[Federal Register Volume 72, Number 150 (Monday, August 6, 2007)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 43537-43539]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: E7-15118]
=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
40 CFR Part 52
[EPA-R09-OAR-2007-0610; FRL-8448-6]
Revisions to the Arizona State Implementation Plan, Maricopa
County
AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).
ACTION: Direct final rule.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: EPA is taking direct final action to approve a revision to the
Maricopa County portion of the Arizona State Implementation Plan (SIP).
This revision concerns reductions of particulate matter (PM) emissions
from the paving of unpaved roads and the use of these reductions to
satisfy the offset requirements under the new source review provisions
of the Clean Air Act as amended in 1990 (CAA or the Act). We are
approving a local rule which assures that the PM emission reductions
resulting from the road paving meet the criteria for valid offsets
under the Act.
DATES: This rule is effective on October 5, 2007 without further
notice, unless EPA receives adverse comments by September 5, 2007. If
we receive such comments, we will publish a timely withdrawal in the
Federal Register to notify the public that this direct final rule will
not take effect.
ADDRESSES: Submit comments, identified by docket number EPA-R09-OAR-
2007-0610, by one of the following methods:
1. Federal eRulemaking Portal: http://www.regulations.gov. Follow
the on-line instructions.
2. E-mail: [email protected].
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 http://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 http://www.regulations.gov or e-mail. http://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 e-mail directly to EPA, your e-mail 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: The index to the docket for this action is available
electronically at http://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 in the index, some information may
be publicly available only at the hard copy location (e.g., copyrighted
material), 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: Lily Wong, EPA Region IX, (415) 947-
4114, [email protected].
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Throughout this document, ``we,'' ``us'' and
``our'' refer to EPA.
Table of Contents
I. The State's Submittal
A. What rule did the State submit?
B. Are there other versions of this rule?
C. What is the purpose of the submitted rule?
II. EPA's Evaluation and Action
A. How is EPA evaluating the rule?
B. Does the rule meet the evaluation criteria?
C. Public Comment and Final Action
III. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews
[[Page 43538]]
I. The State's Submittal
A. What rule did the State submit?
Table 1 lists the rule we are approving with the date that it was
adopted by the Maricopa Air Quality Department and submitted to us by
the Arizona Department of Environmental Quality.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Local agency Rule No. Rule title Adopted Submitted
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Maricopa County Air Quality Department.... 242 Emission Offsets Generated by 06/20/07 07/05/07
the Voluntary Paving of
Unpaved Roads.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
On July 12, 2007, this rule submittal was found to meet the
completeness criteria in 40 CFR Part 51, Appendix V, which must be met
before formal EPA review.
B. Are there other versions of this rule?
There are no previous versions of Rule 242 in the SIP, and the
Maricopa County Air Quality Department has not adopted any earlier
version of this rule.
C. What is the purpose of the submitted rule?
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 173(c) of
the CAA requires, among other things, that major new sources of PM and
major modifications of existing sources of PM offset their increases of
PM emissions. Rule 242 creates a mechanism for owners and operators of
such sources to offset their PM emissions increases through the paving
of unpaved public roads in the PM non-attainment area of Maricopa
County. EPA's technical support document (TSD) has more information
about this rule.
II. EPA's Evaluation and Action
A. How is EPA evaluating the rule?
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). In addition, an offset generating rule of this type must meet the
criteria for generating valid offsets and should meet the criteria set
forth in our guidance concerning economic incentive programs.
Guidance and policy documents that we use to help evaluate specific
enforceability requirements and economic incentive rules or programs
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. AP-42, Fifth edition, ``Compilation of Air Pollutant Emission
Factors, Volume I, Stationary and Point Area Sources, Miscellaneous
Sources, Chapter 13,'' December 2003.
4. ``Emission Offset Interpretative Ruling,'' 40 CFR part 51,
appendix S.
5. ``Improving Air Quality with Economic Incentive Programs,'' EPA
452/R-01-001, January 2001.
B. Does the rule meet the evaluation criteria?
We believe this rule is consistent with the relevant policy and
guidance regarding enforceability and economic incentive programs and
ensures that the emission reductions are surplus, quantifiable,
enforceable, and permanent. The TSD has more information on our
evaluation.
C. Public Comment and Final Action
As authorized in section 110(k)(3) of the Act, EPA is fully
approving the submitted rule because we believe it fulfills all
relevant requirements. We do not think anyone will object to this
approval, so we are finalizing it without proposing it in advance.
However, in the Proposed Rules section of this Federal Register, we are
simultaneously proposing approval of the same submitted rule. If we
receive adverse comments by September 5, 2007, we will publish a timely
withdrawal in the Federal Register to notify the public that the direct
final approval will not take effect and we will address the comments in
a subsequent final action based on the proposal. If we do not receive
timely adverse comments, the direct final approval will be effective
without further notice on October 5, 2007. This will incorporate the
rule into the federally enforceable SIP.
III. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews
Under Executive Order 12866 (58 FR 51735, October 4, 1993), this
action is not a ``significant regulatory action'' and therefore is not
subject to review by the Office of Management and Budget. For this
reason, this action is also not subject to Executive Order 13211,
``Actions Concerning Regulations That Significantly Affect Energy
Supply, Distribution, or Use'' (66 FR 28355, May 22, 2001). This action
merely approves state law as meeting Federal requirements and imposes
no additional requirements beyond those imposed by state law.
Accordingly, the Administrator certifies that this rule will not have a
significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities
under the Regulatory Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 601 et seq.). Because
this rule approves pre-existing requirements under state law and does
not impose any additional enforceable duty beyond that required by
state law, it 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). This rule also does not
have tribal implications because it will 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,
as specified by Executive Order 13175 (65 FR 67249, November 9, 2000).
This action also does not have Federalism implications because it does
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 (64 FR 43255, August 10, 1999).
This action 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. This rule
also is not subject to Executive Order 13045 ``Protection of Children
from Environmental Health Risks and Safety Risks'' (62 FR 19885, April
23, 1997),
[[Page 43539]]
because it approves a state rule implementing a Federal standard.
In reviewing SIP submissions, EPA's role is to approve state
choices, provided that they meet the criteria of the Clean Air Act. In
this context, in the absence of a prior existing requirement for the
State to use voluntary consensus standards (VCS), EPA has no authority
to disapprove a SIP submission for failure to use VCS. It would thus be
inconsistent with applicable law for EPA, when it reviews a SIP
submission; to use VCS in place of a SIP submission that otherwise
satisfies the provisions of the Clean Air Act. Thus, the requirements
of section 12(d) of the National Technology Transfer and Advancement
Act of 1995 (15 U.S.C. 272 note) do not apply. This rule does not
impose an information collection burden under the provisions of the
Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.). 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).
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 October 5, 2007. 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, Particulate matter, and
Reporting and recordkeeping requirements.
Dated: July 20, 2007.
Keith Takata,
Acting Regional Administrator, Region IX.
0
Part 52, chapter I, title 40 of the Code of Federal Regulations is
amended as follows:
PART 52--[AMENDED]
0
1. The authority citation for part 52 continues to read as follows:
Authority: 42 U.S.C. 7401 et seq.
Subpart D--Arizona
0
2. Section 52.120 is amended by adding paragraph (c)(139) to read as
follows:
Sec. 52.120 Identification of plan.
* * * * *
(c) * * *
(139) The following plan was submitted on July 5, 2007 by the
Governor's designee.
(i) Incorporation by reference.
(A) Maricopa County Air Quality Department
(1) Rule 242, adopted on June 20, 2007.
[FR Doc. E7-15118 Filed 8-3-07; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P