Partial Approval and Partial Disapproval of Air Quality State Implementation Plans; Arizona; Infrastructure Requirements for Lead and Ozone, 40905-40909 [2015-17057]
Download as PDF
Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 134 / Tuesday, July 14, 2015 / Rules and Regulations
Fairness Act of 1996 (Pub. L. 104–121),
in the NPRM we offered to assist small
entities in understanding the rule so
that they could better evaluate its effects
on them and participate in the
rulemaking process.
Small businesses may send comments
on the actions of Federal employees
who enforce, or otherwise determine
compliance with, Federal regulations to
the Small Business and Agriculture
Regulatory Enforcement Ombudsman
and the Regional Small Business
Regulatory Fairness Boards. The
Ombudsman evaluates these actions
annually and rates each agency’s
responsiveness to small business. If you
wish to comment on actions by
employees of the Coast Guard, call 1–
888–REG–FAIR (1–888–734–3247). The
Coast Guard will not retaliate against
small entities that question or complain
about this rule or any policy or action
of the Coast Guard.
4. Collection of Information
This rule calls for no new collection
of information under the Paperwork
Reduction Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. 3501–
3520.).
5. Federalism
A rule has implications for federalism
under Executive Order 13132,
Federalism, if it has a substantial direct
effect on State or local governments and
would either preempt State law or
impose a substantial direct cost of
compliance on them. We have analyzed
this rule under that Order and have
determined that it does not have
implications for federalism.
6. Protest Activities
The Coast Guard respects the First
Amendment rights of protesters.
Protesters are asked to contact the
person listed in the FOR FURTHER
INFORMATION CONTACT section to
coordinate protest activities so that your
message can be received without
jeopardizing the safety or security of
people, places or vessels.
asabaliauskas on DSK5VPTVN1PROD with RULES
7. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act
The Unfunded Mandates Reform Act
of 1995 (2 U.S.C. 1531–1538) requires
Federal agencies to assess the effects of
their discretionary regulatory actions. In
particular, the Act addresses actions
that may result in the expenditure by a
State, local, or tribal government, in the
aggregate, or by the private sector of
$100,000,000.00 (adjusted for inflation)
or more in any one year. Though this
rule would not result in such
expenditure, we do discuss the effects of
this rule elsewhere in this preamble.
VerDate Sep<11>2014
22:02 Jul 13, 2015
Jkt 235001
8. Taking of Private Property
This rule will not cause a taking of
private property or otherwise have
taking implications under Executive
Order 12630, Governmental Actions and
Interference with Constitutionally
Protected Property Rights.
9. Civil Justice Reform
This rule meets applicable standards
in sections 3(a) and 3(b)(2) of Executive
Order 12988, Civil Justice Reform, to
minimize litigation, eliminate
ambiguity, and reduce burden.
10. Protection of Children
The Coast Guard has analyzed this
rule under Executive Order 13045,
Protection of Children from
Environmental Health Risks and Safety
Risks. This rule is not an economically
significant rule and would not create an
environmental risk to health or risk to
safety that might disproportionately
affect children.
11. Indian Tribal Governments
This rule does not have tribal
implications under Executive Order
13175, Consultation and Coordination
with Indian Tribal Governments,
because it would not have a substantial
direct effect on one or more Indian
tribes, on the relationship between the
Federal Government and Indian tribes,
or on the distribution of power and
responsibilities between the Federal
Government and Indian tribes.
12. Energy Effects
The Coast Guard analyzed this rule
under Executive Order 13211, Actions
Concerning Regulations That
Significantly Affect Energy Supply,
Distribution, or Use.
13. Technical Standards
This rule does not use technical
standards. Therefore, we did not
consider the use of voluntary consensus
standards.
14. Environment
We have analyzed this rule under
Department of Homeland Security
Management Directive 023–01 and
Commandant Instruction M16475.lD,
which guide the Coast Guard in
complying with the National
Environmental Policy Act of 1969
(NEPA) (42 U.S.C. 4321–4370f), and
have made a preliminary determination
that this action is one of a category of
actions that do not individually or
cumulatively have a significant effect on
the human environment. An
environmental analysis checklist
supporting this determination is
available in the docket where indicated
PO 00000
Frm 00011
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
40905
under ADDRESSES. We seek any
comments or information that may lead
to the discovery of a significant
environmental impact from this rule.
This rule is categorically excluded from
further review under paragraph 34(g) of
Figure 2–1 of the Commandant’s
Instruction.
List of Subjects in 33 CFR Part 147
Continental shelf, Marine safety,
Navigation (water).
For the reasons discussed in the
preamble, the Coast Guard amends 33
CFR part 147 as follows:
PART 147—SAFETY ZONES
1. The authority citation for part 147
continues to read as follows:
■
Authority: 14 U.S.C. 85; 43 U.S.C. 1333;
Department of Homeland Security Delegation
No. 0170.1.
2. Add § 147.T17–0247 to read as
follows:
■
§ 147.T17–0247 Safety Zone; DRILL UNIT
POLAR PIONEER, Outer Continental Shelf
Drillship, Chukchi Sea, Alaska.
(a) Description. The DRILL UNIT
POLAR PIONEER will be engaged in
exploratory drilling operations at
various locations in the Chukchi Sea
from July 1, 2015 through October 31,
2015. The area that extends 500 meters
from the outer edge of the DRILL UNIT
POLAR PIONEER is a safety zone.
Lawful demonstrations may be
conducted outside of the safety zone.
(b) Regulation. No vessel may enter or
remain in this safety zone except the
following:
(1) An attending vessel; or
(2) A vessel authorized by the
Commander, Seventeenth Coast Guard
District, or a designated representative.
Dated: June 17, 2015.
Daniel B. Abel,
Rear Admiral, U.S. Coast Guard, Commander,
Seventeenth Coast Guard District.
[FR Doc. 2015–17129 Filed 7–13–15; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 9110–04–P
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION
AGENCY
40 CFR Part 52
[EPA–R09–OAR–2015–0297; FRL–9930–28–
Region 9
Partial Approval and Partial
Disapproval of Air Quality State
Implementation Plans; Arizona;
Infrastructure Requirements for Lead
and Ozone
Environmental Protection
Agency (EPA).
AGENCY:
E:\FR\FM\14JYR1.SGM
14JYR1
40906
ACTION:
Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 134 / Tuesday, July 14, 2015 / Rules and Regulations
Final rule.
The Environmental Protection
Agency (EPA) is partially approving and
partially disapproving State
Implementation Plan (SIP) revisions
submitted by the State of Arizona to
address the requirements of section
110(a)(1) and (2) of the Clean Air Act
(CAA) for the 2008 Lead (Pb) and 2008
ozone national ambient air quality
standards (NAAQS). Section 110(a) of
the CAA requires that each State adopt
and submit a SIP for the
implementation, maintenance, and
enforcement of each NAAQS
promulgated by EPA. We refer to such
SIP revisions as ‘‘infrastructure’’ SIPs
because they are intended to address
basic structural SIP requirements for
new or revised NAAQS including, but
not limited to, legal authority,
regulatory structure, resources, permit
programs, monitoring, and modeling
necessary to assure attainment and
maintenance of the standards.
DATES: This final rule is effective on
August 13, 2015.
ADDRESSES: EPA has established a
docket for this action, identified by
Docket ID Number EPA–R09–OAR–
2015–0297. The index to the docket for
this action is available electronically at
https://www.regulations.gov and in hard
copy at EPA Region IX, 75 Hawthorne,
San Francisco, California. While all
documents in the docket are listed in
the index, some information may be
publically available only at the hard
copy location (e.g., copyrighted
material) and some may not be
publically available in either location
(e.g., confidential business information
(CBI)). To inspect the hard copy
materials, please schedule an
appointment during normal business
hours with the contact listed directly
below.
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.
SUMMARY:
asabaliauskas on DSK5VPTVN1PROD with RULES
Table of Contents
I. Background
II. Proposed Action
III. Public Comments and EPA Responses
IV. Final Action
V. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews
I. Background
CAA section 110(a)(1) requires each
state to submit to EPA, within three
years after the promulgation of a
primary or secondary NAAQS or any
VerDate Sep<11>2014
22:02 Jul 13, 2015
Jkt 235001
revision thereof, an infrastructure SIP
revision that provides for the
implementation, maintenance, and
enforcement of such NAAQS. Section
110(a)(2) sets the content requirements
of such a plan, which generally relate to
the information and authorities,
compliance assurances, procedural
requirements, and control measures that
constitute the ‘‘infrastructure’’ of a
state’s air quality management program.
These infrastructure SIP elements
required by section 110(a)(2) are as
follows:
• Section 110(a)(2)(A): Emission
limits and other control measures.
• Section 110(a)(2)(B): Ambient air
quality monitoring/data system.
• Section 110(a)(2)(C): Program for
enforcement of control measures and
regulation of new and modified
stationary sources.
• Section 110(a)(2)(D)(i): Interstate
pollution transport.
• Section 110(a)(2)(D)(ii): Interstate
and international pollution abatement.
• Section 110(a)(2)(E): Adequate
resources and authority, conflict of
interest, and oversight of local and
regional government agencies.
• Section 110(a)(2)(F): Stationary
source monitoring and reporting.
• Section 110(a)(2)(G): Emergency
episodes.
• Section 110(a)(2)(H): SIP revisions.
• Section 110(a)(2)(J): Consultation
with government officials, public
notification, prevention of significant
deterioration (PSD), and visibility
protection.
• Section 110(a)(2)(K): Air quality
modeling and submittal of modeling
data.
• Section 110(a)(2)(L): Permitting
fees.
• Section 110(a)(2)(M): Consultation/
participation by affected local entities.
Two elements identified in section
110(a)(2) are not governed by the threeyear submittal deadline of section
110(a)(1) and are therefore not
addressed in this action. These two
elements are: (i) Section 110(a)(2)(C) to
the extent it refers to permit programs
required under part D (nonattainment
new source review (NSR)), and (ii)
section 110(a)(2)(I), pertaining to the
nonattainment planning requirements of
part D. As a result, this action does not
address infrastructure for the
nonattainment NSR portion of section
110(a)(2)(C) or the whole of section
110(a)(2)(I).
On November 12, 2008, the EPA
issued a revised NAAQS for Pb.1 This
1 73 FR 66964 (November 12, 2008). The 1978 Pb
standard (1.5 mg/m3 as a quarterly average) was
modified to a rolling 3 month average not to be
PO 00000
Frm 00012
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
action triggered a requirement for states
to submit an infrastructure SIP to
address the applicable requirements of
section 110(a)(2) within three years of
issuance of the revised NAAQS. On
October 14, 2011, EPA issued
‘‘Guidance on Section 110 Infrastructure
SIPs for the 2008 Pb NAAQS’’, referred
to herein as EPA’s 2011 Pb Guidance.2
Depending on the timing of a given
submittal, some states relied on the
earlier draft version of this guidance,
referred to herein as EPA’s 2011 Draft
Pb Guidance.3 EPA issued additional
guidance on infrastructure SIPs on
September 13, 2013.4
On March 27, 2008, EPA issued a
revised NAAQS for 8-hour Ozone.5 This
action triggered a requirement for states
to submit an infrastructure SIP to
address the applicable requirements of
section 110(a)(2) within three years of
issuance of the revised NAAQS. EPA
did not, however, prepare guidance at
this time for states in submitting I–SIP
revisions for the 2008 Ozone NAAQS.6
On September 13, 2013, EPA issued
‘‘Guidance of Infrastructure State
Implementation Plan (SIP) Elements
under Clean Air Act Sections 110(a)(1)
and 110(a)(2),’’ which provides advice
on the development of infrastructure
SIPs for the 2008 ozone NAAQS (among
other pollutants) as well as
infrastructure SIPs for new or revised
NAAQS promulgated in the future.7
The Arizona Department of
Environmental Quality (ADEQ) has
submitted infrastructure SIP revisions
pursuant to EPA’s promulgation of the
NAAQS addressed by this rule,
including the following:
exceeded of 0.15 mg/m3. EPA also revised the
secondary NAAQS to 0.15 mg/m3 and made it
identical to the revised primary standard. Id.
2 See Memorandum from Stephen D. Page,
Director, Office of Air Quality Planning and
Standards, to Regional Air Division Directors,
Regions 1–10 (October 14, 2011).
3 ‘‘DRAFT Guidance on SIP Elements Required
Under Sections 110(a)(1) and (2) for the 2008 Lead
(Pb) National Ambient Air Quality Standards
(NAAQS),’’ June 17, 2011 version.
4 See Memorandum dated September 13, 2013
from Stephen D. Page, Director, EPA Office of Air
Quality Planning and Standards, to Regional Air
Directors, EPA Regions 1–10, ‘‘Guidance on
Infrastructure State Implementation Plan (SIP)
Elements under Clean Air Act Sections 110(a)(1)
and 110(a)(2)’’ (referred to herein as ‘‘2013
Infrastructure SIP Guidance’’).
5 73 FR 16436 (March 27, 2008).
6 Preparation of guidance for the 2008 Ozone
NAAQS was postponed given EPA’s
reconsideration of the standard. See 78 FR 34183
(June 6, 2013).
7 See Memorandum dated September 13, 2013
from Stephen D. Page, Director, EPA Office of Air
Quality Planning and Standards, to Regional Air
Directors, EPA Regions 1–10, ‘‘Guidance on
Infrastructure State Implementation Plan (SIP)
Elements under Clean Air Act Sections 110(a)(1)
and 110(a)(2)’’ (referred to herein as ‘‘2013
Infrastructure SIP Guidance’’).
E:\FR\FM\14JYR1.SGM
14JYR1
Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 134 / Tuesday, July 14, 2015 / Rules and Regulations
• October 14, 2011—‘‘Arizona State
Implementation Plan Revision under
Clean Air Act Section 110(a)(1) and (2);
2008 Lead NAAQS,’’ to address all of
the CAA section 110(a)(2) requirements,
except for section 110(a)(2)(G),8 for the
2008 Pb NAAQS (2011 Pb I–SIP
Submittal).
• December 27, 2012—‘‘Arizona State
Implementation Plan Revision under
Clean Air Act Section 110(a)(1) and (2);
2008 8-hour Ozone NAAQS,’’ to address
all of the CAA section 110(a)(2)
requirements for the 2008 8-hour Ozone
NAAQS (2012 Ozone I–SIP Submittal).
On February 19, 2015 EPA approved
elements of the above submittals with
respect to the 2008 Pb and 2008 8-hour
ozone NAAQS infrastructure
requirements in CAA sections
110(a)(2)(A), (B), (E), (F), (G), (H), (L)
and (M).9 That action also explained
that we would separately act on the
permitting infrastructure SIP elements
in CAA sections 110(a)(2)(C), (D), (J),
and (K) in a subsequent rulemaking.
These permit related elements are the
subject of today’s final rule.
In addition to the above 2011 and
2012 infrastructure SIP submittals,
ADEQ submitted ‘‘New Source Review
State Implementation Plan Submission’’
on October 29, 2012, and
‘‘Supplemental Information to 2012
New Source Review State
Implementation Plan Submission’’ on
July 2, 2014 (NSR Submittals). In
addition to addressing revisions to
Arizona’s NSR program, these
submissions also relate to our analysis
of infrastructure SIP elements in CAA
sections 110(a)(2)(C), (D), (J), and (K).
asabaliauskas on DSK5VPTVN1PROD with RULES
II. Proposed Action
On May 12, 2015 (80 FR 27127), EPA
proposed to partially approve and
partially disapprove Arizona’s 2011 Pb
I–SIP Submittal and 2012 Ozone I–SIP
Submittal with respect to the permitting
infrastructure SIP elements in CAA
sections 110(a)(2)(C), (D), (J), and (K).
Our proposed action and associated
technical support document (TSD)
8 In a separate rulemaking, EPA fully approved
Arizona’s SIP to address the requirements regarding
air pollution emergency episodes in CAA section
110(a)(2)(G) for the 1997 8-hour ozone NAAQS. 77
FR 62452 (October 15, 2012). Although ADEQ did
not submit an analysis of Section 110(a)(2)(G)
requirements, we discuss them in our technical
support document (TSD), which is in the docket for
this rulemaking.
9 ‘‘Approval and Promulgation of State
Implementation Plans; Arizona; Infrastructure
requirements for the 2008 Lead (Pb) and the 2008
8-Hour Ozone National Ambient Air Quality
Standards (NAAQS)’’ was signed on February 19,
2015 but, as of June 29, 2015, has not yet published
in the Federal Register. This action was proposed
in the Federal Register on November 24, 2014 (79
FR 69796).
VerDate Sep<11>2014
22:02 Jul 13, 2015
Jkt 235001
provide detailed discussion of Arizona’s
demonstration for each element.
Generally, we proposed a partial
approval because the submittals show
that Arizona largely fulfills the relevant
infrastructure requirements. But we
proposed a simultaneous partial
disapproval because of these
deficiencies:
• With respect to § 110(a)(2)(C), EPA
proposed to: (1) Disapprove the 2011 Pb
and 2012 Ozone Infrastructure SIPs for
ADEQ and Pinal County because the
SIP-approved PSD programs lack certain
‘‘structural’’ PSD program elements as
identified in our TSD; and (2)
disapprove both Infrastructure SIPs for
Maricopa and Pima counties, which do
not have SIP approved PSD programs.
• With respect to the third prong of
§ 110(a)(D)(i), EPA proposed to
disapprove both Infrastructure SIPs
regarding ‘‘structural’’ PSD
requirements under § 110(a)(2)(C).
• With respect to § 110(a)(2)(D)(ii),
EPA proposed to disapprove both
Infrastructure SIPs with respect to
Maricopa County and Pima County,
which do not have SIP approved PSD
programs.
• With respect to § 110(a)(2)(J), we
proposed to disapprove both Arizona
Infrastructure SIPs for failure to fully
satisfy the requirements of part C
relating to PSD.
• With respect to § 110(a)(2)(K), we
proposed to disapprove both
Infrastructure SIPs because ADEQ,
Pinal, Pima, and Maricopa counties
have not submitted adequate provisions
or a narrative that explain how existing
state and county law satisfy the
requirements of 110(a)(2)(K).
III. Public Comments and EPA
Responses
The public comment period on EPA’s
proposed rule opened on May 12, 2015,
the date of its publication in the Federal
Register at 80 FR 27127, and closed on
June 11, 2015. During this period, EPA
did not receive any comments.
Therefore, EPA is finalizing our action
as proposed.
IV. Final Action
Under CAA section 110(k)(3) and
based on the evaluation and rationale
presented in the proposed rule, the TSD
and this final rule, EPA is partially
approving the 2011 Pb I–SIP Submittal
and the 2012 Ozone I–SIP Submittal
with respect to the following
infrastructure SIP requirements:
• Section 110(a)(2)(C) (in part):
Program of enforcement of control
measures and regulation of new and
modified stationary sources.
PO 00000
Frm 00013
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
40907
• Section 110(a)(2)(D)(i) (in part):
Interstate pollution transport.
• Section 110(a)(2)(D)(ii) (in part):
Interstate pollution abatement and
international air pollution.
• Section 110(a)(2)(J) (in part):
Consultation with government officials,
public notification, PSD, and visibility
protection.
• Section 110(a)(2)(K): Air quality
modeling and submission of modeling
data.
EPA is simultaneously partially
disapproving the submittals because of
deficiencies described in our proposed
rule and TSD and summarized in the
proposed rule section above. For all I–
SIP elements that do not meet the CAA
§ 110(a)(2) requirements there are
existing FIPs in place, with the
exception of the modeling requirements
under CAA § 110(a)(2)(K) for Pinal
County and ADEQ. To the extent our
proposed approval or proposed
disapproval of an I–SIP element relied
on our March 18, 2015 proposed action
on ADEQ’s NSR SIP submittal, our final
action on the I–SIP elements identified
in this notice relies on our final action
on ADEQ’s NSR SIP submittal, signed
contemporaneously primarily in the
form of a limited approval/limited
disapproval.10 Furthermore, the partial
disapprovals in this action do not result
in sanctions under section 179 of the
Act because infrastructure SIPs are not
required under Title I, Part D of the Act.
V. Statutory and Executive Order
Reviews
A. Executive Order 12866, Regulatory
Planning and Review
The Office of Management and Budget
(OMB) has exempted this regulatory
action from Executive Order 12866,
entitled ‘‘Regulatory Planning and
Review.’’
B. Paperwork Reduction Act
This action does not impose an
information collection burden under the
provisions of the Paperwork Reduction
Act, 44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq. Burden is
defined at 5 CFR 1320.3(b).
C. Regulatory Flexibility Act
The Regulatory Flexibility Act (RFA)
generally requires an agency to conduct
a regulatory flexibility analysis of any
rule subject to notice and comment
rulemaking requirements unless the
10 EPA’s action on ADEQ’s NSR SIP submittal was
largely finalized as proposed, with the exception of
certain changes in response to public comments.
These changes resulted in our finding fewer bases
for disapproval as compared with our proposed
action on ADEQ’s NSR SIP submittal and do not
affect today’s final action on Arizona’s I–SIP
submittals.
E:\FR\FM\14JYR1.SGM
14JYR1
40908
Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 134 / Tuesday, July 14, 2015 / Rules and Regulations
agency certifies that the rule will not
have a significant economic impact on
a substantial number of small entities.
Small entities include small businesses,
small not-for-profit enterprises, and
small governmental jurisdictions.
This rule will not have a significant
impact on a substantial number of small
entities because SIP partial approvals/
partial disapprovals under section 110
and subchapter I, part D of the Clean Air
Act do not create any new requirements
but simply approve requirements that
the State is already imposing. Therefore,
because EPA’s approval does not create
any new requirements, I certify that this
action will not have a significant
economic impact on a substantial
number of small entities.
Moreover, due to the nature of the
Federal-State relationship under the
Clean Air Act, preparation of flexibility
analysis would constitute Federal
inquiry into the economic
reasonableness of State action. The
Clean Air Act forbids EPA to base its
actions concerning SIPs on such
grounds. Union Electric Co., v. U.S.
EPA, 427 U.S. 246, 255–66 (1976); 42
U.S.C. 7410(a)(2).
asabaliauskas on DSK5VPTVN1PROD with RULES
D. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act
Under sections 202 of the Unfunded
Mandates Reform Act of 1995
(‘‘Unfunded Mandates Act’’), signed
into law on March 22, 1995, EPA must
prepare a budgetary impact statement to
accompany any proposed or final rule
that includes a Federal mandate that
may result in estimated costs to State,
local, or tribal governments in the
aggregate; or to the private sector, of
$100 million or more. Under section
205, EPA must select the most costeffective and least burdensome
alternative that achieves the objectives
of the rule and is consistent with
statutory requirements. Section 203
requires EPA to establish a plan for
informing and advising any small
governments that may be significantly
or uniquely impacted by the rule.
EPA has determined that the partial
approval/partial disapproval action
promulgated does not include a Federal
mandate that may result in estimated
costs of $100 million or more to either
State, local, or tribal governments in the
aggregate, or to the private sector. This
Federal action approves pre-existing
requirements under State or local law,
and imposes no new requirements.
Accordingly, no additional costs to
State, local, or tribal governments, or to
the private sector, result from this
action.
VerDate Sep<11>2014
22:02 Jul 13, 2015
Jkt 235001
E. Executive Order 13132, Federalism
Federalism (64 FR 43255, August 10,
1999) revokes and replaces Executive
Orders 12612 (Federalism) and 12875
(Enhancing the Intergovernmental
Partnership). Executive Order 13132
requires EPA to develop an accountable
process to ensure ‘‘meaningful and
timely input by State and local officials
in the development of regulatory
policies that have federalism
implications.’’ ‘‘Policies that have
federalism implications’’ is defined in
the Executive Order to include
regulations that have ‘‘substantial direct
effects on the States, on the relationship
between the national government and
the States, or on the distribution of
power and responsibilities among the
various levels of government.’’ Under
Executive Order 13132, EPA may not
issue a regulation that has federalism
implications, that imposes substantial
direct compliance costs, and that is not
required by statute, unless the Federal
government provides the funds
necessary to pay the direct compliance
costs incurred by State and local
governments, or EPA consults with
State and local officials early in the
process of developing the proposed
regulation. EPA also may not issue a
regulation that has federalism
implications and that preempts State
law unless the Agency consults with
State and local officials early in the
process of developing the proposed
regulation.
This rule will not have substantial
direct effects on the States, on the
relationship between the national
government and the States, or on the
distribution of power and
responsibilities among the various
levels of government, as specified in
Executive Order 13132, because it
merely approves a State rule
implementing a Federal standard, and
does not alter the relationship or the
distribution of power and
responsibilities established in the Clean
Air Act. Thus, the requirements of
section 6 of the Executive Order do not
apply to this rule.
F. Executive Order 13175, Coordination
With Indian Tribal Governments
Executive Order 13175, entitled
‘‘Consultation and Coordination with
Indian Tribal Governments’’ (65 FR
67249, November 9, 2000), requires the
EPA to develop an accountable process
to ensure ‘‘meaningful and timely input
by tribal officials in the development of
regulatory policies that have tribal
implications.’’ This final rule does not
have tribal implications, as specified in
Executive Order 13175. It will not have
PO 00000
Frm 00014
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
substantial direct effects on tribal
governments, on the relationship
between the Federal government and
Indian tribes, or on the distribution of
power and responsibilities between the
Federal government and Indian tribes.
In addition, the SIP is not approved to
apply on any Indian reservation land or
in any other area where EPA or an
Indian tribe has demonstrated that a
tribe has jurisdiction. In those areas of
Indian country, the rule does not have
tribal implications and will not impose
substantial direct costs on tribal
governments or preempt tribal law.
Thus, Executive Order 13175 does not
apply to this rule.
G. Executive Order 13045, Protection of
Children From Environmental Health
Risks and Safety Risks
EPA interprets Executive Order 13045
(62 FR 19885, April 23, 1997) as
applying only to those regulatory
actions that concern health or safety
risks, such that the analysis required
under section 5–501 of the Executive
Order has the potential to influence the
regulation. This rule is not subject to
Executive Order 13045, because it
approves a State rule implementing a
Federal standard.
H. Executive Order 13211, Actions That
Significantly Affect Energy Supply,
Distribution, or Use
This rule is not subject to Executive
Order 13211, ‘‘Actions Concerning
Regulations That Significantly Affect
Energy Supply, Distribution, or Use’’ (66
FR 28355, May 22, 2001) because it is
not a significant regulatory action under
Executive Order 12866.
I. National Technology Transfer and
Advancement Act
Section 12 of the National Technology
Transfer and Advancement Act
(NTTAA) of 1995 requires Federal
agencies to evaluate existing technical
standards when developing a new
regulation. To comply with NTTAA,
EPA must consider and use ‘‘voluntary
consensus standards’’ (VCS) if available
and applicable when developing
programs and policies unless doing so
would be inconsistent with applicable
law or otherwise impractical.
The EPA believes that VCS are
inapplicable to this action. Today’s
action does not require the public to
perform activities conducive to the use
of VCS.
E:\FR\FM\14JYR1.SGM
14JYR1
Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 134 / Tuesday, July 14, 2015 / Rules and Regulations
J. Executive Order 12898: Federal
Actions To Address Environmental
Justice in Minority Populations and
Low-Income Population
Executive Order (E.O.) 12898 (59 FR
7629 (Feb. 16, 1994)) establishes federal
executive policy on environmental
justice. Its main provision directs
federal agencies, to the greatest extent
practicable and permitted by law, to
make environmental justice part of their
mission by identifying and addressing,
as appropriate, disproportionately high
and adverse human health or
environmental effects of their programs,
policies, and activities on minority
populations and low-income
populations in the United States.
EPA lacks the discretionary authority
to address environmental justice in this
rulemaking.
asabaliauskas on DSK5VPTVN1PROD with RULES
K. Congressional Review Act
The Congressional Review Act, 5
U.S.C. 801 et seq., as added by the Small
Business Regulatory Enforcement
Fairness Act of 1996, generally provides
that before a rule may take effect, the
agency promulgating the rule must
submit a rule report, which includes a
copy of the rule, to each House of the
Congress and to the Comptroller General
of the United States. EPA will submit a
report containing this rule and other
required information to the U.S. Senate,
the U.S. House of Representatives, and
the Comptroller General of the United
States prior to publication of the rule in
the Federal Register. A major rule
cannot take effect until 60 days after it
is published in the Federal Register.
This action is not a ‘‘major rule’’ as
defined by 5 U.S.C. 804(2). This rule
will be effective August 13, 2015.
L. Petitions for Judicial Review
Under section 307(b)(1) of the Clean
Air Act, petitions for judicial review of
this action must be filed in the United
States Court of Appeals for the
appropriate circuit by September 14,
2015. Filing a petition for
reconsideration by the Administrator of
this final rule does not affect the finality
of this rule for the purposes of judicial
review nor does it extend the time
within which a petition for judicial
review may be filed, and shall not
postpone the effectiveness of such rule
or action. This action may not be
challenged later in proceedings to
enforce its requirements (see section
307(b)(2)).
List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52
Environmental protection, Air
pollution control, Incorporation by
reference, Intergovernmental relations,
Ozone, Lead, Reporting and
recordkeeping requirements.
Dated: June 29, 2015.
Jared Blumenfeld,
Regional Administrator, Region IX.
Part 52, Chapter I, Title 40 of the Code
of Federal Regulations is amended as
follows:
Final rule.
The Environmental Protection
Agency (EPA) is taking final action to
approve revisions to the Ventura County
Air Pollution Control District (VCAPCD)
and Eastern Kern Air Pollution Control
District (EKAPCD) portions of the
California State Implementation Plan
(SIP). These revisions clarify, update,
and revise exemptions from New Source
Review (NSR) permitting requirements,
for various air pollution sources.
SUMMARY:
This rule will be effective on
August 13, 2015.
DATES:
EPA has established docket
number EPA–R09–OAR–2015–0082 for
this action. Generally, documents in the
docket for this action are available
electronically at https://
www.regulations.gov or in hard copy at
EPA Region IX, 75 Hawthorne Street,
San Francisco, California 94105–3901.
While all documents in the docket are
listed at https://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 available in either location (e.g.,
confidential business information
(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.
ADDRESSES:
PART 52—APPROVAL AND
PROMULGATION OF
IMPLEMENTATION PLANS
1. The authority citation for Part 52
continues to read as follows:
■
Authority: 42 U.S.C. 7401 et seq.
Subpart D—Arizona
2. Section 52.123 is amended by
adding paragraphs (o) and (p) to read as
follows:
■
§ 52.123
ACTION:
40909
Approval status.
*
*
*
*
*
(o) 2008 8-hour ozone NAAQS: The
SIPs submitted on October 14, 2011 and
December 27, 2012 are fully or partially
disapproved for Clean Air Act (CAA)
elements 110(a)(2)(C), (D)(ii), (J) and (K)
for all portions of the Arizona SIP.
(p) 2008 Lead (Pb) NAAQS: The SIPs
submitted on October 14, 2011 and
December 27, 2012 are fully or partially
disapproved for Clean Air Act (CAA)
elements 110(a)(2)(C), (D)(ii), (J) and (K)
for all portions of the Arizona SIP.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Throughout this document, ‘‘we,’’ ‘‘us’’
and ‘‘our’’ refer to EPA.
[FR Doc. 2015–17057 Filed 7–13–15; 8:45 am]
Table of Contents
BILLING CODE 6560–50–P
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Lawrence Maurin, EPA Region IX, (415)
972–3943, Maurin.Lawrence@epa.gov.
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION
AGENCY
I. Proposed Action
II. Public Comments and EPA Responses
III. EPA Action
IV. Incorporation by Reference
V. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews
40 CFR Part 52
I. Proposed Action
[EPA–R09–OAR–2015–0082; FRL–9929–64–
Region 9]
On April 14, 2015 (80 FR 19932), EPA
proposed to approve the following rules
into the California SIP. Table 1 lists the
rules addressed by this proposal,
including the dates they were revised by
the local air agency and submitted by
the California Air Resources Board
(CARB).
Revisions to the California SIP,
Ventura & Eastern Kern Air Pollution
Control Districts; Permit Exemptions
Environmental Protection
Agency (EPA).
AGENCY:
TABLE 1—SUBMITTED RULES
Local agency
Rule No.
VCAPCD .........................................................
EKAPCD .........................................................
VerDate Sep<11>2014
22:02 Jul 13, 2015
Jkt 235001
PO 00000
23
202
Frm 00015
Revision
date
Rule title
Exemptions from Permit .................................
Permit Exemptions .........................................
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
E:\FR\FM\14JYR1.SGM
14JYR1
11/12/13
01/13/11
Submittal
date
05/13/14
06/21/11
Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 80, Number 134 (Tuesday, July 14, 2015)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 40905-40909]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2015-17057]
=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
40 CFR Part 52
[EPA-R09-OAR-2015-0297; FRL-9930-28-Region 9
Partial Approval and Partial Disapproval of Air Quality State
Implementation Plans; Arizona; Infrastructure Requirements for Lead and
Ozone
AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).
[[Page 40906]]
ACTION: Final rule.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is partially
approving and partially disapproving State Implementation Plan (SIP)
revisions submitted by the State of Arizona to address the requirements
of section 110(a)(1) and (2) of the Clean Air Act (CAA) for the 2008
Lead (Pb) and 2008 ozone national ambient air quality standards
(NAAQS). Section 110(a) of the CAA requires that each State adopt and
submit a SIP for the implementation, maintenance, and enforcement of
each NAAQS promulgated by EPA. We refer to such SIP revisions as
``infrastructure'' SIPs because they are intended to address basic
structural SIP requirements for new or revised NAAQS including, but not
limited to, legal authority, regulatory structure, resources, permit
programs, monitoring, and modeling necessary to assure attainment and
maintenance of the standards.
DATES: This final rule is effective on August 13, 2015.
ADDRESSES: EPA has established a docket for this action, identified by
Docket ID Number EPA-R09-OAR-2015-0297. The index to the docket for
this action is available electronically at https://www.regulations.gov
and in hard copy at EPA Region IX, 75 Hawthorne, San Francisco,
California. While all documents in the docket are listed in the index,
some information may be publically available only at the hard copy
location (e.g., copyrighted material) and some may not be publically
available in either location (e.g., confidential business information
(CBI)). To inspect the hard copy materials, please schedule an
appointment during normal business hours with the contact listed
directly below.
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. Background
II. Proposed Action
III. Public Comments and EPA Responses
IV. Final Action
V. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews
I. Background
CAA section 110(a)(1) requires each state to submit to EPA, within
three years after the promulgation of a primary or secondary NAAQS or
any revision thereof, an infrastructure SIP revision that provides for
the implementation, maintenance, and enforcement of such NAAQS. Section
110(a)(2) sets the content requirements of such a plan, which generally
relate to the information and authorities, compliance assurances,
procedural requirements, and control measures that constitute the
``infrastructure'' of a state's air quality management program. These
infrastructure SIP elements required by section 110(a)(2) are as
follows:
Section 110(a)(2)(A): Emission limits and other control
measures.
Section 110(a)(2)(B): Ambient air quality monitoring/data
system.
Section 110(a)(2)(C): Program for enforcement of control
measures and regulation of new and modified stationary sources.
Section 110(a)(2)(D)(i): Interstate pollution transport.
Section 110(a)(2)(D)(ii): Interstate and international
pollution abatement.
Section 110(a)(2)(E): Adequate resources and authority,
conflict of interest, and oversight of local and regional government
agencies.
Section 110(a)(2)(F): Stationary source monitoring and
reporting.
Section 110(a)(2)(G): Emergency episodes.
Section 110(a)(2)(H): SIP revisions.
Section 110(a)(2)(J): Consultation with government
officials, public notification, prevention of significant deterioration
(PSD), and visibility protection.
Section 110(a)(2)(K): Air quality modeling and submittal
of modeling data.
Section 110(a)(2)(L): Permitting fees.
Section 110(a)(2)(M): Consultation/participation by
affected local entities.
Two elements identified in section 110(a)(2) are not governed by
the three-year submittal deadline of section 110(a)(1) and are
therefore not addressed in this action. These two elements are: (i)
Section 110(a)(2)(C) to the extent it refers to permit programs
required under part D (nonattainment new source review (NSR)), and (ii)
section 110(a)(2)(I), pertaining to the nonattainment planning
requirements of part D. As a result, this action does not address
infrastructure for the nonattainment NSR portion of section
110(a)(2)(C) or the whole of section 110(a)(2)(I).
On November 12, 2008, the EPA issued a revised NAAQS for Pb.\1\
This action triggered a requirement for states to submit an
infrastructure SIP to address the applicable requirements of section
110(a)(2) within three years of issuance of the revised NAAQS. On
October 14, 2011, EPA issued ``Guidance on Section 110 Infrastructure
SIPs for the 2008 Pb NAAQS'', referred to herein as EPA's 2011 Pb
Guidance.\2\ Depending on the timing of a given submittal, some states
relied on the earlier draft version of this guidance, referred to
herein as EPA's 2011 Draft Pb Guidance.\3\ EPA issued additional
guidance on infrastructure SIPs on September 13, 2013.\4\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ 73 FR 66964 (November 12, 2008). The 1978 Pb standard (1.5
[micro]g/m\3\ as a quarterly average) was modified to a rolling 3
month average not to be exceeded of 0.15 [micro]g/m\3\. EPA also
revised the secondary NAAQS to 0.15 [micro]g/m\3\ and made it
identical to the revised primary standard. Id.
\2\ See Memorandum from Stephen D. Page, Director, Office of Air
Quality Planning and Standards, to Regional Air Division Directors,
Regions 1-10 (October 14, 2011).
\3\ ``DRAFT Guidance on SIP Elements Required Under Sections
110(a)(1) and (2) for the 2008 Lead (Pb) National Ambient Air
Quality Standards (NAAQS),'' June 17, 2011 version.
\4\ See Memorandum dated September 13, 2013 from Stephen D.
Page, Director, EPA Office of Air Quality Planning and Standards, to
Regional Air Directors, EPA Regions 1-10, ``Guidance on
Infrastructure State Implementation Plan (SIP) Elements under Clean
Air Act Sections 110(a)(1) and 110(a)(2)'' (referred to herein as
``2013 Infrastructure SIP Guidance'').
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
On March 27, 2008, EPA issued a revised NAAQS for 8-hour Ozone.\5\
This action triggered a requirement for states to submit an
infrastructure SIP to address the applicable requirements of section
110(a)(2) within three years of issuance of the revised NAAQS. EPA did
not, however, prepare guidance at this time for states in submitting I-
SIP revisions for the 2008 Ozone NAAQS.\6\ On September 13, 2013, EPA
issued ``Guidance of Infrastructure State Implementation Plan (SIP)
Elements under Clean Air Act Sections 110(a)(1) and 110(a)(2),'' which
provides advice on the development of infrastructure SIPs for the 2008
ozone NAAQS (among other pollutants) as well as infrastructure SIPs for
new or revised NAAQS promulgated in the future.\7\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\5\ 73 FR 16436 (March 27, 2008).
\6\ Preparation of guidance for the 2008 Ozone NAAQS was
postponed given EPA's reconsideration of the standard. See 78 FR
34183 (June 6, 2013).
\7\ See Memorandum dated September 13, 2013 from Stephen D.
Page, Director, EPA Office of Air Quality Planning and Standards, to
Regional Air Directors, EPA Regions 1-10, ``Guidance on
Infrastructure State Implementation Plan (SIP) Elements under Clean
Air Act Sections 110(a)(1) and 110(a)(2)'' (referred to herein as
``2013 Infrastructure SIP Guidance'').
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The Arizona Department of Environmental Quality (ADEQ) has
submitted infrastructure SIP revisions pursuant to EPA's promulgation
of the NAAQS addressed by this rule, including the following:
[[Page 40907]]
October 14, 2011--``Arizona State Implementation Plan
Revision under Clean Air Act Section 110(a)(1) and (2); 2008 Lead
NAAQS,'' to address all of the CAA section 110(a)(2) requirements,
except for section 110(a)(2)(G),\8\ for the 2008 Pb NAAQS (2011 Pb I-
SIP Submittal).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\8\ In a separate rulemaking, EPA fully approved Arizona's SIP
to address the requirements regarding air pollution emergency
episodes in CAA section 110(a)(2)(G) for the 1997 8-hour ozone
NAAQS. 77 FR 62452 (October 15, 2012). Although ADEQ did not submit
an analysis of Section 110(a)(2)(G) requirements, we discuss them in
our technical support document (TSD), which is in the docket for
this rulemaking.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
December 27, 2012--``Arizona State Implementation Plan
Revision under Clean Air Act Section 110(a)(1) and (2); 2008 8-hour
Ozone NAAQS,'' to address all of the CAA section 110(a)(2) requirements
for the 2008 8-hour Ozone NAAQS (2012 Ozone I-SIP Submittal).
On February 19, 2015 EPA approved elements of the above submittals
with respect to the 2008 Pb and 2008 8-hour ozone NAAQS infrastructure
requirements in CAA sections 110(a)(2)(A), (B), (E), (F), (G), (H), (L)
and (M).\9\ That action also explained that we would separately act on
the permitting infrastructure SIP elements in CAA sections
110(a)(2)(C), (D), (J), and (K) in a subsequent rulemaking. These
permit related elements are the subject of today's final rule.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\9\ ``Approval and Promulgation of State Implementation Plans;
Arizona; Infrastructure requirements for the 2008 Lead (Pb) and the
2008 8-Hour Ozone National Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS)''
was signed on February 19, 2015 but, as of June 29, 2015, has not
yet published in the Federal Register. This action was proposed in
the Federal Register on November 24, 2014 (79 FR 69796).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
In addition to the above 2011 and 2012 infrastructure SIP
submittals, ADEQ submitted ``New Source Review State Implementation
Plan Submission'' on October 29, 2012, and ``Supplemental Information
to 2012 New Source Review State Implementation Plan Submission'' on
July 2, 2014 (NSR Submittals). In addition to addressing revisions to
Arizona's NSR program, these submissions also relate to our analysis of
infrastructure SIP elements in CAA sections 110(a)(2)(C), (D), (J), and
(K).
II. Proposed Action
On May 12, 2015 (80 FR 27127), EPA proposed to partially approve
and partially disapprove Arizona's 2011 Pb I-SIP Submittal and 2012
Ozone I-SIP Submittal with respect to the permitting infrastructure SIP
elements in CAA sections 110(a)(2)(C), (D), (J), and (K). Our proposed
action and associated technical support document (TSD) provide detailed
discussion of Arizona's demonstration for each element. Generally, we
proposed a partial approval because the submittals show that Arizona
largely fulfills the relevant infrastructure requirements. But we
proposed a simultaneous partial disapproval because of these
deficiencies:
With respect to Sec. 110(a)(2)(C), EPA proposed to: (1)
Disapprove the 2011 Pb and 2012 Ozone Infrastructure SIPs for ADEQ and
Pinal County because the SIP-approved PSD programs lack certain
``structural'' PSD program elements as identified in our TSD; and (2)
disapprove both Infrastructure SIPs for Maricopa and Pima counties,
which do not have SIP approved PSD programs.
With respect to the third prong of Sec. 110(a)(D)(i), EPA
proposed to disapprove both Infrastructure SIPs regarding
``structural'' PSD requirements under Sec. 110(a)(2)(C).
With respect to Sec. 110(a)(2)(D)(ii), EPA proposed to
disapprove both Infrastructure SIPs with respect to Maricopa County and
Pima County, which do not have SIP approved PSD programs.
With respect to Sec. 110(a)(2)(J), we proposed to
disapprove both Arizona Infrastructure SIPs for failure to fully
satisfy the requirements of part C relating to PSD.
With respect to Sec. 110(a)(2)(K), we proposed to
disapprove both Infrastructure SIPs because ADEQ, Pinal, Pima, and
Maricopa counties have not submitted adequate provisions or a narrative
that explain how existing state and county law satisfy the requirements
of 110(a)(2)(K).
III. Public Comments and EPA Responses
The public comment period on EPA's proposed rule opened on May 12,
2015, the date of its publication in the Federal Register at 80 FR
27127, and closed on June 11, 2015. During this period, EPA did not
receive any comments. Therefore, EPA is finalizing our action as
proposed.
IV. Final Action
Under CAA section 110(k)(3) and based on the evaluation and
rationale presented in the proposed rule, the TSD and this final rule,
EPA is partially approving the 2011 Pb I-SIP Submittal and the 2012
Ozone I-SIP Submittal with respect to the following infrastructure SIP
requirements:
Section 110(a)(2)(C) (in part): Program of enforcement of
control measures and regulation of new and modified stationary sources.
Section 110(a)(2)(D)(i) (in part): Interstate pollution
transport.
Section 110(a)(2)(D)(ii) (in part): Interstate pollution
abatement and international air pollution.
Section 110(a)(2)(J) (in part): Consultation with
government officials, public notification, PSD, and visibility
protection.
Section 110(a)(2)(K): Air quality modeling and submission
of modeling data.
EPA is simultaneously partially disapproving the submittals because
of deficiencies described in our proposed rule and TSD and summarized
in the proposed rule section above. For all I-SIP elements that do not
meet the CAA Sec. 110(a)(2) requirements there are existing FIPs in
place, with the exception of the modeling requirements under CAA Sec.
110(a)(2)(K) for Pinal County and ADEQ. To the extent our proposed
approval or proposed disapproval of an I-SIP element relied on our
March 18, 2015 proposed action on ADEQ's NSR SIP submittal, our final
action on the I-SIP elements identified in this notice relies on our
final action on ADEQ's NSR SIP submittal, signed contemporaneously
primarily in the form of a limited approval/limited disapproval.\10\
Furthermore, the partial disapprovals in this action do not result in
sanctions under section 179 of the Act because infrastructure SIPs are
not required under Title I, Part D of the Act.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\10\ EPA's action on ADEQ's NSR SIP submittal was largely
finalized as proposed, with the exception of certain changes in
response to public comments. These changes resulted in our finding
fewer bases for disapproval as compared with our proposed action on
ADEQ's NSR SIP submittal and do not affect today's final action on
Arizona's I-SIP submittals.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
V. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews
A. Executive Order 12866, Regulatory Planning and Review
The Office of Management and Budget (OMB) has exempted this
regulatory action from Executive Order 12866, entitled ``Regulatory
Planning and Review.''
B. Paperwork Reduction Act
This action does not impose an information collection burden under
the provisions of the Paperwork Reduction Act, 44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.
Burden is defined at 5 CFR 1320.3(b).
C. Regulatory Flexibility Act
The Regulatory Flexibility Act (RFA) generally requires an agency
to conduct a regulatory flexibility analysis of any rule subject to
notice and comment rulemaking requirements unless the
[[Page 40908]]
agency certifies that the rule will not have a significant economic
impact on a substantial number of small entities. Small entities
include small businesses, small not-for-profit enterprises, and small
governmental jurisdictions.
This rule will not have a significant impact on a substantial
number of small entities because SIP partial approvals/partial
disapprovals under section 110 and subchapter I, part D of the Clean
Air Act do not create any new requirements but simply approve
requirements that the State is already imposing. Therefore, because
EPA's approval does not create any new requirements, I certify that
this action will not have a significant economic impact on a
substantial number of small entities.
Moreover, due to the nature of the Federal-State relationship under
the Clean Air Act, preparation of flexibility analysis would constitute
Federal inquiry into the economic reasonableness of State action. The
Clean Air Act forbids EPA to base its actions concerning SIPs on such
grounds. Union Electric Co., v. U.S. EPA, 427 U.S. 246, 255-66 (1976);
42 U.S.C. 7410(a)(2).
D. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act
Under sections 202 of the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995
(``Unfunded Mandates Act''), signed into law on March 22, 1995, EPA
must prepare a budgetary impact statement to accompany any proposed or
final rule that includes a Federal mandate that may result in estimated
costs to State, local, or tribal governments in the aggregate; or to
the private sector, of $100 million or more. Under section 205, EPA
must select the most cost-effective and least burdensome alternative
that achieves the objectives of the rule and is consistent with
statutory requirements. Section 203 requires EPA to establish a plan
for informing and advising any small governments that may be
significantly or uniquely impacted by the rule.
EPA has determined that the partial approval/partial disapproval
action promulgated does not include a Federal mandate that may result
in estimated costs of $100 million or more to either State, local, or
tribal governments in the aggregate, or to the private sector. This
Federal action approves pre-existing requirements under State or local
law, and imposes no new requirements. Accordingly, no additional costs
to State, local, or tribal governments, or to the private sector,
result from this action.
E. Executive Order 13132, Federalism
Federalism (64 FR 43255, August 10, 1999) revokes and replaces
Executive Orders 12612 (Federalism) and 12875 (Enhancing the
Intergovernmental Partnership). Executive Order 13132 requires EPA to
develop an accountable process to ensure ``meaningful and timely input
by State and local officials in the development of regulatory policies
that have federalism implications.'' ``Policies that have federalism
implications'' is defined in the Executive Order to include regulations
that have ``substantial direct effects on the States, on the
relationship between the national government and the States, or on the
distribution of power and responsibilities among the various levels of
government.'' Under Executive Order 13132, EPA may not issue a
regulation that has federalism implications, that imposes substantial
direct compliance costs, and that is not required by statute, unless
the Federal government provides the funds necessary to pay the direct
compliance costs incurred by State and local governments, or EPA
consults with State and local officials early in the process of
developing the proposed regulation. EPA also may not issue a regulation
that has federalism implications and that preempts State law unless the
Agency consults with State and local officials early in the process of
developing the proposed regulation.
This rule will not have substantial direct effects on the States,
on the relationship between the national government and the States, or
on the distribution of power and responsibilities among the various
levels of government, as specified in Executive Order 13132, because it
merely approves a State rule implementing a Federal standard, and does
not alter the relationship or the distribution of power and
responsibilities established in the Clean Air Act. Thus, the
requirements of section 6 of the Executive Order do not apply to this
rule.
F. Executive Order 13175, Coordination With Indian Tribal Governments
Executive Order 13175, entitled ``Consultation and Coordination
with Indian Tribal Governments'' (65 FR 67249, November 9, 2000),
requires the EPA to develop an accountable process to ensure
``meaningful and timely input by tribal officials in the development of
regulatory policies that have tribal implications.'' This final rule
does not have tribal implications, as specified in Executive Order
13175. It will not have substantial direct effects on tribal
governments, on the relationship between the Federal government and
Indian tribes, or on the distribution of power and responsibilities
between the Federal government and Indian tribes. In addition, the SIP
is not approved to apply on any Indian reservation land or in any other
area where EPA or an Indian tribe has demonstrated that a tribe has
jurisdiction. In those areas of Indian country, the rule does not have
tribal implications and will not impose substantial direct costs on
tribal governments or preempt tribal law. Thus, Executive Order 13175
does not apply to this rule.
G. Executive Order 13045, Protection of Children From Environmental
Health Risks and Safety Risks
EPA interprets Executive Order 13045 (62 FR 19885, April 23, 1997)
as applying only to those regulatory actions that concern health or
safety risks, such that the analysis required under section 5-501 of
the Executive Order has the potential to influence the regulation. This
rule is not subject to Executive Order 13045, because it approves a
State rule implementing a Federal standard.
H. Executive Order 13211, Actions That Significantly Affect Energy
Supply, Distribution, or Use
This rule is not subject to Executive Order 13211, ``Actions
Concerning Regulations That Significantly Affect Energy Supply,
Distribution, or Use'' (66 FR 28355, May 22, 2001) because it is not a
significant regulatory action under Executive Order 12866.
I. National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act
Section 12 of the National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act
(NTTAA) of 1995 requires Federal agencies to evaluate existing
technical standards when developing a new regulation. To comply with
NTTAA, EPA must consider and use ``voluntary consensus standards''
(VCS) if available and applicable when developing programs and policies
unless doing so would be inconsistent with applicable law or otherwise
impractical.
The EPA believes that VCS are inapplicable to this action. Today's
action does not require the public to perform activities conducive to
the use of VCS.
[[Page 40909]]
J. Executive Order 12898: Federal Actions To Address Environmental
Justice in Minority Populations and Low-Income Population
Executive Order (E.O.) 12898 (59 FR 7629 (Feb. 16, 1994))
establishes federal executive policy on environmental justice. Its main
provision directs federal agencies, to the greatest extent practicable
and permitted by law, to make environmental justice part of their
mission by identifying and addressing, as appropriate,
disproportionately high and adverse human health or environmental
effects of their programs, policies, and activities on minority
populations and low-income populations in the United States.
EPA lacks the discretionary authority to address environmental
justice in this rulemaking.
K. Congressional Review Act
The Congressional Review Act, 5 U.S.C. 801 et seq., as added by the
Small Business Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act of 1996, generally
provides that before a rule may take effect, the agency promulgating
the rule must submit a rule report, which includes a copy of the rule,
to each House of the Congress and to the Comptroller General of the
United States. EPA will submit a report containing this rule and other
required information to the U.S. Senate, the U.S. House of
Representatives, and the Comptroller General of the United States prior
to publication of the rule in the Federal Register. A major rule cannot
take effect until 60 days after it is published in the Federal
Register. This action is not a ``major rule'' as defined by 5 U.S.C.
804(2). This rule will be effective August 13, 2015.
L. Petitions for Judicial Review
Under section 307(b)(1) of the Clean Air Act, petitions for
judicial review of this action must be filed in the United States Court
of Appeals for the appropriate circuit by September 14, 2015. Filing a
petition for reconsideration by the Administrator of this final rule
does not affect the finality of this rule for the purposes of judicial
review nor does it extend the time within which a petition for judicial
review may be filed, and shall not postpone the effectiveness of such
rule or action. This action may not be challenged later in proceedings
to enforce its requirements (see section 307(b)(2)).
List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52
Environmental protection, Air pollution control, Incorporation by
reference, Intergovernmental relations, Ozone, Lead, Reporting and
recordkeeping requirements.
Dated: June 29, 2015.
Jared Blumenfeld,
Regional Administrator, Region IX.
Part 52, Chapter I, Title 40 of the Code of Federal Regulations is
amended as follows:
PART 52--APPROVAL AND PROMULGATION OF IMPLEMENTATION PLANS
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 52.123 is amended by adding paragraphs (o) and (p) to read
as follows:
Sec. 52.123 Approval status.
* * * * *
(o) 2008 8-hour ozone NAAQS: The SIPs submitted on October 14, 2011
and December 27, 2012 are fully or partially disapproved for Clean Air
Act (CAA) elements 110(a)(2)(C), (D)(ii), (J) and (K) for all portions
of the Arizona SIP.
(p) 2008 Lead (Pb) NAAQS: The SIPs submitted on October 14, 2011
and December 27, 2012 are fully or partially disapproved for Clean Air
Act (CAA) elements 110(a)(2)(C), (D)(ii), (J) and (K) for all portions
of the Arizona SIP.
[FR Doc. 2015-17057 Filed 7-13-15; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P