009-0462. All documents in the docket are listed on
the https://www.regulations.gov Web site. Although listed in the index,
some information is not publicly available, e.g., CBI or other
information whose disclosure is restricted by statute. Certain other
material, such as copyrighted material, is not placed on the Internet
and will be publicly available only in hard copy form. Publicly
available docket materials are available either electronically through
https://www.regulations.gov or in hard copy at the Environmental
Protection Agency, Region II Office, Air Programs Branch, 290 Broadway,
25th Floor, New York, New York 10007-1866. This Docket Facility is open
from 8:30 a.m. to 4:30 p.m., Monday through Friday, excluding legal
holidays. The Docket telephone number is 212-637-4249.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Kirk Wieber (wieber.kirk@epa.gov), Air
Programs Branch, Environmental Protection Agency, 290 Broadway, 25th
Floor, New York, New York 10007-1866, (212) 637-4249.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Table of Contents
I. What comments did EPA receive in response to its proposal and
what action is EPA taking in this final rule?
II. What was included in New York's SIP submittals?
III. What is the rationale for this approval action?
IV. What are EPA's conclusions?
V. What are the consequences if a final conditional approval is
converted to a disapproval?
VI. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews
I. What comments did EPA receive in response to its proposal and what
action is EPA taking in this final rule?
On May 4, 2010 (75 FR 23640) the Environmental Protection Agency
(EPA) proposed to conditionally approve New York's reasonably available
control measure (RACM) analysis and New York's efforts to meet the
reasonably available control technology (RACT) requirement. The reader
is referred to that rulemaking action for a more detailed discussion of
New York's RACT and RACM plans. EPA received no comments in response to
the May 4, 2010 proposal. Therefore, in this action, EPA is
conditionally approving New York's RACT and RACM plans.
II. What was included in New York's SIP submittals?
On September 1, 2006, New York submitted its State-wide 8-hour
ozone RACT SIP, which included a determination that many of the RACT
rules currently contained in its SIP meet the RACT obligation for the
8-hour standard. On February 8, 2008, New York submitted two
comprehensive 8-hour ozone SIPs--one for the New York portion of the
New York-Northern New Jersey-Long Island, NY-NJ-CT nonattainment area,
entitled, ``New York SIP for Ozone--Attainment Demonstration for New
York Metro Area'' and one for the Poughkeepsie nonattainment area,
entitled, ``New York SIP for Ozone--Attainment Demonstration for
Poughkeepsie, NY Area.'' The submittals included the 2002 base year
emissions inventory,
[[Page 43067]]
projection year emissions, attainment demonstrations, Reasonable
Further Progress (RFP) plans, RACT analysis, RACM analysis, contingency
measures, new source review and on-road motor vehicle emission budgets.
These proposed SIP revisions were subject to notice and comment by the
public and the State addressed the comments received on the proposed
SIP revisions before adopting the plans and submitting them for EPA
review and rulemaking action.
Included in New York's February 8, 2008 8-hour Ozone SIP submittal
was a list of additional control measures identified by the State as
RACT and RACM. The State committed to adopt additional control measures
applicable to the following source categories: Adhesives and Sealants,
Consumer Products, Portable Fuel Containers, Graphic Arts, Asphalt
Formulation, Asphalt Paving Production, Portland Cement Plants, Glass
Manufacturing, and NOx RACT.
Of the source categories identified by New York, the State adopted
rules for Portable Fuel Containers on July 15, 2009, and for Consumer
Products on September 30, 2009. New York submitted the Consumer
Products rule (on October 21, 2009) and the Portable Fuel Container
rule (on November 23, 2009) to EPA, for review and approval into the
SIP. On May 28, 2010 (75 FR 29897), EPA approved New York's Consumer
Products and Portable Fuel Container rules.
On April 15, 2010, New York submitted a letter committing to adopt
the necessary control measures that will satisfy the RACT and RACM
requirement by August 31, 2010, which is no more than one year from our
final action on the RACT and RACM SIP submittals.
III. What is the rationale for this approval action?
On August 25, 2009 (74 FR 42813), EPA proposed to disapprove New
York's RACT and RACM plans. In that proposed rulemaking action, EPA
made suggestions for how New York could correct the identified
deficiencies and strengthen the 8-hour ozone SIP (see 74 FR 42819). As
discussed in Section II, New York adopted and submitted for inclusion
in the SIP two of the control measures it had adopted. On December 23,
2009, New York proposed adoption of all but one of the remaining
additional control measures that it committed to adopt as satisfying
the RACT and RACM requirement. On April 21, 2010, New York proposed
adoption of that one remaining control measure. Based on this recent
progress and on New York's April 15, 2010 letter committing to submit
adopted RACT/RACM rules by August 31, 2010, EPA proposed a conditional
approval of the RACT and RACM SIPs for the 8-hour ozone NAAQS on May 4,
2010. EPA has determined that New York should be able to meet this
commitment because the State has already adopted rules for two of the
source categories and proposed RACT/RACM provisions for all of the
remaining source categories.
IV. What are EPA's conclusions?
EPA is conditionally approving the moderate area RACM analysis for
the New York portion of the New York-Northern New Jersey-Long Island,
NY-NJ-CT 8-hour ozone moderate nonattainment area as presented in the
February 8, 2008 ``New York SIP for Ozone--Attainment Demonstration for
New York Metro Area'' SIP submittal.
EPA is also conditionally approving the September 1, 2006 New York
RACT analysis SIP submittal, supplemented on February 8, 2008 and
September 16, 2008, which applies to the entire State and to the New
York portion of the New York-Northern New Jersey-Long Island, NY-NJ-CT
and the Poughkeepsie 8-hour ozone moderate nonattainment areas.
EPA is conditionally approving the RACT and RACM analyses for the
8-hour ozone NAAQS based on New York's letter committing to submit
adopted RACT/RACM rules for several source categories by August 31,
2010. EPA has determined that New York should be able to meet this
commitment because the State has already adopted rules for two of the
source categories and proposed RACT/RACM provisions for all of the
remaining source categories.
Under section 110(k)(4) of the Act, EPA may conditionally approve a
plan based on a commitment from the State to adopt specific enforceable
measures by a date certain, but not later than 1 year from the date of
approval. If EPA conditionally approves the commitment in a final
rulemaking action, the State must meet its commitment to adopt the
identified regulations. If the State fails to do so, this action will
become a disapproval upon the State's failure to meet its commitment.
EPA will notify the State by letter that this action has occurred. If
the conditional approval converts to a disapproval, the commitment will
no longer be a part of the approved New York SIP. Upon notification to
the State that the conditional approval has converted to a disapproval,
EPA will publish a notice in the Federal Register notifying the public
that the conditional approval automatically converted to a disapproval.
If EPA disapproves the RACT and RACM SIP submittals, such action will
start a sanctions and FIP clock (see section V). If the State meets its
commitment, within the applicable time frame, the conditionally
approved submission will remain a part of the SIP until EPA takes final
action approving or disapproving the RACT and RACM submittals. If EPA
approves the submittals, the RACT and RACM analyses will be fully
approved into the SIP in their entirety.
V. What are the consequences if a final conditional approval is
converted to a disapproval?
The Act provides for the imposition of sanctions and the
promulgation of a Federal Implementation Plan (FIP) if States fail to
correct any deficiencies identified by EPA in a final disapproval
action within certain timeframes.
A. What are the Act's provisions for sanctions?
If EPA disapproves a required SIP submittal or component of a SIP
submittal, section 179(a) provides for the imposition of sanctions
unless the deficiency is corrected within 18 months of the final
rulemaking of disapproval. The first sanction would apply 18 months
after EPA disapproves the SIP submittal if a State fails to make the
required submittal. Under EPA's sanctions regulations, 40 CFR 52.31,
the first sanction would be 2:1 offsets for sources subject to the new
source review requirements under section 173 of the Act. If the State
has still failed to submit a SIP for which EPA proposes full or
conditional approval 6 months after the first sanction is imposed, the
second sanction will apply. The second sanction is a limitation on the
receipt of Federal highway funds. EPA also has authority under section
110(m) to sanction a broader area.
B. What Federal implementation plan provisions apply if a state fails
to submit an approvable plan?
In addition to sanctions, if EPA finds that a State failed to
submit the required SIP revision or disapproves the required SIP
revision, or a portion thereof, EPA must promulgate a FIP no later than
2 years from the date of the finding if the deficiency has not been
corrected.
VI. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews
A. Executive Order 12866, Regulatory Planning and Review
This action is not a ``significant regulatory action'' under the
terms of Executive Order (EO) 12866 (58 FR
[[Page 43068]]
51735, October 4, 1993) and is therefore not subject to review under
the EO.
B. Paperwork Reduction Act
This action does not impose an information collection burden under
the provisions of the Paperwork Reduction Act, 44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.,
because this SIP conditional approval under section 110 and subchapter
I, part D of the Clean Air Act will not in-and-of itself create any new
information collection burdens but simply conditionally approves
certain State requirements for inclusion into the SIP. Burden is
defined at 5 CFR 1320.3(b).
C. Regulatory Flexibility Act
The Regulatory Flexibility Act (RFA) generally requires an agency
to conduct a regulatory flexibility analysis of any rule subject to
notice and comment rulemaking requirements unless the agency certifies
that the rule will not have a significant economic impact on a
substantial number of small entities. Small entities include small
businesses, small not-for-profit enterprises, and small governmental
jurisdictions. For purposes of assessing the impacts of today's rule on
small entities, small entity is defined as: (1) A small business as
defined by the Small Business Administration's (SBA) regulations at 13
CFR 121.201; (2) a small governmental jurisdiction that is a government
of a city, county, town, school district or special district with a
population of less than 50,000; and (3) a small organization that is
any not-for-profit enterprise which is independently owned and operated
and is not dominant in its field.
After considering the economic impacts of today's final rule on
small entities, I certify that this action will not have a significant
impact on a substantial number of small entities. This rule does not
impose any requirements or create impacts on small entities. This SIP
conditional approval under section 110 and subchapter I, part D of the
Clean Air Act will not in-and-of itself create any new requirements but
simply disapproves certain State requirements for inclusion into the
SIP. Accordingly, it affords no opportunity for EPA to fashion for
small entities less burdensome compliance or reporting requirements or
timetables or exemptions from all or part of the rule. The fact that
the Clean Air Act prescribes that various consequences (e.g., higher
offset requirements) may or will flow from this conditional approval
does not mean that EPA either can or must conduct a regulatory
flexibility analysis for this action. Therefore, this action will not
have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small
entities.
We continue to be interested in the potential impacts of this final
rule on small entities and welcome comments on issues related to such
impacts.
D. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act
This action contains no Federal mandates under the provisions of
Title II of the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995 (UMRA), 2 U.S.C.
1531-1538 for State, local, or Tribal governments or the private
sector. EPA has determined that the final conditional approval action
does not include a Federal mandate that may result in estimated costs
of $100 million or more to either State, local, or Tribal governments
in the aggregate, or to the private sector. This action conditionally
approves pre-existing requirements under State or local law, and
imposes no new requirements. Accordingly, no additional costs to State,
local, or Tribal governments, or to the private sector, result from
this action.
E. Executive Order 13132, Federalism
Executive Order 13132, entitled ``Federalism'' (64 FR 43255, August
10, 1999), requires EPA to develop an accountable process to ensure
``meaningful and timely input by State and local officials in the
development of regulatory policies that have federalism implications.''
``Policies that have federalism implications'' is defined in the
Executive Order to include regulations that have ``substantial direct
effects on the States, on the relationship between the national
government and the States, or on the distribution of power and
responsibilities among the various levels of government.''
This action does not have federalism implications. It will not have
substantial direct effects on the States, on the relationship between
the national government and the States, or on the distribution of power
and responsibilities among the various levels of government, as
specified in Executive Order 13132, because it merely conditionally
approves certain State requirements for inclusion into the SIP and does
not alter the relationship or the distribution of power and
responsibilities established in the Clean Air Act. Thus, Executive
Order 13132 does not apply to this action.
F. Executive Order 13175, Coordination With Indian Tribal Governments
This action does not have Tribal implications, as specified in
Executive Order 13175 (65 FR 67249, November 9, 2000), because the SIP
EPA is conditionally approving would not apply in Indian country
located in the State, and EPA notes that it will not impose substantial
direct costs on Tribal governments or preempt Tribal law. Thus,
Executive Order 13175 does not apply to this action.
G. Executive Order 13045, Protection of Children From Environmental
Health Risks and Safety Risks
EPA interprets EO 13045 (62 FR 19885, April 23, 1997) as applying
only to those regulatory actions that concern health or safety risks,
such that the analysis required under section 5-501 of the EO has the
potential to influence the regulation. This action is not subject to EO
13045 because it is not an economically significant regulatory action
based on health or safety risks subject to Executive Order 13045 (62 FR
19885, April 23, 1997). This SIP conditional approval under section 110
and subchapter I, part D of the Clean Air Act will not in-and-of itself
create any new regulations but simply conditionally approves certain
State requirements for inclusion into the SIP.
H. Executive Order 13211, Actions That Significantly Affect Energy
Supply, Distribution, or Use
This final rule is not subject to Executive Order 13211 (66 FR
28355, May 22, 2001) because it is not a significant regulatory action
under Executive Order 12866.
I. National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act
Section 12(d) of the National Technology Transfer and Advancement
Act of 1995 (``NTTAA''), Public Law No. 104-113, 12(d) (15 U.S.C. 272
note) directs EPA to use voluntary consensus standards in its
regulatory activities unless to do so would be inconsistent with
applicable law or otherwise impractical. Voluntary consensus standards
are technical standards (e.g., materials specifications, test methods,
sampling procedures, and business practices) that are developed or
adopted by voluntary consensus standards bodies. NTTAA directs EPA to
provide Congress, through OMB, explanations when the Agency decides not
to use available and applicable voluntary consensus standards.
The EPA believes this action is not subject to requirements of
Section 12(d) of NTTAA because application of those requirements would
be inconsistent with the Clean Air Act.
[[Page 43069]]
J. Executive Order 12898: Federal Actions To Address Environmental
Justice in Minority Populations and Low-Income Populations
Executive Order (EO) 12898 (59 FR 7629 (Feb. 16, 1994)) establishes
Federal executive policy on environmental justice. Its main provision
directs Federal agencies, to the greatest extent practicable and
permitted by law, to make environmental justice part of their mission
by identifying and addressing, as appropriate, disproportionately high
and adverse human health or environmental effects of their programs,
policies, and activities on minority populations and low-income
populations in the United States.
EPA lacks the discretionary authority to address environmental
justice in this final action. In reviewing SIP submissions, EPA's role
is to approve or disapprove State choices, based on the criteria of the
Clean Air Act. Accordingly, this action merely conditionally approves
certain State requirements for inclusion into the SIP under section 110
and subchapter I, part D of the Clean Air Act and will not in-and-of
itself create any new requirements. Accordingly, it does not provide
EPA with the discretionary authority to address, as appropriate,
disproportionate human health or environmental effects, using
practicable and legally permissible methods, under Executive Order
12898.
K. Congressional Review Act
The Congressional Review Act, 5 U.S.C. 801 et seq., as added by the
Small Business Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act of 1996, generally
provides that before a rule may take effect, the agency promulgating
the rule must submit a rule report, which includes a copy of the rule,
to each House of the Congress and to the Comptroller General of the
United States. EPA will submit a report containing this action 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).
L. Petitions for Judicial Review
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 September 21, 2010. Filing a
petition for reconsideration by the Administrator of this final rule
does not affect the finality of this action 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, Ozone, Reporting and
recordkeeping requirements, Volatile organic compounds.
Dated: July 13, 2010.
Judith A. Enck,
Regional Administrator, Region 2.
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 HH--New York
0
2. Section 52.1683 is amended by adding new paragraph (k) to read as
follows:
52.1683 Control strategy: Ozone.
* * * * *
(k)(1) The September 1, 2006 New York reasonably available control
technology (RACT) analysis plan submittal, supplemented on February 8,
2008 and September 16, 2008, which applies to the entire State and to
the New York portion of the New York-Northern New Jersey-Long Island,
NY-NJ-CT and the Poughkeepsie 8-hour ozone moderate nonattainment areas
is conditionally approved.
(2) The moderate area reasonably available control measure (RACM)
analysis for the New York portion of the New York-Northern New Jersey-
Long Island, NY-NJ-CT 8-hour ozone moderate nonattainment area as
presented in the February 8, 2008 ``New York SIP for Ozone--Attainment
Demonstration for New York Metro Area'' submittal is conditionally
approved.
[FR Doc. 2010-18074 Filed 7-22-10; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P