Approval and Promulgation of Implementation Plans; Arizona; Motor Vehicle Inspection and Maintenance Programs, 30209-30213 [2013-12091]
Download as PDF
<![CDATA[
pmangrum on DSK3VPTVN1PROD with RULES
Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 99 / Wednesday, May 22, 2013 / Rules and Regulations
that complies with the provisions of the
CAA 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
VerDate Mar<15>2010
14:58 May 21, 2013
Jkt 229001
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 July 22, 2013. 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,
and Reporting and recordkeeping
requirements.
Dated: April 22, 2013.
Susan Hedman,
Regional Administrator, Region 5.
Authority: 42 U.S.C. 7401 et seq.
2. Section 52.2570 is amended by
adding paragraph (c)(126) to read as
follows:
■
Identification of plan.
*
*
*
*
(c) * * *
(126) On May 4, 2011, June 20, 2012,
and September 28, 2012, the Wisconsin
Department of Natural Resources
submitted a request to revise
Wisconsin’s Prevention of Significant
Deterioration (PSD) program to
incorporate the ‘‘Tailoring Rule’’ and
the Federal deferral for biogenic CO2
emissions into Wisconsin’s SIP.
(i) Incorporation by reference.
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
BILLING CODE 6560–50–P
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION
AGENCY
1. The authority citation for part 52
continues to read as follows:
Frm 00013
[Amended]
[FR Doc. 2013–12094 Filed 5–21–13; 8:45 am]
■
PO 00000
§ 52.2572
3. Section 52.2572 is amended by
removing and reserving paragraph (b).
PART 52—APPROVAL AND
PROMULGATION OF
IMPLEMENTATION PLANS
*
(A) Wisconsin Administrative Code,
NR 400.02 Definitions. NR 400.02 (74m)
‘‘Greenhouse gases’’ or ‘‘GHG’’, as
published in the Wisconsin
Administrative Register August 2011,
No. 668, effective September 1, 2011.
(B) Wisconsin Administrative Code,
NR 400.03 Units and abbreviations. NR
400.03(3)(om) ‘‘SF6’’, NR 400.03(4)(go)
‘‘GHG’’, and NR 400.03(4)(kg) ‘‘PFC’’, as
published in the Wisconsin
Administrative Register August 2011,
No. 668, effective September 1, 2011.
(C) Wisconsin Administrative Code,
NR 405.02 Definitions. NR 405.02(28m)
‘‘Subject to regulation under the Act’’,
as published in the Wisconsin
Administrative Register August 2011,
No. 668, effective September 1, 2011.
(D) Wisconsin Administrative Code,
NR 405.07 Review of major stationary
sources and major modifications—
source applicability and exemptions.
NR 405.07(9), as published in the
Wisconsin Administrative Register
August 2011, No. 668, effective
September 1, 2011.
(E) Wisconsin Statutes, section
285.60(3m) Consideration of Certain
Greenhouse Gas Emissions, enacted on
April 2, 2012, by 2011 Wisconsin Act
171.
(F) Wisconsin Statutes, section
285.63(3m) Consideration of Certain
Greenhouse Gas Emissions, enacted on
April 2, 2012, by 2011 Wisconsin Act
171.
■
40 CFR part 52 is amended as follows:
§ 52.2570
30209
40 CFR Part 52
[EPA–R09–OAR–2011–0552; FRL–9780–9]
Approval and Promulgation of
Implementation Plans; Arizona; Motor
Vehicle Inspection and Maintenance
Programs
Environmental Protection
Agency (EPA).
ACTION: Final rule.
AGENCY:
SUMMARY: EPA is taking final action to
approve three revisions to the Arizona
State Implementation Plan submitted by
the Arizona Department of
Environmental Quality. Two of these
revisions relate to an amendment to
Arizona’s vehicle emissions inspection
program that exempts motorcycles in
the Phoenix metropolitan area from
E:\FR\FM\22MYR1.SGM
22MYR1
30210
Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 99 / Wednesday, May 22, 2013 / Rules and Regulations
emissions testing requirements. The
third revision expands the geographic
area in which various air quality control
measures, including the vehicle
emissions inspection program but also
including other control measures, apply
in the Phoenix metropolitan area. EPA
is approving these SIP revisions based
on our conclusion that the SIP revisions
meet all applicable requirements and
would not interfere with reasonable
further progress or attainment of any of
the national ambient air quality
standards. EPA is finalizing this action
under the Clean Air Act obligation to
take action on State submittals of
revisions to state implementation plans.
DATES: Effective Date: This rule is
effective on June 21, 2013.
ADDRESSES: EPA has established docket
number EPA–R09–OAR–2011–0552 for
this action. Generally, documents in the
docket for this action are available
electronically at www.regulations.gov
and in hard copy at EPA Region IX, 75
Hawthorne Street, San Francisco,
California. While all documents in the
docket are listed at
www.regulations.gov, some information
may be publicly available only at the
hard copy location (e.g., copyrighted
material, large maps, multi-volume
reports), and some may not be publicly
available in either location (e.g.,
Confidential Business Information). To
inspect the hard copy materials, please
schedule an appointment during normal
business hours with the contact listed in
the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT
section.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Jeffrey Buss, Office of Air Planning, U.S.
Environmental Protection Agency,
Region 9, (415) 947–4152, email:
buss.jeffrey@epa.gov.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Throughout this document, the terms
‘‘we,’’ ‘‘us,’’ and ‘‘our’’ refer to EPA.
Table of Contents
pmangrum on DSK3VPTVN1PROD with RULES
I. Proposed Action
II. Response to Comments
III. EPA’s Final Action
IV. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews
I. Proposed Action
On November 5, 2012 (77 FR 66422),
EPA proposed to approve revisions to
the Arizona state implementation plan
(SIP) submitted by the Arizona
Department of Environmental Quality
(ADEQ) that would exempt motorcycles
in the Phoenix metropolitan area from
testing under the Arizona motor vehicle
emissions inspections and maintenance
(‘‘VEI’’) program and that would expand
the geographic area in which certain air
pollution control programs apply within
VerDate Mar<15>2010
14:58 May 21, 2013
Jkt 229001
the Phoenix metropolitan area. We
proposed these actions under section
110(k) of the Clean Air Act (CAA or
‘‘Act’’). (The State of Arizona developed
the VEI program to reduce emissions of
carbon monoxide (CO), volatile organic
compounds (VOC) and oxides of
nitrogen (NOX) from in-use motor
vehicles in the Phoenix and Tucson
areas.1)
Specifically, we proposed to approve
the submittal on November 6, 2009 of
‘‘Final Arizona State Implementation
Plan Revision, Exemption of
Motorcycles from Vehicle Emissions
Inspections and Maintenance Program
Requirements in Area A’’ (October 2009)
(‘‘2009 VEI SIP Revision’’) and the
submittal on January 11, 2011 of ‘‘Final
Addendum to the Arizona State
Implementation Plan Revision,
Exemption of Motorcycles from Vehicle
Emissions Inspections and Maintenance
Program Requirements in Area A,
October 2009’’ (December 2010) (‘‘2011
VEI SIP Addendum’’).
As described in our November 5, 2012
proposed rule, the 2009 VEI SIP
Revision submittal includes a nonregulatory portion that provides
analyses of emission impacts due to the
motorcycle exemption, a demonstration
that the exemption would not interfere
with attainment or maintenance of the
national ambient air quality standards
(NAAQS or ‘‘standards’’), and a
contingency measure establishing a
binding commitment on ADEQ to
request Legislative action to reinstate
emissions testing for motorcycles in the
Phoenix area should the Phoenix area
experience a violation of the carbon
monoxide NAAQS. The 2009 VEI SIP
Revision also includes a regulatory
portion comprised by House Bill (HB)
2280, enacted by Arizona in 2008 to
take effect upon EPA approval. HB 2280
amends the Arizona Revised Statutes
(ARS) section 49–542 (‘‘Emissions
inspection program; powers and duties
of director; administration; periodic
inspection; minimum standards and
rules; exceptions; definition’’) by
exempting motorcycles in Area A (i.e.,
the Phoenix area) from emissions testing
under the VEI program.2 3 The 2011 VEI
1 VOC and NO are precursors to ozone formation
X
in the atmosphere under the influence of sunlight
and meteorology.
2 The changes to ARS Section 49–542 are selfimplementing, which means that they become
effective upon EPA approval as a revision to the
Arizona SIP. See page 4 of the 2009 VEI SIP
Revision.
3 On January 28, 2013, at EPA’s request, ADEQ
supplemented appendix A of the 2009 VEI SIP
Revision with a certified copy of the codified
version of ARS section 49–542, along with two
House Bills that extended the conditional
enactment date set for July 2010 in House Bill 2280
PO 00000
Frm 00014
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
SIP Revision includes additional
information regarding the impacts of the
motorcycle exemption on attainment of
the 2008 8-hour ozone NAAQS and the
1987 PM10 NAAQS and includes a
substitute measure to offset the VOC
emission reductions foregone by the
exemption of motorcycles from the VEI
emissions testing requirement.
With respect to the SIP revision that
would expand the geographic area in
which certain air pollution control
programs apply within the Phoenix
metropolitan area, we noted in our
November 5, 2012 proposed rule that
the relevant amended statutory
definition of ‘‘Area A’’ was included in
ADEQ’s May 25, 2012 submittal of the
MAG 2012 Five Percent Plan for PM–10
for the Maricopa County Nonattainment
Area (May 2012) (‘‘2012 Phoenix Area
PM–10 Five Percent Plan’’).
Specifically, ADEQ included ARS 49–
541(1) (‘‘Definitions’’) as amended by
the Arizona Legislature in 2001 as part
of the submittal of the 2012 Phoenix
Area PM–10 Five Percent Plan. ARS 49–
541(1) establishes the boundaries of
Area A.4
As explained in our proposed rule,
Area A, as last approved in 2003 (68 FR
2912 (January 22, 2003)), includes all of
the metropolitan Phoenix carbon
monoxide and 1-hour ozone
nonattainment areas plus additional
areas in Maricopa County to the north,
east, and west, as well as a small portion
of Yavapai County and the western
portions of Pinal County. ‘‘Area A’’ is
also used by the State of Arizona to
identify the applicable area for
implementation of a number of air
pollution control measures, including
but not limited to the VEI, cleaner
burning gasoline (CBG), and ‘‘stage II’’
vapor recovery programs. The amended
‘‘Area A’’ definition, included with the
2012 Phoenix Area PM–10 Five Percent
Plan, extends Area A beyond the
boundaries approved by EPA in 2003 to
add portions of Maricopa County west
of Goodyear and Peoria and a small
piece of land on the north side of Lake
Pleasant in Yavapai County.
As discussed in more detail on pages
66424–66428 of the November 5, 2012
proposed rule, we proposed to approve
to July 2012, and then to July 2014. We are taking
final action to approve this certified copy of ARS
49–542 in today’s action.
4 ADEQ included ARS 49–541(1) in exhibit 1 in
Appendix C to the 2012 Phoenix Area PM–10 Five
Percent Plan. With respect to ADEQ’s May 25, 2012
SIP revision submittal of the 2012 Phoenix Area
PM–10 Five Percent Plan, EPA is taking action
today only on the amended statutory provision that
expands the boundaries of Area A [i.e., amended
ARS 49–541(1)]. EPA will take action on the rest
of the 2012 Phoenix Area PM–10 Five Percent Plan
in one or more future rulemakings.
E:\FR\FM\22MYR1.SGM
22MYR1
pmangrum on DSK3VPTVN1PROD with RULES
Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 99 / Wednesday, May 22, 2013 / Rules and Regulations
the exemption for Phoenix-area
motorcycles from the emissions testing
requirements under the VEI program
because:
• With respect to all three SIP
revisions, ADEQ has met the procedural
(i.e. public process) requirements for
SIP revisions under CAA section 110(l)
and 40 CFR part 51, subpart F;
• With the emissions testing
exemption for motorcycles in the
Phoenix metropolitan area, the Arizona
VEI would continue to meet Federal
minimum requirements for vehicle
inspection and maintenance (I/M)
programs;
• The VEI program, as amended to
exempt motorcycles from the emissions
testing requirement, would continue to
meet or exceed the alternate low
enhanced I/M performance standard in
the Phoenix area as required under 40
CFR 51.351 and 51.905(a)(1);
• The motorcycle exemption would
not interfere with attainment or
maintenance of any of the NAAQS and
would thereby comply with section
110(l) of the CAA because the potential
incremental increase in emissions of
CO, VOC and PM–10 due to foregone
motorcycle emissions testing and
maintenance would be more than offset
by the emissions impact of expanding
the boundaries of ‘‘Area A’’ 5 because
‘‘Area A’’ defines the area of
applicability for various air pollution
control measures, such as the VEI
program, the CBG program, the ‘‘stage
II’’ vapor recovery program, and various
PM–10 control measures, and
expanding the boundaries of ‘‘Area A’’
thus extends these programs to areas not
otherwise covered for the purposes of
the Arizona SIP; and
• The 2009 VEI SIP Revision includes
a commitment by ADEQ, i.e., to request
Legislative action to reinstate emissions
testing for motorcycles in the Phoenix
area should the area experience a
violation of the CO standards, that we
find complies with the contingency
measure requirements under section
175A(d) of the CAA with respect to the
Phoenix area, which is a ‘‘maintenance’’
area for the CO standard.
For background information about the
EPA’s regulations governing motor
vehicle inspection and maintenance
programs (I/M), the development and
evolution of Arizona’s VEI program,
EPA’s actions in connection with that
program, as well as additional
5 For example, the proposed rule, at page 66427,
compares the estimated 1.3 metric tons per day of
VOC emissions reductions from expansion of Area
A boundaries with the estimated 0.1 metric ton per
day of VOC emissions increases from foregone
emissions testing under the VEI program for
Phoenix area motorcycles.
VerDate Mar<15>2010
14:58 May 21, 2013
Jkt 229001
information concerning the State’s
public process for adopting these SIP
revisions, and our rationale for
proposing approval of the three subject
SIP revisions, please see our November
5, 2012 proposed rule.
II. Response to Comments
Our November 5, 2012 proposed rule
provided a 30-day public comment
period. We received comments from 15
commenters on our proposed rule
during the public comment period. All
of the commenters except for two
expressed their support for EPA’s
proposed action. In the following
paragraphs, we summarize the
comments objecting to our proposed
action and provide our responses.
Comment #1: The commenter agrees
with the proposal to exempt
motorcycles from emissions testing, but
objects to the expansion of Area A
because it expands the use of special
gasoline blends (summer and winter)
that the commenter believes do nothing
for the environment and contribute to
fuel shortages and excessive retail fuel
costs. The commenter also suggests that
the emissions testing exemption for
newer model year vehicles be increased
from 5 to 10 years based on engine
technology improvements.
Response #1: First of all, EPA
disagrees with the contention that the
special gasoline blends in effect in the
Phoenix metropolitan area, and referred
to as the ‘‘cleaner burning gasoline’’
(CBG) program, do nothing for the
environment. To the contrary, EPA has
approved a number of Phoenix area air
quality plans that rely on the
continuation of the CBG program to
attain and maintain the NAAQS. For
instance, in the Carbon Monoxide
Redesignation Request and
Maintenance Plan for the Maricopa
County Nonattainment Area (May
2003), which was approved by EPA at
70 FR 11553 (March 9, 2005), the
Maricopa Association of Governments
(MAG) credits CBG with providing over
20% of the CO emissions reductions
relied upon to demonstrate maintenance
of the CO standard through the first ten
years beyond redesignation.6 More
recently, in the Eight-Hour Ozone Plan
for the Maricopa Nonattainment Area
(June 2007), approved by EPA at 77 FR
35285 (June 13, 2012), MAG credits CBG
with providing 3.5% of the NOX
reductions that the plan relies upon to
demonstrate attainment of the 1997 86 See page ES–7 of MAG’s Carbon Monoxide
Redesignation Request and Maintenance Plan for
the Maricopa County Nonattainment Area (May
2003).
PO 00000
Frm 00015
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
30211
hour ozone standard in the PhoenixMesa area.7
Second, we note that the commenter
does not challenge EPA’s conclusion
that the expansion of Area A meets all
applicable CAA requirements but rather
contends that the extension of CBG to a
larger area would increase retail fuel
costs and lead to fuel shortages.
However, in reviewing SIP submissions,
EPA’s role is to approve state choices,
provided that they meet the minimum
criteria set in the Clean Air Act or any
applicable EPA regulations. Thus,
considerations such as whether a State
rule may be economically or
technologically challenging cannot form
the basis for EPA disapproval of a rule
submitted by a state as part of a SIP [see
Union Electric Company v. EPA; 427
U.S. 246, 265 (1976)]. Also, EPA
disapproval of ADEQ’s submittal of the
statutory provision expanding Area A
would not prevent the implementation
of CBG in the larger area because the
expanded definition of Area A and
related CBG requirements would still
apply in the larger area, and would still
be enforceable, under State law,
regardless of EPA’s action to approve or
disapprove the amended definition as a
revision to the Arizona SIP.
Lastly, with respect to the suggestion
that the emissions testing exemption for
newer model year vehicles should be
increased from 5 to 10 years, any
changes to the exemption for motor
vehicle emissions testing would first
require a change in Arizona law. Thus,
the commenter should direct this
suggestion to State officials in the first
instance. If such a statutory change were
to be adopted, ADEQ would need to
adopt and submit the change as a
revision to the Arizona SIP, including
documentation showing that the
revision meets all relevant CAA and
EPA requirements—including a
demonstration that the change would
not interfere with reasonable further
progress or attainment of the NAAQS
under section 110(l) of the Act. Upon
receipt of a complete SIP revision, EPA
would then consider approval or
disapproval in the context of noticeand-comment rulemaking.
Comment #2: The commenter objects
to EPA’s proposed approval of the
exemption for motorcycles because
motorcycle-related emissions contribute
to the overall problem of poor air
quality in the Phoenix metropolitan area
and should not be ignored even though
it may be small in comparison to the
emissions generated by cars.
7 See page ES–5 of MAG’s Eight-Hour Ozone Plan
for the Maricopa Nonattainment Area (June 2007).
E:\FR\FM\22MYR1.SGM
22MYR1
30212
Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 99 / Wednesday, May 22, 2013 / Rules and Regulations
pmangrum on DSK3VPTVN1PROD with RULES
Response #2: In support of the
contention that motorcycle emissions do
contribute to overall air quality
problems in the Phoenix metropolitan
area, the commenter presents an
estimate of total emissions from
motorcycles in the Phoenix area that, as
corrected for a computational error and
adjusted for unit conversions, are not
inconsistent with the corresponding
estimates of motorcycle emissions
prepared by MAG in the Eight-Hour
Ozone Redesignation Request and
Maintenance Plan for the Maricopa
Nonattainment Area (February 2009).8
However, we did not propose to
approve the VEI exemption for
motorcycles based on the relatively low
contribution of motorcycle emissions to
overall pollutant emissions in the
Phoenix metropolitan area. Rather, we
based our proposed approval on our
conclusion that the VEI program, as
amended to include the motorcycle
exemption, would continue to meet
Federal I/M requirements and that any
increase in emissions due to the
exemption would be offset by the
reduction in emissions due to the
extension of various control measures to
a larger geographic area by virtue of the
amended statutory definition of ‘‘Area
A.’’
More specifically, in connection with
the emissions impact analysis submitted
by ADEQ, we agreed with its focus on
the incremental change due to foregone
emissions testing and maintenance of
motorcycles under the VEI program
rather than on total motorcycle-related
emissions. Next, we found ADEQ’s
emissions estimates for the incremental
increase to be reasonable. Converted to
tons per year, ADEQ’s estimates for the
incremental increase amounts to
approximately 20 tpy for VOC and 100
tpy for CO (see the column labeled
‘‘I/M benefit from motorcycle testing
and repair’’ in table 2 of EPA’s
November 5, 2012 proposed rule). As to
this incremental increase in VOC and
CO emissions, we concluded that the
incremental increase in emissions due
to foregone emissions testing and
8 In Eight-Hour Ozone Redesignation Request and
Maintenance Plan for the Maricopa Nonattainment
Area (February 2009) (see page 109 of the Appendix
A, Exhibit 1 (‘‘2005 Ozone Periodic Emission
Inventory’’), MAG estimates that motorcycles in
year 2005 emitted approximately 660 tons per year
(tpy), 200 tpy, and 2,620 tpy of VOC, NOX, and CO,
respectively, within the Phoenix-Mesa 8-hour ozone
nonattainment area. The corresponding estimates
prepared by the commenter, as corrected for an
error in computation (i.e., the commenter’s
calculated estimate of CO per bike should have
been 33,817 grams (per year) instead of 3,137 grams
(per year) based on 7 grams per kilogram and 4,831
kilometers driven per year per bike) and converted
to tons per year, are approximately 360 tpy for VOC
(and for VOC+NOX) and 2,720 tpy for CO.
VerDate Mar<15>2010
14:58 May 21, 2013
Jkt 229001
maintenance would not interfere with
attainment or maintenance of any of the
NAAQS given the emissions benefits
associated with the expansion of Area A
and the related extension of various air
quality control measures to the larger
area, including the VEI program, the
CBG program, the vapor recovery
program, and various PM–10 control
measures, given that the geographic
applicability for all of these programs is
defined by ‘‘Area A.’’ See page 66426–
66428 of EPA’s November 5, 2012
proposed rule.
III. EPA’s Final Action
Under section 110(k) of the CAA, and
for the reasons set forth in our
November 5, 2012 proposed rule and
summarized herein, EPA is taking final
action to approve the revisions to the
Arizona SIP submitted by ADEQ on
November 6, 2009 and January 11, 2011
concerning the exemption of
motorcycles from the emissions testing
requirements under the Arizona VEI
program in the Phoenix area, because
we find that the revisions meet all
applicable requirements, and together
with the expansion of the geographic
area to which the VEI and other air
pollution control measures apply,
would not interfere with reasonable
further progress or attainment of any of
the national ambient air quality
standards. In connection with our
approval of the State’s exemption of
motorcycles from the VEI emissions
testing requirements, we are approving
an amended statute, Arizona Revised
Statutes (ARS) section 49–542, that
codifies this exemption in State law.9
EPA is also approving the revised
statutory provision [amended Arizona
Revised Statutes (ARS) section 49–
541(1)], submitted by ADEQ on May 25,
2012,10 that expands the boundaries of
9 Final approval of the current version of ARS 49–
542 exempting motorcycles from VEI emissions
testing requirements supersedes the previous
versions of ARS 49–542 approved by EPA and made
a part of the applicable Arizona SIP. The most
recent prior approval by EPA of ARS 49–542 was
published at 72 FR 15046 (March 30, 2007).
10 Final approval of the amendment to ARS 49–
541(1) expanding the boundaries of ‘‘Area A’’ to
those promulgated by the Arizona Legislature in
2001 supersedes the previous versions of ARS 49–
541(1) approved by EPA and made a part of the
applicable Arizona SIP. The most recent prior
approvals by EPA of the definition of ‘‘Area A’’ in
ARS 49–541(1) were published at 68 FR 2912
(January 22, 2003) and 69 FR 10161 (March 4,
2004). The definition of the boundaries of ‘‘Area A’’
in ARS 49–541(1) was the same in both the 2003
and 2004 final approval actions and reflect the
boundaries promulgated by the Arizona Legislature
in 1999. Approval of the amended statutory
definition of ‘‘Area A’’ in today’s final action
expands the geographic applicability of the VEI
program, the CBG program, the Stage II vapor
recovery program and any other Arizona SIP control
PO 00000
Frm 00016
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
Area A, i.e., the area in which the
various air pollution control measures
(including the VEI, and cleaner burning
gasoline and stage II vapor recovery
programs) in the Phoenix area apply.
IV. Statutory and Executive Order
Reviews
Under the Clean Air Act, 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 Clean Air Act.
Accordingly, this action merely
proposes to approve 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 Clean Air Act;
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).
measure that relies on the definition of ‘‘Area A’’
in ARS 49–541(1) under the Arizona SIP.
E:\FR\FM\22MYR1.SGM
22MYR1
Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 99 / Wednesday, May 22, 2013 / Rules and Regulations
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 July 22, 2013. 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, Carbon monoxide,
Incorporation by reference,
Intergovernmental relations, Oxides of
nitrogen, Ozone, Reporting and
recordkeeping requirements, Volatile
organic compounds.
pmangrum on DSK3VPTVN1PROD with RULES
Dated: February 4, 2013.
Jared Blumenfeld,
Regional Administrator, Region IX.
Part 52, chapter I, title 40 of the Code
of Federal Regulations are 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.
VerDate Mar<15>2010
14:58 May 21, 2013
Jkt 229001
Subpart D—Arizona
2. Section 52.120 is amended by
adding paragraphs (c)(155), (c)(156), and
(c)(157) to read as follows:
■
§ 52.120
Identification of plan.
*
*
*
*
*
(c) * * *
(155) The following plan was
submitted on November 6, 2009 by the
Governor’s designee.
(i) Incorporation by reference.
(A) Arizona Department of
Environmental Quality.
(1) Affidavit by Efrem K. Sepulveda,
Law Librarian, Arizona State Library,
Archives and Public Records, certifying
authenticity of reproduction of A.R.S.
§ 49–542 (2008 edition) plus title page
to pocket part of Title 49 (2008 edition),
signed January 11, 2013.
(2) Arizona Revised Statutes
(Thomson West, 2008 Cumulative
Pocket Part): Title 49 (the environment),
section 49–542 (‘‘Emissions inspection
program; powers and duties of director;
administration; periodic inspection;
minimum standards and rules;
exceptions; definition’’).
(ii) Additional materials.
(A) Arizona Department of
Environmental Quality.
(1) Final Arizona State
Implementation Plan Revision,
Exemption of Motorcycles from Vehicle
Emissions Inspections and Maintenance
Program Requirements in Area A
(October 2009), adopted by the Arizona
Department of Environmental Quality
on November 6, 2009, excluding
appendices A and C.
(156) The following plan was
submitted on January 11, 2011 by the
Governor’s designee.
(i) [Reserved]
(ii) Additional materials.
(A) Arizona Department of
Environmental Quality.
(1) Final Addendum to the Arizona
State Implementation Plan Revision,
Exemption of Motorcycles from Vehicle
Emissions Inspections and Maintenance
Program Requirements in Area A,
October 2009 (December 2010), adopted
by the Arizona Department of
Environmental Quality on January 11,
2011.
(157) The following plan was
submitted on May 25, 2012 by the
Governor’s designee.
(i) Incorporation by reference.
(A) Arizona Department of
Environmental Quality.
(1) Affidavit by Barbara Howe, Law
Reference Librarian, Arizona State
Library, Archives and Public Records,
certifying authenticity of reproduction
of Arizona Revised Statutes § 49–451
PO 00000
Frm 00017
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
30213
(sic) (corrected to § 49–541) (2001
pocket part), signed May 3, 2012.
(2) Arizona Revised Statutes (West
Group, 2001 Cumulative Pocket Part):
title 49 (the environment), section 49–
541 (‘‘Definitions’’), subsection 1
[Definition of Area A].
[FR Doc. 2013–12091 Filed 5–21–13; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560–50–P
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION
AGENCY
40 CFR Part 180
[EPA–HQ–OPP–2012–0203; FRL–9386–1]
1-Naphthaleneacetic acid; Pesticide
Tolerances
Environmental Protection
Agency (EPA).
ACTION: Final rule.
AGENCY:
SUMMARY: This regulation establishes
tolerances for residues of 1naphthaleneacetic acid in or on
avocado; fruit, pome, group 11–10;
mango; sapote, mamey; and rambutan.
This regulation additionally deletes
certain tolerances, identified and
discussed later in this document.
Interregional Research Project Number 4
(IR–4) requested these tolerances under
the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic
Act (FFDCA).
DATES: This regulation is effective May
22, 2013. Objections and requests for
hearings must be received on or before
July 22, 2013, and must be filed in
accordance with the instructions
provided in 40 CFR part 178 (see also
Unit I.C. of the SUPPLEMENTARY
INFORMATION).
The docket for this action,
identified by docket identification (ID)
number EPA–HQ–OPP–2012–0203, is
available at https://www.regulations.gov
or at the Office of Pesticide Programs
Regulatory Public Docket (OPP Docket)
in the Environmental Protection Agency
Docket Center (EPA/DC), EPA West
Bldg., Rm. 3334, 1301 Constitution Ave.
NW., Washington, DC 20460–0001. The
Public Reading Room is open from 8:30
a.m. to 4:30 p.m., Monday through
Friday, excluding legal holidays. The
telephone number for the Public
Reading Room is (202) 566–1744, and
the telephone number for the OPP
Docket is (703) 305–5805. Please review
the visitor instructions and additional
information about the docket available
at https://www.epa.gov/dockets.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Laura Nollen, Registration Division
(7505P), Office of Pesticide Programs,
Environmental Protection Agency, 1200
ADDRESSES:
E:\FR\FM\22MYR1.SGM
22MYR1
]]>Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 78, Number 99 (Wednesday, May 22, 2013)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 30209-30213]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2013-12091]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
40 CFR Part 52
[EPA-R09-OAR-2011-0552; FRL-9780-9]
Approval and Promulgation of Implementation Plans; Arizona; Motor
Vehicle Inspection and Maintenance Programs
AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).
ACTION: Final rule.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: EPA is taking final action to approve three revisions to the
Arizona State Implementation Plan submitted by the Arizona Department
of Environmental Quality. Two of these revisions relate to an amendment
to Arizona's vehicle emissions inspection program that exempts
motorcycles in the Phoenix metropolitan area from
[[Page 30210]]
emissions testing requirements. The third revision expands the
geographic area in which various air quality control measures,
including the vehicle emissions inspection program but also including
other control measures, apply in the Phoenix metropolitan area. EPA is
approving these SIP revisions based on our conclusion that the SIP
revisions meet all applicable requirements and would not interfere with
reasonable further progress or attainment of any of the national
ambient air quality standards. EPA is finalizing this action under the
Clean Air Act obligation to take action on State submittals of
revisions to state implementation plans.
DATES: Effective Date: This rule is effective on June 21, 2013.
ADDRESSES: EPA has established docket number EPA-R09-OAR-2011-0552 for
this action. Generally, documents in the docket for this action are
available electronically at www.regulations.gov and in hard copy at EPA
Region IX, 75 Hawthorne Street, San Francisco, California. While all
documents in the docket are listed at www.regulations.gov, some
information may be publicly available only at the hard copy location
(e.g., copyrighted material, large maps, multi-volume reports), and
some may not be publicly available in either location (e.g.,
Confidential Business Information). To inspect the hard copy materials,
please schedule an appointment during normal business hours with the
contact listed in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Jeffrey Buss, Office of Air Planning,
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Region 9, (415) 947-4152, email:
buss.jeffrey@epa.gov.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Throughout this document, the terms ``we,''
``us,'' and ``our'' refer to EPA.
Table of Contents
I. Proposed Action
II. Response to Comments
III. EPA's Final Action
IV. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews
I. Proposed Action
On November 5, 2012 (77 FR 66422), EPA proposed to approve
revisions to the Arizona state implementation plan (SIP) submitted by
the Arizona Department of Environmental Quality (ADEQ) that would
exempt motorcycles in the Phoenix metropolitan area from testing under
the Arizona motor vehicle emissions inspections and maintenance
(``VEI'') program and that would expand the geographic area in which
certain air pollution control programs apply within the Phoenix
metropolitan area. We proposed these actions under section 110(k) of
the Clean Air Act (CAA or ``Act''). (The State of Arizona developed the
VEI program to reduce emissions of carbon monoxide (CO), volatile
organic compounds (VOC) and oxides of nitrogen (NOX) from
in-use motor vehicles in the Phoenix and Tucson areas.\1\)
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ VOC and NOX are precursors to ozone formation in
the atmosphere under the influence of sunlight and meteorology.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Specifically, we proposed to approve the submittal on November 6,
2009 of ``Final Arizona State Implementation Plan Revision, Exemption
of Motorcycles from Vehicle Emissions Inspections and Maintenance
Program Requirements in Area A'' (October 2009) (``2009 VEI SIP
Revision'') and the submittal on January 11, 2011 of ``Final Addendum
to the Arizona State Implementation Plan Revision, Exemption of
Motorcycles from Vehicle Emissions Inspections and Maintenance Program
Requirements in Area A, October 2009'' (December 2010) (``2011 VEI SIP
Addendum'').
As described in our November 5, 2012 proposed rule, the 2009 VEI
SIP Revision submittal includes a non-regulatory portion that provides
analyses of emission impacts due to the motorcycle exemption, a
demonstration that the exemption would not interfere with attainment or
maintenance of the national ambient air quality standards (NAAQS or
``standards''), and a contingency measure establishing a binding
commitment on ADEQ to request Legislative action to reinstate emissions
testing for motorcycles in the Phoenix area should the Phoenix area
experience a violation of the carbon monoxide NAAQS. The 2009 VEI SIP
Revision also includes a regulatory portion comprised by House Bill
(HB) 2280, enacted by Arizona in 2008 to take effect upon EPA approval.
HB 2280 amends the Arizona Revised Statutes (ARS) section 49-542
(``Emissions inspection program; powers and duties of director;
administration; periodic inspection; minimum standards and rules;
exceptions; definition'') by exempting motorcycles in Area A (i.e., the
Phoenix area) from emissions testing under the VEI
program.2 3 The 2011 VEI SIP Revision includes additional
information regarding the impacts of the motorcycle exemption on
attainment of the 2008 8-hour ozone NAAQS and the 1987 PM10
NAAQS and includes a substitute measure to offset the VOC emission
reductions foregone by the exemption of motorcycles from the VEI
emissions testing requirement.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\2\ The changes to ARS Section 49-542 are self-implementing,
which means that they become effective upon EPA approval as a
revision to the Arizona SIP. See page 4 of the 2009 VEI SIP
Revision.
\3\ On January 28, 2013, at EPA's request, ADEQ supplemented
appendix A of the 2009 VEI SIP Revision with a certified copy of the
codified version of ARS section 49-542, along with two House Bills
that extended the conditional enactment date set for July 2010 in
House Bill 2280 to July 2012, and then to July 2014. We are taking
final action to approve this certified copy of ARS 49-542 in today's
action.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
With respect to the SIP revision that would expand the geographic
area in which certain air pollution control programs apply within the
Phoenix metropolitan area, we noted in our November 5, 2012 proposed
rule that the relevant amended statutory definition of ``Area A'' was
included in ADEQ's May 25, 2012 submittal of the MAG 2012 Five Percent
Plan for PM-10 for the Maricopa County Nonattainment Area (May 2012)
(``2012 Phoenix Area PM-10 Five Percent Plan''). Specifically, ADEQ
included ARS 49-541(1) (``Definitions'') as amended by the Arizona
Legislature in 2001 as part of the submittal of the 2012 Phoenix Area
PM-10 Five Percent Plan. ARS 49-541(1) establishes the boundaries of
Area A.\4\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\4\ ADEQ included ARS 49-541(1) in exhibit 1 in Appendix C to
the 2012 Phoenix Area PM-10 Five Percent Plan. With respect to
ADEQ's May 25, 2012 SIP revision submittal of the 2012 Phoenix Area
PM-10 Five Percent Plan, EPA is taking action today only on the
amended statutory provision that expands the boundaries of Area A
[i.e., amended ARS 49-541(1)]. EPA will take action on the rest of
the 2012 Phoenix Area PM-10 Five Percent Plan in one or more future
rulemakings.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
As explained in our proposed rule, Area A, as last approved in 2003
(68 FR 2912 (January 22, 2003)), includes all of the metropolitan
Phoenix carbon monoxide and 1-hour ozone nonattainment areas plus
additional areas in Maricopa County to the north, east, and west, as
well as a small portion of Yavapai County and the western portions of
Pinal County. ``Area A'' is also used by the State of Arizona to
identify the applicable area for implementation of a number of air
pollution control measures, including but not limited to the VEI,
cleaner burning gasoline (CBG), and ``stage II'' vapor recovery
programs. The amended ``Area A'' definition, included with the 2012
Phoenix Area PM-10 Five Percent Plan, extends Area A beyond the
boundaries approved by EPA in 2003 to add portions of Maricopa County
west of Goodyear and Peoria and a small piece of land on the north side
of Lake Pleasant in Yavapai County.
As discussed in more detail on pages 66424-66428 of the November 5,
2012 proposed rule, we proposed to approve
[[Page 30211]]
the exemption for Phoenix-area motorcycles from the emissions testing
requirements under the VEI program because:
With respect to all three SIP revisions, ADEQ has met the
procedural (i.e. public process) requirements for SIP revisions under
CAA section 110(l) and 40 CFR part 51, subpart F;
With the emissions testing exemption for motorcycles in
the Phoenix metropolitan area, the Arizona VEI would continue to meet
Federal minimum requirements for vehicle inspection and maintenance (I/
M) programs;
The VEI program, as amended to exempt motorcycles from the
emissions testing requirement, would continue to meet or exceed the
alternate low enhanced I/M performance standard in the Phoenix area as
required under 40 CFR 51.351 and 51.905(a)(1);
The motorcycle exemption would not interfere with
attainment or maintenance of any of the NAAQS and would thereby comply
with section 110(l) of the CAA because the potential incremental
increase in emissions of CO, VOC and PM-10 due to foregone motorcycle
emissions testing and maintenance would be more than offset by the
emissions impact of expanding the boundaries of ``Area A'' \5\ because
``Area A'' defines the area of applicability for various air pollution
control measures, such as the VEI program, the CBG program, the ``stage
II'' vapor recovery program, and various PM-10 control measures, and
expanding the boundaries of ``Area A'' thus extends these programs to
areas not otherwise covered for the purposes of the Arizona SIP; and
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\5\ For example, the proposed rule, at page 66427, compares the
estimated 1.3 metric tons per day of VOC emissions reductions from
expansion of Area A boundaries with the estimated 0.1 metric ton per
day of VOC emissions increases from foregone emissions testing under
the VEI program for Phoenix area motorcycles.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The 2009 VEI SIP Revision includes a commitment by ADEQ,
i.e., to request Legislative action to reinstate emissions testing for
motorcycles in the Phoenix area should the area experience a violation
of the CO standards, that we find complies with the contingency measure
requirements under section 175A(d) of the CAA with respect to the
Phoenix area, which is a ``maintenance'' area for the CO standard.
For background information about the EPA's regulations governing
motor vehicle inspection and maintenance programs (I/M), the
development and evolution of Arizona's VEI program, EPA's actions in
connection with that program, as well as additional information
concerning the State's public process for adopting these SIP revisions,
and our rationale for proposing approval of the three subject SIP
revisions, please see our November 5, 2012 proposed rule.
II. Response to Comments
Our November 5, 2012 proposed rule provided a 30-day public comment
period. We received comments from 15 commenters on our proposed rule
during the public comment period. All of the commenters except for two
expressed their support for EPA's proposed action. In the following
paragraphs, we summarize the comments objecting to our proposed action
and provide our responses.
Comment #1: The commenter agrees with the proposal to exempt
motorcycles from emissions testing, but objects to the expansion of
Area A because it expands the use of special gasoline blends (summer
and winter) that the commenter believes do nothing for the environment
and contribute to fuel shortages and excessive retail fuel costs. The
commenter also suggests that the emissions testing exemption for newer
model year vehicles be increased from 5 to 10 years based on engine
technology improvements.
Response #1: First of all, EPA disagrees with the contention that
the special gasoline blends in effect in the Phoenix metropolitan area,
and referred to as the ``cleaner burning gasoline'' (CBG) program, do
nothing for the environment. To the contrary, EPA has approved a number
of Phoenix area air quality plans that rely on the continuation of the
CBG program to attain and maintain the NAAQS. For instance, in the
Carbon Monoxide Redesignation Request and Maintenance Plan for the
Maricopa County Nonattainment Area (May 2003), which was approved by
EPA at 70 FR 11553 (March 9, 2005), the Maricopa Association of
Governments (MAG) credits CBG with providing over 20% of the CO
emissions reductions relied upon to demonstrate maintenance of the CO
standard through the first ten years beyond redesignation.\6\ More
recently, in the Eight-Hour Ozone Plan for the Maricopa Nonattainment
Area (June 2007), approved by EPA at 77 FR 35285 (June 13, 2012), MAG
credits CBG with providing 3.5% of the NOX reductions that
the plan relies upon to demonstrate attainment of the 1997 8-hour ozone
standard in the Phoenix-Mesa area.\7\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\6\ See page ES-7 of MAG's Carbon Monoxide Redesignation Request
and Maintenance Plan for the Maricopa County Nonattainment Area (May
2003).
\7\ See page ES-5 of MAG's Eight-Hour Ozone Plan for the
Maricopa Nonattainment Area (June 2007).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Second, we note that the commenter does not challenge EPA's
conclusion that the expansion of Area A meets all applicable CAA
requirements but rather contends that the extension of CBG to a larger
area would increase retail fuel costs and lead to fuel shortages.
However, in reviewing SIP submissions, EPA's role is to approve state
choices, provided that they meet the minimum criteria set in the Clean
Air Act or any applicable EPA regulations. Thus, considerations such as
whether a State rule may be economically or technologically challenging
cannot form the basis for EPA disapproval of a rule submitted by a
state as part of a SIP [see Union Electric Company v. EPA; 427 U.S.
246, 265 (1976)]. Also, EPA disapproval of ADEQ's submittal of the
statutory provision expanding Area A would not prevent the
implementation of CBG in the larger area because the expanded
definition of Area A and related CBG requirements would still apply in
the larger area, and would still be enforceable, under State law,
regardless of EPA's action to approve or disapprove the amended
definition as a revision to the Arizona SIP.
Lastly, with respect to the suggestion that the emissions testing
exemption for newer model year vehicles should be increased from 5 to
10 years, any changes to the exemption for motor vehicle emissions
testing would first require a change in Arizona law. Thus, the
commenter should direct this suggestion to State officials in the first
instance. If such a statutory change were to be adopted, ADEQ would
need to adopt and submit the change as a revision to the Arizona SIP,
including documentation showing that the revision meets all relevant
CAA and EPA requirements--including a demonstration that the change
would not interfere with reasonable further progress or attainment of
the NAAQS under section 110(l) of the Act. Upon receipt of a complete
SIP revision, EPA would then consider approval or disapproval in the
context of notice-and-comment rulemaking.
Comment #2: The commenter objects to EPA's proposed approval of the
exemption for motorcycles because motorcycle-related emissions
contribute to the overall problem of poor air quality in the Phoenix
metropolitan area and should not be ignored even though it may be small
in comparison to the emissions generated by cars.
[[Page 30212]]
Response #2: In support of the contention that motorcycle emissions
do contribute to overall air quality problems in the Phoenix
metropolitan area, the commenter presents an estimate of total
emissions from motorcycles in the Phoenix area that, as corrected for a
computational error and adjusted for unit conversions, are not
inconsistent with the corresponding estimates of motorcycle emissions
prepared by MAG in the Eight-Hour Ozone Redesignation Request and
Maintenance Plan for the Maricopa Nonattainment Area (February
2009).\8\ However, we did not propose to approve the VEI exemption for
motorcycles based on the relatively low contribution of motorcycle
emissions to overall pollutant emissions in the Phoenix metropolitan
area. Rather, we based our proposed approval on our conclusion that the
VEI program, as amended to include the motorcycle exemption, would
continue to meet Federal I/M requirements and that any increase in
emissions due to the exemption would be offset by the reduction in
emissions due to the extension of various control measures to a larger
geographic area by virtue of the amended statutory definition of ``Area
A.''
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\8\ In Eight-Hour Ozone Redesignation Request and Maintenance
Plan for the Maricopa Nonattainment Area (February 2009) (see page
109 of the Appendix A, Exhibit 1 (``2005 Ozone Periodic Emission
Inventory''), MAG estimates that motorcycles in year 2005 emitted
approximately 660 tons per year (tpy), 200 tpy, and 2,620 tpy of
VOC, NOX, and CO, respectively, within the Phoenix-Mesa
8-hour ozone nonattainment area. The corresponding estimates
prepared by the commenter, as corrected for an error in computation
(i.e., the commenter's calculated estimate of CO per bike should
have been 33,817 grams (per year) instead of 3,137 grams (per year)
based on 7 grams per kilogram and 4,831 kilometers driven per year
per bike) and converted to tons per year, are approximately 360 tpy
for VOC (and for VOC+NOX) and 2,720 tpy for CO.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
More specifically, in connection with the emissions impact analysis
submitted by ADEQ, we agreed with its focus on the incremental change
due to foregone emissions testing and maintenance of motorcycles under
the VEI program rather than on total motorcycle-related emissions.
Next, we found ADEQ's emissions estimates for the incremental increase
to be reasonable. Converted to tons per year, ADEQ's estimates for the
incremental increase amounts to approximately 20 tpy for VOC and 100
tpy for CO (see the column labeled ``I/M benefit from motorcycle
testing and repair'' in table 2 of EPA's November 5, 2012 proposed
rule). As to this incremental increase in VOC and CO emissions, we
concluded that the incremental increase in emissions due to foregone
emissions testing and maintenance would not interfere with attainment
or maintenance of any of the NAAQS given the emissions benefits
associated with the expansion of Area A and the related extension of
various air quality control measures to the larger area, including the
VEI program, the CBG program, the vapor recovery program, and various
PM-10 control measures, given that the geographic applicability for all
of these programs is defined by ``Area A.'' See page 66426-66428 of
EPA's November 5, 2012 proposed rule.
III. EPA's Final Action
Under section 110(k) of the CAA, and for the reasons set forth in
our November 5, 2012 proposed rule and summarized herein, EPA is taking
final action to approve the revisions to the Arizona SIP submitted by
ADEQ on November 6, 2009 and January 11, 2011 concerning the exemption
of motorcycles from the emissions testing requirements under the
Arizona VEI program in the Phoenix area, because we find that the
revisions meet all applicable requirements, and together with the
expansion of the geographic area to which the VEI and other air
pollution control measures apply, would not interfere with reasonable
further progress or attainment of any of the national ambient air
quality standards. In connection with our approval of the State's
exemption of motorcycles from the VEI emissions testing requirements,
we are approving an amended statute, Arizona Revised Statutes (ARS)
section 49-542, that codifies this exemption in State law.\9\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\9\ Final approval of the current version of ARS 49-542
exempting motorcycles from VEI emissions testing requirements
supersedes the previous versions of ARS 49-542 approved by EPA and
made a part of the applicable Arizona SIP. The most recent prior
approval by EPA of ARS 49-542 was published at 72 FR 15046 (March
30, 2007).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
EPA is also approving the revised statutory provision [amended
Arizona Revised Statutes (ARS) section 49-541(1)], submitted by ADEQ on
May 25, 2012,\10\ that expands the boundaries of Area A, i.e., the area
in which the various air pollution control measures (including the VEI,
and cleaner burning gasoline and stage II vapor recovery programs) in
the Phoenix area apply.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\10\ Final approval of the amendment to ARS 49-541(1) expanding
the boundaries of ``Area A'' to those promulgated by the Arizona
Legislature in 2001 supersedes the previous versions of ARS 49-
541(1) approved by EPA and made a part of the applicable Arizona
SIP. The most recent prior approvals by EPA of the definition of
``Area A'' in ARS 49-541(1) were published at 68 FR 2912 (January
22, 2003) and 69 FR 10161 (March 4, 2004). The definition of the
boundaries of ``Area A'' in ARS 49-541(1) was the same in both the
2003 and 2004 final approval actions and reflect the boundaries
promulgated by the Arizona Legislature in 1999. Approval of the
amended statutory definition of ``Area A'' in today's final action
expands the geographic applicability of the VEI program, the CBG
program, the Stage II vapor recovery program and any other Arizona
SIP control measure that relies on the definition of ``Area A'' in
ARS 49-541(1) under the Arizona SIP.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
IV. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews
Under the Clean Air Act, 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 Clean Air Act.
Accordingly, this action merely proposes to approve 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 Clean Air Act; 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).
[[Page 30213]]
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 July 22, 2013. 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, Carbon monoxide,
Incorporation by reference, Intergovernmental relations, Oxides of
nitrogen, Ozone, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements, Volatile
organic compounds.
Dated: February 4, 2013.
Jared Blumenfeld,
Regional Administrator, Region IX.
Part 52, chapter I, title 40 of the Code of Federal Regulations are
amended as follows:
PART 52--[AMENDED]
0
1. The authority citation for part 52 continues to read as follows:
Authority: 42 U.S.C. 7401 et seq.
Subpart D--Arizona
0
2. Section 52.120 is amended by adding paragraphs (c)(155), (c)(156),
and (c)(157) to read as follows:
Sec. 52.120 Identification of plan.
* * * * *
(c) * * *
(155) The following plan was submitted on November 6, 2009 by the
Governor's designee.
(i) Incorporation by reference.
(A) Arizona Department of Environmental Quality.
(1) Affidavit by Efrem K. Sepulveda, Law Librarian, Arizona State
Library, Archives and Public Records, certifying authenticity of
reproduction of A.R.S. Sec. 49-542 (2008 edition) plus title page to
pocket part of Title 49 (2008 edition), signed January 11, 2013.
(2) Arizona Revised Statutes (Thomson West, 2008 Cumulative Pocket
Part): Title 49 (the environment), section 49-542 (``Emissions
inspection program; powers and duties of director; administration;
periodic inspection; minimum standards and rules; exceptions;
definition'').
(ii) Additional materials.
(A) Arizona Department of Environmental Quality.
(1) Final Arizona State Implementation Plan Revision, Exemption of
Motorcycles from Vehicle Emissions Inspections and Maintenance Program
Requirements in Area A (October 2009), adopted by the Arizona
Department of Environmental Quality on November 6, 2009, excluding
appendices A and C.
(156) The following plan was submitted on January 11, 2011 by the
Governor's designee.
(i) [Reserved]
(ii) Additional materials.
(A) Arizona Department of Environmental Quality.
(1) Final Addendum to the Arizona State Implementation Plan
Revision, Exemption of Motorcycles from Vehicle Emissions Inspections
and Maintenance Program Requirements in Area A, October 2009 (December
2010), adopted by the Arizona Department of Environmental Quality on
January 11, 2011.
(157) The following plan was submitted on May 25, 2012 by the
Governor's designee.
(i) Incorporation by reference.
(A) Arizona Department of Environmental Quality.
(1) Affidavit by Barbara Howe, Law Reference Librarian, Arizona
State Library, Archives and Public Records, certifying authenticity of
reproduction of Arizona Revised Statutes Sec. 49-451 (sic) (corrected
to Sec. 49-541) (2001 pocket part), signed May 3, 2012.
(2) Arizona Revised Statutes (West Group, 2001 Cumulative Pocket
Part): title 49 (the environment), section 49-541 (``Definitions''),
subsection 1 [Definition of Area A].
[FR Doc. 2013-12091 Filed 5-21-13; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P
