Revisions to the Arizona State Implementation Plan, Maricopa County Area, 52485-52487 [2013-20654]
Download as PDF
<![CDATA[
Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 164 / Friday, August 23, 2013 / Proposed Rules
significantly to nonattainment in, or
interfere with maintenance by, any
other state, and (D)(i)(II), with respect to
visibility requirements for the 2006
PM2.5 NAAQS as EPA is acting
separately on these elements.
mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
VII. 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 proposed
action merely approves some state law
as meeting federal requirements and
disapproves other state law because it
does not meet federal requirements; this
proposed action does not impose
additional requirements beyond those
imposed by state law. For that reason,
this proposed 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 (Public Law 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).
VerDate Mar<15>2010
17:24 Aug 22, 2013
Jkt 229001
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.
List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52
Environmental protection, Air
pollution control, Carbon monoxide,
Intergovernmental relations,
Greenhouse gases, Incorporation by
reference, Lead, Nitrogen dioxide,
Ozone, Particulate matter, Reporting
and recordkeeping requirements, Sulfur
oxides, Volatile organic compounds,
Incorporation by reference.
Dated: August 8, 2013.
Shaun L. McGrath,
Regional Administrator, Region 8.
[FR Doc. 2013–20662 Filed 8–22–13; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560–50–P
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION
AGENCY
40 CFR Part 52
[EPA–R09–OAR–2013–0576; FRL–9900–25–
Region 9]
Revisions to the Arizona State
Implementation Plan, Maricopa County
Area
Environmental Protection
Agency (EPA).
ACTION: Proposed rule.
AGENCY:
EPA is proposing to approve
revisions to the Maricopa County Area
portion of the Arizona State
Implementation Plan (SIP). These
revisions concern particulate matter
(PM) emissions from fugitive dust
sources. We are approving local statutes
that regulate these emission sources
under the Clean Air Act as amended in
1990 (CAA or the Act). We are taking
comments on this proposal and plan to
follow with a final action.
DATES: Any comments must arrive by
September 23, 2013.
ADDRESSES: Submit comments,
identified by docket number [EPA–R09–
OAR–2013–0576], by one of the
following methods:
1. Federal eRulemaking Portal:
www.regulations.gov. Follow the on-line
instructions.
2. Email: steckel.andrew@epa.gov.
3. Mail or deliver: Andrew Steckel
(Air-4), U.S. Environmental Protection
Agency Region IX, 75 Hawthorne Street,
San Francisco, CA 94105–3901.
SUMMARY:
PO 00000
Frm 00026
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
52485
Instructions: All comments 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
Confidential Business Information (CBI)
or other information whose disclosure is
restricted by statute. Information that
you consider CBI or otherwise protected
should be clearly identified as such and
should not be submitted through
www.regulations.gov or email.
www.regulations.gov is an ‘‘anonymous
access’’ system, and EPA will not know
your identity or contact information
unless you provide it in the body of
your comment. If you send email
directly to EPA, your email address will
be automatically captured and included
as part of the public comment. If EPA
cannot read your comment due to
technical difficulties and cannot contact
you for clarification, EPA may not be
able to consider your comment.
Electronic files should avoid the use of
special characters, any form of
encryption, and be free of any defects or
viruses.
Docket: 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), and some may not
be publicly available in either location
(e.g., CBI). To inspect the hard copy
materials, please schedule an
appointment during normal business
hours with the contact listed in the FOR
FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Nancy Levin, EPA Region IX, (415) 942–
3848, levin.nancy@epa.gov.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Throughout this document, ‘‘we,’’ ‘‘us’’
and ‘‘our’’ refer to EPA.
Table of Contents
I. The State’s Submittal
A. What rules did the State submit?
B. Are there other versions of these rules?
C. What is the purpose of the submitted
rules?
II. EPA’s Evaluation and Action.
A. How is EPA evaluating the rules?
B. Do the rules meet the evaluation
criteria?
C. EPA Recommendations to Further
Improve the Rules
D. Public Comment and Proposed Action
III. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews
E:\FR\FM\23AUP1.SGM
23AUP1
52486
Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 164 / Friday, August 23, 2013 / Proposed Rules
I. The State’s Submittal
A. What rules did the State submit?
Table 1 lists the statutes addressed by
this proposal with the dates that they
were signed into law by the Governor
and submitted by the Arizona
Department of Environmental Quality.
TABLE 1—SUBMITTED RULES
Arizona statute
Statute title
9–500.27 ..........
11–871 .............
28–1098 ...........
49–457.03 ........
49–457.04 ........
Off-road vehicle ordinance; applicability; violation; classification ........
Emissions control; no burn; exemptions; penalty ................................
Vehicle loads; restrictions; civil penalties ............................................
Off-road vehicles; pollution advisory days; applicability; penalties .....
Off-highway vehicle and all-terrain vehicle dealers; informational material; outreach; applicability.
Unlawful open burning; exceptions; fine; definition .............................
49–501 .............
On July 20, 2012, EPA determined
that the May 25, 2012 submittal of
Arizona Revised Statutes (ARS) 9–
500.27, 11–871, 28–1098, 49–457.03,
49–457.04 and 49–501 met the
completeness criteria in 40 CFR part 51
Appendix V, which must be met before
formal EPA review. On May 21, 2013
ADEQ identified several statute
subsections included in the May 25,
2012 submittal for which Arizona no
longer requested EPA SIP approval and
provided a revised submittal.
B. Are there other versions of these
rules?
There are no previous versions of
these statutes in the SIP, although the
Maricopa Association of Governments
submitted them with the 2007 Five
Percent Plan for PM–10, which was
subsequently withdrawn.
mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
C. What is the purpose of the submitted
rules?
PM contributes to effects that are
harmful to human health and the
environment, including premature
mortality, aggravation of respiratory and
cardiovascular disease, decreased lung
function, visibility impairment, and
damage to vegetation and ecosystems.
Section 110(a) of the CAA requires
States to submit regulations that control
PM emissions. These statutes regulate
PM emissions from off-highway
vehicles, all-terrain vehicles, off-road
recreational motor vehicles, residential
wood burning and vehicle loads. EPA’s
technical support documents (TSDs)
have more information about these
statutes. The State is not taking
emission reduction credits for these
statutes.
II. EPA’s Evaluation and Action
A. How is EPA evaluating the rules?
Generally, SIP rules must be
enforceable (see section 110(a) of the
VerDate Mar<15>2010
17:24 Aug 22, 2013
Jkt 229001
Signed
July
July
July
July
July
2,
2,
2,
2,
2,
B. Do the rules meet the evaluation
criteria?
We believe these statutes are
consistent with the relevant policy and
guidance regarding enforceability and
SIP relaxations. The TSDs have more
information on our evaluation.
Frm 00027
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
......
......
......
......
......
July 2, 2007 ......
Act) and must not relax existing
requirements (see sections 110(l) and
193).
Guidance and policy documents that
we use to evaluate these requirements
consistently include the following:
1. ‘‘Issues Relating to VOC Regulation
Cutpoints, Deficiencies, and Deviations;
Clarification to Appendix D of
November 24, 1987 Federal Register
Notice,’’ (Blue Book), notice of
availability published in the May 25,
1988 Federal Register.
2. ‘‘Guidance Document for Correcting
Common VOC & Other Rule
Deficiencies,’’ EPA Region 9, August 21,
2001 (the Little Bluebook).
3. ‘‘State Implementation Plans;
General Preamble for the
Implementation of Title I of the Clean
Air Act Amendments of 1990,’’ 57 FR
13498 (April 16, 1992); 57 FR 18070
(April 28, 1992).
4. ‘‘State Implementation Plans for
Serious PM–10 Nonattainment Areas,
and Attainment Date Waivers for PM–10
Nonattainment Areas Generally;
Addendum to the General Preamble for
the Implementation of Title I of the
Clean Air Act Amendments of 1990,’’ 59
FR 41998 (August 16, 1994).
5. ‘‘PM–10 Guideline Document,’’
EPA 452/R–93–008, April 1993.
6. ‘‘Fugitive Dust Background
Document and Technical Information
Document for Best Available Control
Measures,’’ EPA 450/2–92–004,
September 1992.
PO 00000
2007
2007
2007
2007
2007
Revised
submittal
Submitted
May
May
May
May
May
25,
25,
25,
25,
25,
2012
2012
2012
2012
2012
...
...
...
...
...
May 25, 2012 ...
May
May
May
May
May
21,
21,
21,
21,
21,
2013.
2013.
2013.
2013.
2013.
May 21, 2013.
C. EPA Recommendations to Further
Improve the Rules
The TSDs describes additional rule
revisions that we recommend for the
next time Arizona modifies the rules but
are not currently the basis for rule
disapproval.
D. Public Comment and Proposed
Action
Because EPA believes the submitted
statutes fulfill all relevant requirements,
we are proposing to fully approve them
as described in section 110(k)(3) of the
Act. We will accept comments from the
public on this proposal for the next 30
days. Unless we receive convincing new
information during the comment period,
we intend to publish a final approval
action that will incorporate these rules
into the federally enforceable SIP.
III. 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 proposed 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 proposed 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
E:\FR\FM\23AUP1.SGM
23AUP1
Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 164 / Friday, August 23, 2013 / Proposed Rules
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
disproportionate human health or
environmental effects with practical,
appropriate, and legally permissible
methods under Executive Order 12898
(59 FR 7629, February 16, 1994).
In addition, this proposed action 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.
List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52
Environmental protection, Air
pollution control, Intergovernmental
relations, Particulate matter, Reporting
and recordkeeping requirements.
Authority: 42 U.S.C. 7401 et seq.
Dated: August 8, 2013.
Jared Blumenfeld,
Regional Administrator, Region IX.
[FR Doc. 2013–20654 Filed 8–22–13; 8:45 am]
mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
BILLING CODE 6560–50–P
VerDate Mar<15>2010
17:24 Aug 22, 2013
Jkt 229001
DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
National Oceanic and Atmospheric
Administration
50 CFR Part 635
[Docket No. 130402317–3707–01]
RIN 0648–XC611
Atlantic Highly Migratory Species;
2014 Atlantic Shark Commercial
Fishing Season
National Marine Fisheries
Service (NMFS), National Oceanic and
Atmospheric Administration (NOAA),
Commerce.
ACTION: Proposed rule; request for
comments.
AGENCY:
This proposed rule would
establish opening dates and adjust
quotas for the 2014 fishing season for
the Atlantic commercial shark fisheries.
Quotas would be adjusted as allowable
based on any over- and/or
underharvests experienced during 2013
and previous fishing seasons. In
addition, NMFS proposes season
openings based on adaptive
management measures to provide, to the
extent practicable, fishing opportunities
for commercial shark fishermen in all
regions and areas. The proposed
measures could affect fishing
opportunities for commercial shark
fishermen in the northwestern Atlantic
Ocean, including the Gulf of Mexico
and Caribbean Sea.
DATES: Written comments will be
accepted until September 23, 2013.
ADDRESSES: You may submit comments
on this document, identified by NOAA–
NMFS–2013–0112, by any of the
following methods:
• Electronic Submission: Submit all
electronic public comments via the
Federal e-Rulemaking Portal. Go to
www.regulations.gov/#!docketDetail;D=
NOAA-NMFS-2013-0112, click the
‘‘Comment Now!’’ icon, complete the
required fields, and enter or attach your
comments.
• Mail: Submit written comments to
1315 East-West Highway, Silver Spring,
MD 20910. Please mark the outside of
the envelope ‘‘Comments on the
Proposed Rule to Establish Quotas and
Opening Dates for the 2014 Atlantic
Shark Commercial Fishing Season.’’
• Fax: 301–427–8503, Attn: Karyl
´
Brewster-Geisz or Guy DuBeck.
Instructions: Comments sent by any
other method, to any other address or
individual, or received after the end of
the comment period, may not be
considered by NMFS. All comments
received are a part of the public record
SUMMARY:
PO 00000
Frm 00028
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
52487
and will generally be posted for public
viewing on www.regulations.gov
without change. All personal identifying
information (e.g., name, address, etc.),
confidential business information, or
otherwise sensitive information
submitted voluntarily by the sender will
be publicly accessible. NMFS will
accept anonymous comments (enter
‘‘N/A’’ in the required fields if you wish
to remain anonymous). Attachments to
electronic comments will be accepted in
Microsoft Word, Excel, or Adobe PDF
file formats only.
´
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Guy
DuBeck or Karyl Brewster-Geisz at 301–
427–8503.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Background
The Atlantic commercial shark
fisheries are managed under the
authority of the Magnuson-Stevens
Fishery Conservation and Management
Act (Magnuson-Stevens Act). The 2006
Consolidated Highly Migratory Species
(HMS) Fishery Management Plan (FMP)
and its amendments are implemented
by regulations at 50 CFR part 635. For
the Atlantic commercial shark fisheries,
the 2006 Consolidated HMS FMP and
its amendments established, among
other things, commercial quotas for
species and management groups,
accounting measures for under- and
overharvests for the shark fisheries, and
adaptive management measures such as
flexible opening dates for the fishing
season and inseason adjustments to
shark trip limits, which provide
management flexibility in furtherance of
equitable fishing opportunities, to the
extent practicable, for commercial shark
fishermen in all regions and areas.
Accounting for Under- and
Overharvests
This proposed rule would adjust the
quota levels for the different shark
stocks and management groups for the
2014 Atlantic commercial shark fishing
season based on over- and
underharvests that occurred during
2013 and previous fishing seasons,
consistent with existing regulations at
50 CFR 635.27(b)(2). Over- and
underharvests are accounted for in the
same region and/or fishery in which
they occurred the following year or, for
overharvests, spread over a number of
subsequent fishing years to a maximum
of 5 years. Shark stocks or management
groups that contain one or more stocks
that are overfished, have overfishing
occurring, or that have an unknown
status, will not have underharvest
carried over in the following year.
Stocks that are not overfished and have
E:\FR\FM\23AUP1.SGM
23AUP1
]]>Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 78, Number 164 (Friday, August 23, 2013)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 52485-52487]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2013-20654]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
40 CFR Part 52
[EPA-R09-OAR-2013-0576; FRL-9900-25-Region 9]
Revisions to the Arizona State Implementation Plan, Maricopa
County Area
AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).
ACTION: Proposed rule.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: EPA is proposing to approve revisions to the Maricopa County
Area portion of the Arizona State Implementation Plan (SIP). These
revisions concern particulate matter (PM) emissions from fugitive dust
sources. We are approving local statutes that regulate these emission
sources under the Clean Air Act as amended in 1990 (CAA or the Act). We
are taking comments on this proposal and plan to follow with a final
action.
DATES: Any comments must arrive by September 23, 2013.
ADDRESSES: Submit comments, identified by docket number [EPA-R09-OAR-
2013-0576], by one of the following methods:
1. Federal eRulemaking Portal: www.regulations.gov. Follow the on-
line instructions.
2. Email: steckel.andrew@epa.gov.
3. Mail or deliver: Andrew Steckel (Air-4), U.S. Environmental
Protection Agency Region IX, 75 Hawthorne Street, San Francisco, CA
94105-3901.
Instructions: All comments will be included in the public docket
without change and may be made available online at www.regulations.gov,
including any personal information provided, unless the comment
includes Confidential Business Information (CBI) or other information
whose disclosure is restricted by statute. Information that you
consider CBI or otherwise protected should be clearly identified as
such and should not be submitted through www.regulations.gov or email.
www.regulations.gov is an ``anonymous access'' system, and EPA will not
know your identity or contact information unless you provide it in the
body of your comment. If you send email directly to EPA, your email
address will be automatically captured and included as part of the
public comment. If EPA cannot read your comment due to technical
difficulties and cannot contact you for clarification, EPA may not be
able to consider your comment. Electronic files should avoid the use of
special characters, any form of encryption, and be free of any defects
or viruses.
Docket: 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), and some may not be publicly
available in either location (e.g., CBI). To inspect the hard copy
materials, please schedule an appointment during normal business hours
with the contact listed in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Nancy Levin, EPA Region IX, (415) 942-
3848, levin.nancy@epa.gov.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Throughout this document, ``we,'' ``us'' and
``our'' refer to EPA.
Table of Contents
I. The State's Submittal
A. What rules did the State submit?
B. Are there other versions of these rules?
C. What is the purpose of the submitted rules?
II. EPA's Evaluation and Action.
A. How is EPA evaluating the rules?
B. Do the rules meet the evaluation criteria?
C. EPA Recommendations to Further Improve the Rules
D. Public Comment and Proposed Action
III. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews
[[Page 52486]]
I. The State's Submittal
A. What rules did the State submit?
Table 1 lists the statutes addressed by this proposal with the
dates that they were signed into law by the Governor and submitted by
the Arizona Department of Environmental Quality.
Table 1--Submitted Rules
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Arizona statute Statute title Signed Submitted Revised submittal
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
9-500.27.............. Off-road vehicle July 2, 2007.......... May 25, 2012.......... May 21, 2013.
ordinance;
applicability;
violation;
classification.
11-871................ Emissions July 2, 2007.......... May 25, 2012.......... May 21, 2013.
control; no
burn;
exemptions;
penalty.
28-1098............... Vehicle loads; July 2, 2007.......... May 25, 2012.......... May 21, 2013.
restrictions;
civil penalties.
49-457.03............. Off-road July 2, 2007.......... May 25, 2012.......... May 21, 2013.
vehicles;
pollution
advisory days;
applicability;
penalties.
49-457.04............. Off-highway July 2, 2007.......... May 25, 2012.......... May 21, 2013.
vehicle and all-
terrain vehicle
dealers;
informational
material;
outreach;
applicability.
49-501................ Unlawful open July 2, 2007.......... May 25, 2012.......... May 21, 2013.
burning;
exceptions;
fine; definition.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
On July 20, 2012, EPA determined that the May 25, 2012 submittal of
Arizona Revised Statutes (ARS) 9-500.27, 11-871, 28-1098, 49-457.03,
49-457.04 and 49-501 met the completeness criteria in 40 CFR part 51
Appendix V, which must be met before formal EPA review. On May 21, 2013
ADEQ identified several statute subsections included in the May 25,
2012 submittal for which Arizona no longer requested EPA SIP approval
and provided a revised submittal.
B. Are there other versions of these rules?
There are no previous versions of these statutes in the SIP,
although the Maricopa Association of Governments submitted them with
the 2007 Five Percent Plan for PM-10, which was subsequently withdrawn.
C. What is the purpose of the submitted rules?
PM contributes to effects that are harmful to human health and the
environment, including premature mortality, aggravation of respiratory
and cardiovascular disease, decreased lung function, visibility
impairment, and damage to vegetation and ecosystems. Section 110(a) of
the CAA requires States to submit regulations that control PM
emissions. These statutes regulate PM emissions from off-highway
vehicles, all-terrain vehicles, off-road recreational motor vehicles,
residential wood burning and vehicle loads. EPA's technical support
documents (TSDs) have more information about these statutes. The State
is not taking emission reduction credits for these statutes.
II. EPA's Evaluation and Action
A. How is EPA evaluating the rules?
Generally, SIP rules must be enforceable (see section 110(a) of the
Act) and must not relax existing requirements (see sections 110(l) and
193).
Guidance and policy documents that we use to evaluate these
requirements consistently include the following:
1. ``Issues Relating to VOC Regulation Cutpoints, Deficiencies, and
Deviations; Clarification to Appendix D of November 24, 1987 Federal
Register Notice,'' (Blue Book), notice of availability published in the
May 25, 1988 Federal Register.
2. ``Guidance Document for Correcting Common VOC & Other Rule
Deficiencies,'' EPA Region 9, August 21, 2001 (the Little Bluebook).
3. ``State Implementation Plans; General Preamble for the
Implementation of Title I of the Clean Air Act Amendments of 1990,'' 57
FR 13498 (April 16, 1992); 57 FR 18070 (April 28, 1992).
4. ``State Implementation Plans for Serious PM-10 Nonattainment
Areas, and Attainment Date Waivers for PM-10 Nonattainment Areas
Generally; Addendum to the General Preamble for the Implementation of
Title I of the Clean Air Act Amendments of 1990,'' 59 FR 41998 (August
16, 1994).
5. ``PM-10 Guideline Document,'' EPA 452/R-93-008, April 1993.
6. ``Fugitive Dust Background Document and Technical Information
Document for Best Available Control Measures,'' EPA 450/2-92-004,
September 1992.
B. Do the rules meet the evaluation criteria?
We believe these statutes are consistent with the relevant policy
and guidance regarding enforceability and SIP relaxations. The TSDs
have more information on our evaluation.
C. EPA Recommendations to Further Improve the Rules
The TSDs describes additional rule revisions that we recommend for
the next time Arizona modifies the rules but are not currently the
basis for rule disapproval.
D. Public Comment and Proposed Action
Because EPA believes the submitted statutes fulfill all relevant
requirements, we are proposing to fully approve them as described in
section 110(k)(3) of the Act. We will accept comments from the public
on this proposal for the next 30 days. Unless we receive convincing new
information during the comment period, we intend to publish a final
approval action that will incorporate these rules into the federally
enforceable SIP.
III. 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 proposed 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
proposed 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
[[Page 52487]]
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 disproportionate human health or environmental effects with
practical, appropriate, and legally permissible methods under Executive
Order 12898 (59 FR 7629, February 16, 1994).
In addition, this proposed action 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.
List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52
Environmental protection, Air pollution control, Intergovernmental
relations, Particulate matter, Reporting and recordkeeping
requirements.
Authority: 42 U.S.C. 7401 et seq.
Dated: August 8, 2013.
Jared Blumenfeld,
Regional Administrator, Region IX.
[FR Doc. 2013-20654 Filed 8-22-13; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P
