Approval and Promulgation of Implementation Plans; Revisions to the Georgia State Implementation Plan, 35866-35870 [2012-14595]
Download as PDF
<![CDATA[
35866
*
*
Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 116 / Friday, June 15, 2012 / Rules and Regulations
*
*
*
[FR Doc. 2012–14419 Filed 6–14–12; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560–50–P
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION
AGENCY
40 CFR Part 52
[EPA–R04–OAR–2010–0969; FRL–9686–9]
Approval and Promulgation of
Implementation Plans; Revisions to the
Georgia State Implementation Plan
Environmental Protection
Agency.
ACTION: Direct final rule.
AGENCY:
EPA is taking direct final
action to approve a State
Implementation Plan (SIP) revision
submitted by the State of Georgia,
through the Department of Natural
Resources (GA DNR), on November 16,
2010. This revision consists of
transportation conformity criteria and
procedures related to interagency
consultation and enforceability of
certain transportation-related control
measures and mitigation measures. The
intended effect is to update the
transportation conformity criteria and
procedures in the Georgia SIP. This
action is being taken pursuant to section
110 of the Clean Air Act.
DATES: This direct final rule is effective
August 14, 2012 without further notice,
unless EPA receives adverse comment
by July 16, 2012. 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: Submit your comments,
identified by Docket ID No. EPA–R04–
OAR–2010–0969, by one of the
following methods:
1. www.regulations.gov: Follow the
on-line instructions for submitting
comments.
2. Email:
somerville.amanetta@epa.gov.
3. Fax: (404) 562–9019.
4. Mail: ‘‘EPA–R04–OAR–2010–
0969,’’ Air Quality Modeling and
Transportation Section, Air Planning
Branch, Air, Pesticides and Toxics
Management Division, U.S.
Environmental Protection Agency,
Region 4, 61 Forsyth Street SW.,
Atlanta, Georgia 30303–8960.
5. Hand Delivery or Courier: Amanetta
Somerville, Air Quality Modeling and
Transportation Section, Air Planning
Branch, Air, Pesticides and Toxics
Management Division, U.S.
Environmental Protection Agency,
Region 4, 61 Forsyth Street SW.,
srobinson on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with RULES
SUMMARY:
VerDate Mar<15>2010
19:35 Jun 14, 2012
Jkt 226001
Atlanta, Georgia 30303–8960. Such
deliveries are only accepted during the
Regional Office’s normal hours of
operation. The Regional Office’s official
hours of business are Monday through
Friday, 8:30 to 4:30, excluding federal
holidays.
Instructions: Direct your comments to
Docket ID No. ‘‘EPA–R04–OAR–2010–
0969.’’ EPA’s policy is that all
comments received will be included in
the public docket without change and
may be made available online at
www.regulations.gov, including any
personal information provided, unless
the comment includes information
claimed to be Confidential Business
Information (CBI) or other information
whose disclosure is restricted by statute.
Do not submit through
www.regulations.gov or email,
information that you consider to be CBI
or otherwise protected. The
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 email comment directly
to EPA without going through
www.regulations.gov, your email
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. For additional information
about EPA’s public docket visit the EPA
Docket Center homepage at https://
www.epa.gov/epahome/dockets.htm.
Docket: All documents in the
electronic docket are listed in the
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 www.regulations.gov or
in hard copy at the Air Quality
Modeling and Transportation Section,
Air Planning Branch, Air, Pesticides and
Toxics Management Division, U.S.
Environmental Protection Agency,
PO 00000
Frm 00058
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
Region 4, 61 Forsyth Street SW.,
Atlanta, Georgia 30303–8960. EPA
requests that if at all possible, you
contact the person listed in the FOR
FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section to
schedule your inspection. The Regional
Office’s official hours of business are
Monday through Friday, 8:30 to 4:30,
excluding federal holidays.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Amanetta Somerville, Air Quality
Modeling and Transportation Section,
Air Planning Branch, Air, Pesticides and
Toxics Management Division, U.S.
Environmental Protection Agency,
Region 4, 61 Forsyth Street SW.,
Atlanta, Georgia 30303–8960. Ms.
Somerville’s telephone number is 404–
562–9025. She can also be reached via
electronic mail at
somerville.amanetta@epa.gov.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Table of Contents
I. Transportation Conformity
II. Background for This Action
A. Federal Requirements
B. Atlanta Conformity SIP
C. Chattanooga Conformity SIP
D. Macon Conformity SIP
E. Rome Conformity SIP
III. State Submittal and EPA Evaluation
IV. Public Comment and Final Action
V. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews
I. Transportation Conformity
Transportation conformity (hereafter
referred to as ‘‘conformity’’) is required
under section 176(c) of the Clean Air
Act (CAA or Act) to ensure that
federally supported highway, transit
projects, and other activities are
consistent with (‘‘conform to’’) the
purpose of the SIP. Conformity
currently applies to areas that are
designated nonattainment, and to areas
that have been redesignated to
attainment after 1990 (maintenance
areas) with plans developed under
section 175A of the Act, for the
following transportation related criteria
pollutants: Ozone, particulate matter
(e.g., PM2.5 and PM10), carbon
monoxide, and nitrogen dioxide.
Conformity to the purpose of the SIP
means that transportation activities will
not cause new air quality violations,
worsen existing violations, or delay
timely attainment of the relevant criteria
pollutants, also known as national
ambient air quality standards (NAAQS).
The transportation conformity
regulation is found in 40 CFR part 93
and provisions related to conformity
SIPs are found in 40 CFR 51.390.
E:\FR\FM\15JNR1.SGM
15JNR1
Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 116 / Friday, June 15, 2012 / Rules and Regulations
II. Background for This Action
srobinson on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with RULES
A. Federal Requirements
EPA promulgated the Federal
transportation conformity criteria and
procedures (‘‘Conformity Rule’’) on
November 24, 1993 (58 FR 62188).
Among other things, the rule required
states to address all provisions of the
conformity rule in their SIPs frequently
referred to as ‘‘conformity SIPs.’’ Under
40 CFR 51.390, most sections of the
conformity rule were required to be
copied verbatim. States were also
required to tailor all or portions of the
following three sections of the
conformity rule to meet their state’s
individual circumstances: 40 CFR
93.105, which addresses consultation
procedures; 40 CFR 93.122(a)(4)(ii),
which addresses written commitments
to control measures that are not
included in a metropolitan planning
organization’s (MPO’s) transportation
plan and transportation improvement
program that must be obtained prior to
a conformity determination, and the
requirement that such commitments,
when they exist, must be fulfilled; and
40 CFR 93.125(c), which addresses
written commitments to mitigation
measures that must be obtained prior to
a project-level conformity
determination, and the requirement that
project sponsors must comply with such
commitments, when they exist.
On August 10, 2005, the ‘‘Safe,
Accountable, Flexible, Efficient
Transportation Equity Act: A Legacy for
Users’’ (SAFETEA–LU) was signed into
law. SAFETEA–LU revised section
176(c) of the CAA transportation
conformity provisions. One of the
changes streamlines the requirements
for conformity SIPs. Under SAFETEA–
LU, states are required to address and
tailor only three sections of the rule in
their conformity SIPs: 40 CFR 93.105, 40
CFR 93.122(a)(4)(ii), and, 40 CFR
93.125(c), described above. In general,
states are no longer required to submit
conformity SIP revisions that address
the other sections of the conformity
rule. These changes took effect on
August 10, 2005, when SAFETEA–LU
was signed into law.
B. Atlanta Conformity SIP
Effective June 15, 2004, EPA
designated 20 whole counties in the
Atlanta area, as nonattainment for the
1997 8-hour ozone standard. The
counties include Barrow, Bartow,
Carroll, Cherokee, Clayton, Cobb,
Coweta, DeKalb, Douglas, Fayette,
Forsyth, Fulton, Gwinnett, Hall, Henry,
Newton, Paulding, Rockdale, Spalding,
and Walton counties. Effective April 5,
2005, EPA designated 20 whole
VerDate Mar<15>2010
15:51 Jun 14, 2012
Jkt 226001
counties, and a portion of two counties
in the Atlanta area, as nonattainment for
the 1997 Annual PM2.5 standard. The
whole counties include Barrow, Bartow,
Carroll, Cherokee, Clayton, Cobb,
Coweta, DeKalb, Douglas, Fayette,
Forysth, Fulton, Gwinnett, Hall, Henry,
Newton, Paulding, Rockdale, Spalding,
and Walton counties; the partial
counties include Heard and Putnam
counties. The current designation status
of both the Atlanta 1997 8-hour ozone
and 1997 Annual PM2.5 areas is
nonattainment.
There are two MPOs that are
responsible for transportation planning
for areas within the Atlanta
nonattainment areas. The Atlanta
Regional Commission (ARC) is the MPO
for most of the Atlanta 1997 8-hour
ozone and 1997 Annual PM2.5
nonattainment areas. ARC’s planning
boundary includes the whole counties
of Cherokee, Clayton, Cobb, Coweta,
DeKalb, Douglas, Fayette, Forsyth,
Fulton, Gwinnett, Henry, Paulding and
Rockdale counties; and portions of
Barrow, Bartow, Newton, Spalding and
Walton counties in the Atlanta, Georgia
area. Gainesville-Hall MPO (GHMPO) is
the other MPO for the Atlanta 1997
8-hour ozone and 1997 Annual PM2.5
nonattainment areas. GHMPO’s
planning boundary includes Hall
County. Walton County and the portions
of Barrow, Bartow, Heard, Newton,
Putnam, Spalding counties are
considered ‘‘donut’’ 1 areas for the
purposes of implementing
transportation conformity in this area.
Per the Transportation Conformity Rule,
the MPO’s conformity determination is
not complete without a regional analysis
that considers the projects in the MPO
area(s) as well as the donut areas that
are within the nonattainment/
maintenance area. For the purposes of
implementing 1997 8-hour ozone and
1997 Annual PM2.5 conformity, ARC
serves as the lead agency for the
preparation, consultation, and
distribution of the conformity
determinations.
Previously Georgia had established
transportation conformity SIP for the
Atlanta area. On September 27, 2002,
EPA approved the Atlanta area’s SIP
revision which incorporated by
reference 40 CFR 93 Subpart A, 67 FR
60869, and customized 40 CFR 93.105,
93.122(a)(4)(ii), and 93.125(c) for all of
the MPOs in the entire state.
Specifically, the Atlanta area
established a Memorandum of
1 Donut areas are geographic areas outside a
metropolitan planning area boundary, but inside
the boundary of a nonattainment or maintenance
area that contains any part of a metropolitan area.
PO 00000
Frm 00059
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
35867
Agreement (MOA) for implementing the
conformity Criteria and Consultation
Procedure. The new conformity SIP (the
subject of this rule making) has removed
any incorporation by reference and has
converted the MOA to a State Rule to be
consistent with the SAFETEA–LU
revisions to the CAA (Pub. L. 109–59)
and subsequent regulations published
on January 24, 2008 (73 FR 4420).
C. Chattanooga Conformity SIP
Effective April 5, 2005, EPA
designated Hamilton County in
Tennessee, Walker and Catoosa
Counties in Georgia, and a portion of
Jackson County, Alabama in the tri-state
Chattanooga area, as nonattainment for
the 1997 Annual PM2.5 standard. The
current designation status of the
Chattanooga 1997 Annual PM2.5 area is
nonattainment.
The Chattanooga-Hamilton County,
North Georgia Transportation Planning
Organization (CHNGTPO) is the MPO
for most of the tri-state Chattanooga,
TN-GA, 1997 Annual PM2.5 area.
CHCNGTPO’s planning boundary
includes Portions of Walker and Catoosa
Counties in Georgia and Hamilton
County in Tennessee; Portions of
Walker and Catoosa Counties in
Georgia; and a portion of Jackson
County, Alabama. The portion of
Jackson County, Alabama that is within
the Chattanooga 1997 Annual PM2.5 area
is not within the CHCNGTPO planning
boundary and thus is considered a
‘‘donut’’ area for the purposes of
implementing transportation conformity
in this area. Per the Transportation
Conformity Rule, the MPO’s conformity
determination is not complete without a
regional analysis that considers the
projects in the MPO area as well as the
donut areas that are within the
nonattainment/maintenance area. For
the purposes of implementing 1997
Annual PM2.5 conformity, CHCNGTPO
serves as the lead agency for the
preparation, consultation, and
distribution of the conformity
determinations.
Walker and Catoosa Counties in
Georgia which are a part of the
Chattanooga area do not have a previous
conformity SIP. The states of Tennessee
and Alabama will establish conformity
procedures for the counties that make
up the Tennessee and Alabama portion
of the Chattanooga nonattainment area
in their individual conformity SIPs. The
SIP revision at issue now includes the
conformity procedures for Walker and
Catoosa Counties as part of the 1997
Annual PM2.5 Chattanooga
nonattainment area.
E:\FR\FM\15JNR1.SGM
15JNR1
35868
Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 116 / Friday, June 15, 2012 / Rules and Regulations
D. Macon Conformity SIP
Effective June 15, 2004, EPA
designated Bibb County and a portion of
Monroe County in the Macon, Georgia
area as nonattainment for the 1997 8hour ozone standard. Effective April 5,
2005, EPA designated Bibb County and
a portion of Monroe County in the
Macon, Georgia area as nonattainment
for the 1997 Annual PM2.5 standard. The
current designation status of the Macon
1997 8-hour ozone and 1997 Annual
PM2.5 areas are nonattainment for PM2.5
and attainment (with a maintenance
plan) for 1997 8-hour ozone (72 FR
53432, September 19, 2007).
The Macon Area Transportation
Study (MATS) is the MPO for most of
the Macon 1997 8-hour ozone and 1997
Annual PM2.5 nonattainment area. The
MATS planning boundary includes all
of Bibb County. The portion of Monroe
County that is included in the Macon
1997 8-hour ozone and 1997 Annual
PM2.5 nonattainment areas is not within
the MATS planning boundary, and thus
is considered a ‘‘donut’’ area for the
purposes of implementing
transportation conformity in this area.
The donut area of Monroe County
entered into an agreement with the
Georgia Department of Transportation
(DOT) that will allow the Georgia DOT
to represent them. Per the transportation
conformity regulations, the MPO’s
conformity determination is not
complete without a regional analysis
that considers the transportation
projects in the MPO area as well as the
donut areas that are within the
nonattainment area. For the purposes of
implementing 1997 8-hour ozone and
1997 Annual PM2.5 conformity, MATS
serves as the lead agency for the
preparation, consultation and
distribution of the conformity
determination.
Bibb County and the portion of
Monroe County, Georgia which are a
part of the Macon area do not have a
previous conformity SIP. The SIP
revision at issue now includes the
conformity procedures for both the
entire county of Bibb and the portion of
Monroe County, Georgia, for the Macon
area.
srobinson on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with RULES
E. Rome Conformity SIP
Effective April 5, 2005, EPA
designated a portion of Floyd County in
the Rome-Floyd area as nonattainment
for the 1997 Annual PM2.5 standard. The
current designation status of the RomeFloyd County 1997 Annual PM2.5 area is
nonattainment. The Rome Floyd County
MPO (RFCMPO) is the MPO for the
entire Rome-Floyd 1997 Annual PM2.5
area. For the purposes of implementing
VerDate Mar<15>2010
15:51 Jun 14, 2012
Jkt 226001
1997 Annual PM2.5 conformity,
RFCMPO serves as the lead agency for
the preparation, consultation, and
distribution of the conformity
determinations.
Floyd County, Georgia which is a part
of the Rome area does not have a
previous conformity SIP. The SIP
revision at issue now includes the
conformity procedures for the entire
county of Floyd county, Georgia, for the
Rome area.
III. State Submittal and EPA Evaluation
On November 16, 2010, the State of
Georgia, through GA DNR, submitted
the State’s transportation conformity
and consultation interagency rule to
EPA as a revision to the SIP. On
February 21, 2011, and again on March
10, 2011, GA DNR submitted
supplemental information regarding the
Georgia transportation conformity rule.
These three SIP revisions established
procedures for interagency consultation
and replaced the Memorandum of
Agreement submitted by GA DNR and
approved by EPA on September 27,
2002 (67 FR 60869).
The State of Georgia developed its
consultation rule based on the elements
contained in 40 CFR 93.105,
93.122(a)(4)(ii), and 93.125(c). As a first
step, the State worked with the existing
transportation planning organization’s
interagency committee that included
representatives from the State air quality
agency, State DOT, Federal Highway
Administration—Georgia Division,
Federal Transit Administration, the
MPOs of the maintenance and
nonattainment areas of Georgia, and
EPA. The interagency committee met
regularly and drafted the consultation
rules considering elements in 40 CFR
Part 93.105, 93.122(a)(4)(ii), and
93.125(c), and integrated the local
procedures and processes into the rule.
The consultation process developed in
this rule is for the State of Georgia. On
July 6, 2010, GA DNR held a public
hearing for the transportation
conformity rulemaking.
EPA has evaluated this SIP and has
determined that the State has met the
requirements of Federal transportation
conformity rule as described in 40 CFR
Part 51, Subpart T and 40 CFR Part 93,
Subpart A. GA DNR has satisfied the
public participation and comprehensive
interagency consultation requirement
during development and adoption of the
State Rule at the local level. Therefore,
EPA is approving the rule as a revision
to the Georgia SIP. EPA’s rule requires
the states to develop their own
processes and procedures for
interagency consultation among the
federal, state, and local agencies and
PO 00000
Frm 00060
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
resolution of conflicts meeting the
criteria in 40 CFR 93.105. The SIP
revision must include processes and
procedures to be followed by the MPO,
state DOT, and U.S. DOT in consulting
with the state and local air quality
agencies and EPA before making
conformity determinations. The
transportation conformity SIP revision
must also include processes and
procedures for the state and local air
quality agencies and EPA to coordinate
the development of applicable SIPs with
MPOs, state DOTs, and U.S. DOT.
EPA has reviewed the submittal to
assure consistency with the CAA as
amended by SAFETEA–LU and EPA
regulations (40 CFR part 93 and 40 CFR
51.390) governing state procedures for
transportation conformity and
interagency consultation and has
concluded that the submittal is
approvable. Details of EPA’s review are
set forth in a technical support
document (TSD), which has been
included in the docket for this action.
Specifically, in the TSD, EPA identifies
how the submitted procedures satisfy
our requirements under 40 CFR 93.105
for interagency consultation with
respect to the development of
transportation plans and programs, SIPs,
and conformity determinations, the
resolution of conflicts, and the
provision of adequate public
consultation, and our requirements
under 40 CFR 93.122(a)(4)(ii) and
93.125(c) for enforceability of control
measures and mitigation measures.
IV. Public Comment and Final Action
For the reasons set forth above, EPA
is taking action under section 110 of the
Act to approve the rule implementing
the conformity criteria and consultation
procedures revision to the Georgia SIP
pursuant to the CAA, as a revision to the
Georgia SIP. As a result of this action,
Georgia’s previously SIP-approved
conformity procedures for Georgia (67
FR 60869, September 27, 2002), will be
replaced by the procedures submitted to
EPA on November 16, 2010, for
approval and adopted by State of
Georgia on August 25, 2010. This action
also establishes consultation procedures
for all counties in Georgia.
EPA is publishing this rule without
prior proposal because the Agency
views this as a noncontroversial
submittal and anticipates no adverse
comments. However, in the proposed
rules section of this Federal Register
publication, EPA is publishing a
separate document that will serve as the
proposal to approve the SIP revision
should adverse comments be filed. This
rule will be effective August 14, 2012
without further notice unless the
E:\FR\FM\15JNR1.SGM
15JNR1
35869
Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 116 / Friday, June 15, 2012 / Rules and Regulations
Agency receives adverse comments by
July 16, 2012.
If EPA receives such comments, then
EPA will publish a document
withdrawing the final rule and
informing the public that the rule will
not take effect. All public comments
received will then be addressed in a
subsequent final rule based on the
proposed rule. EPA will not institute a
second comment period. Parties
interested in commenting should do so
at this time. If no such comments are
received, the public is advised that this
rule will be effective on August 14, 2012
and no further action will be taken on
the proposed rule.
V. Statutory and Executive Order
Reviews
Under the CAA, the Administrator is
required to approve a SIP submission
that complies with the provisions of the
Act and applicable Federal regulations.
42 U.S.C. 7410(k); 40 CFR 52.02(a).
Thus, in reviewing SIP submissions,
EPA’s role is to approve state choices,
provided that they meet the criteria of
the CAA. Accordingly, this action
merely approves state law as meeting
federal requirements and does not
impose additional requirements beyond
those imposed by state law. For that
reason, this action:
• Is not a ‘‘significant regulatory
action’’ subject to review by the Office
of Management and Budget under
Executive Order 12866 (58 FR 51735,
October 4, 1993);
• Does not impose an information
collection burden under the provisions
of the Paperwork Reduction Act
(44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.);
• Is certified as not having a
significant economic impact on a
substantial number of small entities
under the Regulatory Flexibility Act
(5 U.S.C. 601 et seq.);
• 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);
• Does not have Federalism
implications as specified in Executive
Order 13132 (64 FR 43255, August 10,
1999);
• Is not an economically significant
regulatory action based on health or
safety risks subject to Executive Order
13045 (62 FR 19885, April 23, 1997);
• Is not a significant regulatory action
subject to Executive Order 13211 (66 FR
28355, May 22, 2001);
• Is not subject to requirements of
Section 12(d) of the National
Technology Transfer and Advancement
Act of 1995 (15 U.S.C. 272 note) because
application of those requirements would
be inconsistent with the CAA; and
• 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
(59 FR 7629, February 16, 1994).
In addition, this rule does not have
tribal implications as specified by
Executive Order 13175 (65 FR 67249,
November 9, 2000), because the SIP is
not approved to 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.
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).
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 August 14, 2012. 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. Parties with
objections to this direct final rule are
encouraged to file a comment in
response to the parallel notice of
proposed rulemaking for this action
published in the proposed rules section
of today’s Federal Register, rather than
file an immediate petition for judicial
review of this direct final rule, so that
EPA can withdraw this direct final rule
and address the comment in the
proposed rulemaking. 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, Carbon monoxide,
Incorporation by reference,
Intergovernmental relations,
Incorporation by reference, Nitrogen
dioxide, Ozone, Reporting and
recordkeeping requirements, Volatile
organic compounds.
Dated: June 1, 2012.
A. Stanley Meiburg,
Acting Regional Administrator, Region 4.
40 CFR part 52 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 L—Georgia
2. Section 52.570 is amended:
a. In paragraph (c) by adding a new
entry in numerical order for ‘‘391–3–1–
.15’’;
■ b. In paragraph (e) by removing and
reserving entry 12 to read as follows:
■
■
§ 52.570
*
Identification of plan.
*
*
(c) * * *
*
*
EPA-APPROVED GEORGIA REGULATIONS
State effective
date
srobinson on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with RULES
State citation
Title/subject
*
391–3–1–.15 .....
*
*
Georgia Transportation Conformity and Consultation Interagency Rule.
VerDate Mar<15>2010
17:55 Jun 14, 2012
Jkt 226001
PO 00000
*
10/6/10
Frm 00061
Fmt 4700
EPA approval date
Explanation
*
6/15/2012 [Insert citation of publication].
Sfmt 4700
E:\FR\FM\15JNR1.SGM
15JNR1
*
*
35870
Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 116 / Friday, June 15, 2012 / Rules and Regulations
*
*
*
*
(e) * * *
*
EPA-APPROVED GEORGIA NON-REGULATORY PROVISIONS
Name of nonregulatory SIP Provision
*
12. [Reserved].
Applicable geographic or nonattainment area
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
BILLING CODE 6560–50–P
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION
AGENCY
40 CFR Part 52
[EPA–R05–OAR–2007–1179; FRL–9685–7]
Approval of Air Quality Implementation
Plans; Wisconsin; Partial Disapproval
of ‘‘Infrastructure’’ State
Implementation Plan
Environmental Protection
Agency (EPA).
ACTION: Final rule.
AGENCY:
Pursuant to its authority
under the Clean Air Act (CAA), EPA is
taking final action to disapprove two
narrow portions of submissions made by
the Wisconsin Department of Natural
Resources (WDNR) to address the
section 110(a)(1) and (2) requirements of
the CAA, often referred to as the
‘‘infrastructure’’ State Implementation
Plan (SIP). Specifically, we are
finalizing the disapproval of portions of
WDNR’s submissions intended to meet
certain requirements of section
110(a)(2)(C) with respect to the 1997
8-hour ozone National Ambient Air
Quality Standards (NAAQS) and 1997
24-hour PM2.5 NAAQS. Among other
conditions, section 110(a)(2)(C) of the
CAA requires states to correctly address
oxides of nitrogen (NOX) as a precursor
to ozone in their respective prevention
of significant deterioration (PSD)
programs. EPA is finalizing disapproval
of a portion of Wisconsin’s submissions
intended to satisfy this requirement.
EPA is also finalizing disapproval of a
portion of Wisconsin’s submissions
because the SIP currently contains a
new source review (NSR) exemption for
fuel changes as major modifications
where the source was capable of
accommodating the change before
January 6, 1975. The proposed rule
associated with this final action was
published on April 20, 2012.
SUMMARY:
15:51 Jun 14, 2012
Jkt 226001
This final rule is effective on July
16, 2012.
ADDRESSES: EPA has established a
docket for this action under Docket ID
No. EPA–R05–OAR–2007–1179. All
documents in the docket are listed in
the www.regulations.gov index.
Although listed in the index, some
information is not publicly available,
e.g., Confidential Business Information
or other information whose disclosure is
restricted by statute. Certain other
material, such as copyrighted material,
will be publicly-available only in hard
copy. Publicly-available docket
materials are available either
electronically in www.regulations.gov or
in hard copy at the U.S. Environmental
Protection Agency, Region 5, Air and
Radiation Division, 77 West Jackson
Boulevard, Chicago, Illinois 60604. This
facility is open from 8:30 a.m. to 4:30
p.m., Monday through Friday, excluding
Federal holidays. We recommend that
you telephone Andy Chang at (312)
886–0258 before visiting the Region 5
office.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Andy Chang, Environmental Engineer,
Attainment Planning and Maintenance
Section, Air Programs Branch (AR–18J),
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency,
Region 5, 77 West Jackson Boulevard,
Chicago, Illinois 60604, (312) 886–0258,
chang.andy@epa.gov.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Throughout this document whenever
‘‘we,’’ ‘‘us,’’ or ‘‘our’’ is used, we mean
EPA. This supplementary information
section is arranged as follows:
DATES:
[FR Doc. 2012–14595 Filed 6–14–12; 8:45 am]
srobinson on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with RULES
EPA approval date
*
*
VerDate Mar<15>2010
State submittal date/effective date
I. What is the background for this action?
II. What is our response to comments
received on the proposed rulemaking?
III. What action is EPA taking?
IV. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews
I. What is the background for this
action?
Under sections 110(a)(1) and (2) of the
CAA, and implementing EPA guidance,
states were required to submit either
revisions to their existing EPA approved
SIPs necessary to provide for
implementation, maintenance, and
PO 00000
Frm 00062
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
enforcement of the 1997 ozone NAAQS
and the 1997 PM2.5 NAAQS, or
certifications that their existing SIPs for
ozone and particulate matter already
met those basic requirements. The
statute requires that states make these
submissions within 3 years after the
promulgation of new or revised
NAAQS. However, intervening litigation
over the 1997 ozone NAAQS and the
1997 PM2.5 NAAQS created uncertainty
about how states were to proceed.1
Accordingly, both EPA and the states
were delayed in addressing these basic
SIP requirements.
In a consent decree with Earth Justice,
EPA agreed to make completeness
findings with respect to these SIP
submissions. Pursuant to this consent
decree, EPA published completeness
findings for all states for the 1997 8hour ozone NAAQS on March 27, 2008,
and for all states for the 1997 PM2.5
NAAQS on October 22, 2008.
On October 2, 2007, EPA issued a
guidance document entitled ‘‘Guidance
on SIP Elements Required Under
Sections 110(a)(1) and (2) for the 1997
8-hour Ozone and PM2.5 National
Ambient Air Quality Standards,’’
making recommendations to states
concerning these SIP submissions (the
2007 Guidance). Within the 2007
Guidance, EPA gave general guidance
relevant to matters such as the timing
and content of the submissions.
Wisconsin made its infrastructure SIP
submission for the 1997 ozone and
PM2.5 NAAQS on December 12, 2007.
The State provided supplemental
submissions to EPA on January 24,
2011, and March 28, 2011.
On April 28, 2011, EPA published its
proposed action on the Region 5 states’
submissions (see 76 FR 23757). Notably,
we proposed to find that Wisconsin had
met the requirements of section
110(a)(2)(C) concerning state PSD
programs generally, and in particular
the requirement to include NOX as a
precursor to ozone (see 76 FR 23757 at
23760–23761), thereby satisfying the
1 See, e.g., Whitman v. American Trucking
Associations, Inc., 531 U.S. 457 (2001).
E:\FR\FM\15JNR1.SGM
15JNR1
]]>Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 77, Number 116 (Friday, June 15, 2012)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 35866-35870]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2012-14595]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
40 CFR Part 52
[EPA-R04-OAR-2010-0969; FRL-9686-9]
Approval and Promulgation of Implementation Plans; Revisions to
the Georgia State Implementation Plan
AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency.
ACTION: Direct final rule.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: EPA is taking direct final action to approve a State
Implementation Plan (SIP) revision submitted by the State of Georgia,
through the Department of Natural Resources (GA DNR), on November 16,
2010. This revision consists of transportation conformity criteria and
procedures related to interagency consultation and enforceability of
certain transportation-related control measures and mitigation
measures. The intended effect is to update the transportation
conformity criteria and procedures in the Georgia SIP. This action is
being taken pursuant to section 110 of the Clean Air Act.
DATES: This direct final rule is effective August 14, 2012 without
further notice, unless EPA receives adverse comment by July 16, 2012.
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: Submit your comments, identified by Docket ID No. EPA-R04-
OAR-2010-0969, by one of the following methods:
1. www.regulations.gov: Follow the on-line instructions for
submitting comments.
2. Email: somerville.amanetta@epa.gov.
3. Fax: (404) 562-9019.
4. Mail: ``EPA-R04-OAR-2010-0969,'' Air Quality Modeling and
Transportation Section, Air Planning Branch, Air, Pesticides and Toxics
Management Division, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Region 4, 61
Forsyth Street SW., Atlanta, Georgia 30303-8960.
5. Hand Delivery or Courier: Amanetta Somerville, Air Quality
Modeling and Transportation Section, Air Planning Branch, Air,
Pesticides and Toxics Management Division, U.S. Environmental
Protection Agency, Region 4, 61 Forsyth Street SW., Atlanta, Georgia
30303-8960. Such deliveries are only accepted during the Regional
Office's normal hours of operation. The Regional Office's official
hours of business are Monday through Friday, 8:30 to 4:30, excluding
federal holidays.
Instructions: Direct your comments to Docket ID No. ``EPA-R04-OAR-
2010-0969.'' EPA's policy is that all comments received will be
included in the public docket without change and may be made available
online at www.regulations.gov, including any personal information
provided, unless the comment includes information claimed to be
Confidential Business Information (CBI) or other information whose
disclosure is restricted by statute. Do not submit through
www.regulations.gov or email, information that you consider to be CBI
or otherwise protected. The 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 email comment directly to EPA without
going through www.regulations.gov, your email 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. For additional information about EPA's public
docket visit the EPA Docket Center homepage at https://www.epa.gov/epahome/dockets.htm.
Docket: All documents in the electronic docket are listed in the
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 www.regulations.gov or
in hard copy at the Air Quality Modeling and Transportation Section,
Air Planning Branch, Air, Pesticides and Toxics Management Division,
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Region 4, 61 Forsyth Street SW.,
Atlanta, Georgia 30303-8960. EPA requests that if at all possible, you
contact the person listed in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT
section to schedule your inspection. The Regional Office's official
hours of business are Monday through Friday, 8:30 to 4:30, excluding
federal holidays.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Amanetta Somerville, Air Quality
Modeling and Transportation Section, Air Planning Branch, Air,
Pesticides and Toxics Management Division, U.S. Environmental
Protection Agency, Region 4, 61 Forsyth Street SW., Atlanta, Georgia
30303-8960. Ms. Somerville's telephone number is 404-562-9025. She can
also be reached via electronic mail at somerville.amanetta@epa.gov.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Table of Contents
I. Transportation Conformity
II. Background for This Action
A. Federal Requirements
B. Atlanta Conformity SIP
C. Chattanooga Conformity SIP
D. Macon Conformity SIP
E. Rome Conformity SIP
III. State Submittal and EPA Evaluation
IV. Public Comment and Final Action
V. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews
I. Transportation Conformity
Transportation conformity (hereafter referred to as ``conformity'')
is required under section 176(c) of the Clean Air Act (CAA or Act) to
ensure that federally supported highway, transit projects, and other
activities are consistent with (``conform to'') the purpose of the SIP.
Conformity currently applies to areas that are designated
nonattainment, and to areas that have been redesignated to attainment
after 1990 (maintenance areas) with plans developed under section 175A
of the Act, for the following transportation related criteria
pollutants: Ozone, particulate matter (e.g., PM2.5 and
PM10), carbon monoxide, and nitrogen dioxide.
Conformity to the purpose of the SIP means that transportation
activities will not cause new air quality violations, worsen existing
violations, or delay timely attainment of the relevant criteria
pollutants, also known as national ambient air quality standards
(NAAQS). The transportation conformity regulation is found in 40 CFR
part 93 and provisions related to conformity SIPs are found in 40 CFR
51.390.
[[Page 35867]]
II. Background for This Action
A. Federal Requirements
EPA promulgated the Federal transportation conformity criteria and
procedures (``Conformity Rule'') on November 24, 1993 (58 FR 62188).
Among other things, the rule required states to address all provisions
of the conformity rule in their SIPs frequently referred to as
``conformity SIPs.'' Under 40 CFR 51.390, most sections of the
conformity rule were required to be copied verbatim. States were also
required to tailor all or portions of the following three sections of
the conformity rule to meet their state's individual circumstances: 40
CFR 93.105, which addresses consultation procedures; 40 CFR
93.122(a)(4)(ii), which addresses written commitments to control
measures that are not included in a metropolitan planning
organization's (MPO's) transportation plan and transportation
improvement program that must be obtained prior to a conformity
determination, and the requirement that such commitments, when they
exist, must be fulfilled; and 40 CFR 93.125(c), which addresses written
commitments to mitigation measures that must be obtained prior to a
project-level conformity determination, and the requirement that
project sponsors must comply with such commitments, when they exist.
On August 10, 2005, the ``Safe, Accountable, Flexible, Efficient
Transportation Equity Act: A Legacy for Users'' (SAFETEA-LU) was signed
into law. SAFETEA-LU revised section 176(c) of the CAA transportation
conformity provisions. One of the changes streamlines the requirements
for conformity SIPs. Under SAFETEA-LU, states are required to address
and tailor only three sections of the rule in their conformity SIPs: 40
CFR 93.105, 40 CFR 93.122(a)(4)(ii), and, 40 CFR 93.125(c), described
above. In general, states are no longer required to submit conformity
SIP revisions that address the other sections of the conformity rule.
These changes took effect on August 10, 2005, when SAFETEA-LU was
signed into law.
B. Atlanta Conformity SIP
Effective June 15, 2004, EPA designated 20 whole counties in the
Atlanta area, as nonattainment for the 1997 8-hour ozone standard. The
counties include Barrow, Bartow, Carroll, Cherokee, Clayton, Cobb,
Coweta, DeKalb, Douglas, Fayette, Forsyth, Fulton, Gwinnett, Hall,
Henry, Newton, Paulding, Rockdale, Spalding, and Walton counties.
Effective April 5, 2005, EPA designated 20 whole counties, and a
portion of two counties in the Atlanta area, as nonattainment for the
1997 Annual PM2.5 standard. The whole counties include
Barrow, Bartow, Carroll, Cherokee, Clayton, Cobb, Coweta, DeKalb,
Douglas, Fayette, Forysth, Fulton, Gwinnett, Hall, Henry, Newton,
Paulding, Rockdale, Spalding, and Walton counties; the partial counties
include Heard and Putnam counties. The current designation status of
both the Atlanta 1997 8-hour ozone and 1997 Annual PM2.5
areas is nonattainment.
There are two MPOs that are responsible for transportation planning
for areas within the Atlanta nonattainment areas. The Atlanta Regional
Commission (ARC) is the MPO for most of the Atlanta 1997 8-hour ozone
and 1997 Annual PM2.5 nonattainment areas. ARC's planning
boundary includes the whole counties of Cherokee, Clayton, Cobb,
Coweta, DeKalb, Douglas, Fayette, Forsyth, Fulton, Gwinnett, Henry,
Paulding and Rockdale counties; and portions of Barrow, Bartow, Newton,
Spalding and Walton counties in the Atlanta, Georgia area. Gainesville-
Hall MPO (GHMPO) is the other MPO for the Atlanta 1997 8-hour ozone and
1997 Annual PM2.5 nonattainment areas. GHMPO's planning
boundary includes Hall County. Walton County and the portions of
Barrow, Bartow, Heard, Newton, Putnam, Spalding counties are considered
``donut'' \1\ areas for the purposes of implementing transportation
conformity in this area. Per the Transportation Conformity Rule, the
MPO's conformity determination is not complete without a regional
analysis that considers the projects in the MPO area(s) as well as the
donut areas that are within the nonattainment/maintenance area. For the
purposes of implementing 1997 8-hour ozone and 1997 Annual
PM2.5 conformity, ARC serves as the lead agency for the
preparation, consultation, and distribution of the conformity
determinations.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ Donut areas are geographic areas outside a metropolitan
planning area boundary, but inside the boundary of a nonattainment
or maintenance area that contains any part of a metropolitan area.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Previously Georgia had established transportation conformity SIP
for the Atlanta area. On September 27, 2002, EPA approved the Atlanta
area's SIP revision which incorporated by reference 40 CFR 93 Subpart
A, 67 FR 60869, and customized 40 CFR 93.105, 93.122(a)(4)(ii), and
93.125(c) for all of the MPOs in the entire state. Specifically, the
Atlanta area established a Memorandum of Agreement (MOA) for
implementing the conformity Criteria and Consultation Procedure. The
new conformity SIP (the subject of this rule making) has removed any
incorporation by reference and has converted the MOA to a State Rule to
be consistent with the SAFETEA-LU revisions to the CAA (Pub. L. 109-59)
and subsequent regulations published on January 24, 2008 (73 FR 4420).
C. Chattanooga Conformity SIP
Effective April 5, 2005, EPA designated Hamilton County in
Tennessee, Walker and Catoosa Counties in Georgia, and a portion of
Jackson County, Alabama in the tri-state Chattanooga area, as
nonattainment for the 1997 Annual PM2.5 standard. The
current designation status of the Chattanooga 1997 Annual
PM2.5 area is nonattainment.
The Chattanooga-Hamilton County, North Georgia Transportation
Planning Organization (CHNGTPO) is the MPO for most of the tri-state
Chattanooga, TN-GA, 1997 Annual PM2.5 area. CHCNGTPO's
planning boundary includes Portions of Walker and Catoosa Counties in
Georgia and Hamilton County in Tennessee; Portions of Walker and
Catoosa Counties in Georgia; and a portion of Jackson County, Alabama.
The portion of Jackson County, Alabama that is within the Chattanooga
1997 Annual PM2.5 area is not within the CHCNGTPO planning
boundary and thus is considered a ``donut'' area for the purposes of
implementing transportation conformity in this area. Per the
Transportation Conformity Rule, the MPO's conformity determination is
not complete without a regional analysis that considers the projects in
the MPO area as well as the donut areas that are within the
nonattainment/maintenance area. For the purposes of implementing 1997
Annual PM2.5 conformity, CHCNGTPO serves as the lead agency
for the preparation, consultation, and distribution of the conformity
determinations.
Walker and Catoosa Counties in Georgia which are a part of the
Chattanooga area do not have a previous conformity SIP. The states of
Tennessee and Alabama will establish conformity procedures for the
counties that make up the Tennessee and Alabama portion of the
Chattanooga nonattainment area in their individual conformity SIPs. The
SIP revision at issue now includes the conformity procedures for Walker
and Catoosa Counties as part of the 1997 Annual PM2.5
Chattanooga nonattainment area.
[[Page 35868]]
D. Macon Conformity SIP
Effective June 15, 2004, EPA designated Bibb County and a portion
of Monroe County in the Macon, Georgia area as nonattainment for the
1997 8-hour ozone standard. Effective April 5, 2005, EPA designated
Bibb County and a portion of Monroe County in the Macon, Georgia area
as nonattainment for the 1997 Annual PM2.5 standard. The
current designation status of the Macon 1997 8-hour ozone and 1997
Annual PM2.5 areas are nonattainment for PM2.5
and attainment (with a maintenance plan) for 1997 8-hour ozone (72 FR
53432, September 19, 2007).
The Macon Area Transportation Study (MATS) is the MPO for most of
the Macon 1997 8-hour ozone and 1997 Annual PM2.5
nonattainment area. The MATS planning boundary includes all of Bibb
County. The portion of Monroe County that is included in the Macon 1997
8-hour ozone and 1997 Annual PM2.5 nonattainment areas is
not within the MATS planning boundary, and thus is considered a
``donut'' area for the purposes of implementing transportation
conformity in this area. The donut area of Monroe County entered into
an agreement with the Georgia Department of Transportation (DOT) that
will allow the Georgia DOT to represent them. Per the transportation
conformity regulations, the MPO's conformity determination is not
complete without a regional analysis that considers the transportation
projects in the MPO area as well as the donut areas that are within the
nonattainment area. For the purposes of implementing 1997 8-hour ozone
and 1997 Annual PM2.5 conformity, MATS serves as the lead
agency for the preparation, consultation and distribution of the
conformity determination.
Bibb County and the portion of Monroe County, Georgia which are a
part of the Macon area do not have a previous conformity SIP. The SIP
revision at issue now includes the conformity procedures for both the
entire county of Bibb and the portion of Monroe County, Georgia, for
the Macon area.
E. Rome Conformity SIP
Effective April 5, 2005, EPA designated a portion of Floyd County
in the Rome-Floyd area as nonattainment for the 1997 Annual
PM2.5 standard. The current designation status of the Rome-
Floyd County 1997 Annual PM2.5 area is nonattainment. The
Rome Floyd County MPO (RFCMPO) is the MPO for the entire Rome-Floyd
1997 Annual PM2.5 area. For the purposes of implementing
1997 Annual PM2.5 conformity, RFCMPO serves as the lead
agency for the preparation, consultation, and distribution of the
conformity determinations.
Floyd County, Georgia which is a part of the Rome area does not
have a previous conformity SIP. The SIP revision at issue now includes
the conformity procedures for the entire county of Floyd county,
Georgia, for the Rome area.
III. State Submittal and EPA Evaluation
On November 16, 2010, the State of Georgia, through GA DNR,
submitted the State's transportation conformity and consultation
interagency rule to EPA as a revision to the SIP. On February 21, 2011,
and again on March 10, 2011, GA DNR submitted supplemental information
regarding the Georgia transportation conformity rule. These three SIP
revisions established procedures for interagency consultation and
replaced the Memorandum of Agreement submitted by GA DNR and approved
by EPA on September 27, 2002 (67 FR 60869).
The State of Georgia developed its consultation rule based on the
elements contained in 40 CFR 93.105, 93.122(a)(4)(ii), and 93.125(c).
As a first step, the State worked with the existing transportation
planning organization's interagency committee that included
representatives from the State air quality agency, State DOT, Federal
Highway Administration--Georgia Division, Federal Transit
Administration, the MPOs of the maintenance and nonattainment areas of
Georgia, and EPA. The interagency committee met regularly and drafted
the consultation rules considering elements in 40 CFR Part 93.105,
93.122(a)(4)(ii), and 93.125(c), and integrated the local procedures
and processes into the rule. The consultation process developed in this
rule is for the State of Georgia. On July 6, 2010, GA DNR held a public
hearing for the transportation conformity rulemaking.
EPA has evaluated this SIP and has determined that the State has
met the requirements of Federal transportation conformity rule as
described in 40 CFR Part 51, Subpart T and 40 CFR Part 93, Subpart A.
GA DNR has satisfied the public participation and comprehensive
interagency consultation requirement during development and adoption of
the State Rule at the local level. Therefore, EPA is approving the rule
as a revision to the Georgia SIP. EPA's rule requires the states to
develop their own processes and procedures for interagency consultation
among the federal, state, and local agencies and resolution of
conflicts meeting the criteria in 40 CFR 93.105. The SIP revision must
include processes and procedures to be followed by the MPO, state DOT,
and U.S. DOT in consulting with the state and local air quality
agencies and EPA before making conformity determinations. The
transportation conformity SIP revision must also include processes and
procedures for the state and local air quality agencies and EPA to
coordinate the development of applicable SIPs with MPOs, state DOTs,
and U.S. DOT.
EPA has reviewed the submittal to assure consistency with the CAA
as amended by SAFETEA-LU and EPA regulations (40 CFR part 93 and 40 CFR
51.390) governing state procedures for transportation conformity and
interagency consultation and has concluded that the submittal is
approvable. Details of EPA's review are set forth in a technical
support document (TSD), which has been included in the docket for this
action. Specifically, in the TSD, EPA identifies how the submitted
procedures satisfy our requirements under 40 CFR 93.105 for interagency
consultation with respect to the development of transportation plans
and programs, SIPs, and conformity determinations, the resolution of
conflicts, and the provision of adequate public consultation, and our
requirements under 40 CFR 93.122(a)(4)(ii) and 93.125(c) for
enforceability of control measures and mitigation measures.
IV. Public Comment and Final Action
For the reasons set forth above, EPA is taking action under section
110 of the Act to approve the rule implementing the conformity criteria
and consultation procedures revision to the Georgia SIP pursuant to the
CAA, as a revision to the Georgia SIP. As a result of this action,
Georgia's previously SIP-approved conformity procedures for Georgia (67
FR 60869, September 27, 2002), will be replaced by the procedures
submitted to EPA on November 16, 2010, for approval and adopted by
State of Georgia on August 25, 2010. This action also establishes
consultation procedures for all counties in Georgia.
EPA is publishing this rule without prior proposal because the
Agency views this as a noncontroversial submittal and anticipates no
adverse comments. However, in the proposed rules section of this
Federal Register publication, EPA is publishing a separate document
that will serve as the proposal to approve the SIP revision should
adverse comments be filed. This rule will be effective August 14, 2012
without further notice unless the
[[Page 35869]]
Agency receives adverse comments by July 16, 2012.
If EPA receives such comments, then EPA will publish a document
withdrawing the final rule and informing the public that the rule will
not take effect. All public comments received will then be addressed in
a subsequent final rule based on the proposed rule. EPA will not
institute a second comment period. Parties interested in commenting
should do so at this time. If no such comments are received, the public
is advised that this rule will be effective on August 14, 2012 and no
further action will be taken on the proposed rule.
V. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews
Under the CAA, the Administrator is required to approve a SIP
submission that complies with the provisions of the Act and applicable
Federal regulations. 42 U.S.C. 7410(k); 40 CFR 52.02(a). Thus, in
reviewing SIP submissions, EPA's role is to approve state choices,
provided that they meet the criteria of the CAA. Accordingly, this
action merely approves state law as meeting federal requirements and
does not impose additional requirements beyond those imposed by state
law. For that reason, this action:
Is not a ``significant regulatory action'' subject to
review by the Office of Management and Budget under Executive Order
12866 (58 FR 51735, October 4, 1993);
Does not impose an information collection burden under the
provisions of the Paperwork Reduction Act (44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.);
Is certified as not having a significant economic impact
on a substantial number of small entities under the Regulatory
Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 601 et seq.);
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);
Does not have Federalism implications as specified in
Executive Order 13132 (64 FR 43255, August 10, 1999);
Is not an economically significant regulatory action based
on health or safety risks subject to Executive Order 13045 (62 FR
19885, April 23, 1997);
Is not a significant regulatory action subject to
Executive Order 13211 (66 FR 28355, May 22, 2001);
Is not subject to requirements of Section 12(d) of the
National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act of 1995 (15 U.S.C. 272
note) because application of those requirements would be inconsistent
with the CAA; and
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 (59 FR 7629, February 16, 1994).
In addition, this rule does not have tribal implications as
specified by Executive Order 13175 (65 FR 67249, November 9, 2000),
because the SIP is not approved to 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.
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).
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 August 14, 2012. 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. Parties with objections to this direct final rule are
encouraged to file a comment in response to the parallel notice of
proposed rulemaking for this action published in the proposed rules
section of today's Federal Register, rather than file an immediate
petition for judicial review of this direct final rule, so that EPA can
withdraw this direct final rule and address the comment in the proposed
rulemaking. 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, Carbon monoxide,
Incorporation by reference, Intergovernmental relations, Incorporation
by reference, Nitrogen dioxide, Ozone, Reporting and recordkeeping
requirements, Volatile organic compounds.
Dated: June 1, 2012.
A. Stanley Meiburg,
Acting Regional Administrator, Region 4.
40 CFR part 52 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 L--Georgia
0
2. Section 52.570 is amended:
0
a. In paragraph (c) by adding a new entry in numerical order for ``391-
3-1-.15'';
0
b. In paragraph (e) by removing and reserving entry 12 to read as
follows:
Sec. 52.570 Identification of plan.
* * * * *
(c) * * *
EPA-Approved Georgia Regulations
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
State effective
State citation Title/subject date EPA approval date Explanation
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
* * * * * * *
391-3-1-.15............... Georgia 10/6/10 6/15/2012 [Insert .....................
Transportation citation of
Conformity and publication].
Consultation
Interagency Rule.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
[[Page 35870]]
* * * * *
(e) * * *
EPA-Approved Georgia Non-Regulatory Provisions
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Applicable geographic or State submittal date/
Name of nonregulatory SIP Provision nonattainment area effective date EPA approval date
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
* * * * * * *
12. [Reserved]. ........................ ....................... .......................
* * * * * * *
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
[FR Doc. 2012-14595 Filed 6-14-12; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P
