Public Hearing. Persons interested in presenting oral testimony or inquiring as to whether a hearing is to be held should contact Mr. Randy McDonald, Organic Chemicals Group, Emission Standards Division (Mail Code C50404), U.S. EPA, Research Triangle Park, North Carolina 27711, telephone number (919) 5415402, electronic mail address
mcdonald.randy@epa.gov., at least 2 days in advance of the potential date of the public hearing. Persons interested in attending the public hearing must also call Mr. Randy McDonald to verify the time, date, and location of the hearing. The public hearing will provide interested parties the opportunity to present data, views, or arguments concerning these proposed emission standards.

Worldwide Web (WWW). In addition to being available in the docket, an electronic copy of today's proposal will also be available on the WWW through the Technology Transfer Network (TTN). Following signature, a copy of this action will be posted on the TTN's policy and guidance page for newly proposed rules at http://www.epa.gov/ttn/oarpg. The TTN provides information and technology exchange in various areas of air pollution control. If more information regarding the TTN is needed, call the TTN HELP line at (919) 5415384.

Direct Final Rule. A direct final rule identical to the proposal is published in the Rules and Regulations section of this Federal Register. If we receive any adverse comment pertaining to the amendment in the proposal, we will publish a timely notice in the Federal Register informing the public that the amendments are being withdrawn due to adverse comment. We will address all public comments concerning the withdrawn amendments in a subsequent final rule. If no relevant adverse comments are received, no further action will be taken on the proposal, and the direct final rule will become effective as provided in that action.

The regulatory text for the proposal is identical to that for the direct final rule published in the Rules and Regulations section of this Federal Register. For further supplemental information, the detailed rationale for the proposal, and the regulatory revisions, see the information provided in the direct final rule published in a separate part of this Federal Register.
Statutory and Executive Order Reviews

A. Executive Order 12866: Regulatory Planning and Review

Under Executive Order 12866, (58 FR 51735, October 4, 1993) the Agency must determine whether the regulatory action is ``significant'' and, therefore, subject to Office of Management and Budget (OMB) review and the requirements of the Executive Order. The Executive Order defines ``significant regulatory action'' as one that is likely to result in a rule that may:
(1) Have an annual effect on the economy of $100 million or more or adversely affect in a material way the economy, a sector of the economy, productivity, competition, jobs, the environment, public health or safety, or State, local, or tribal governments or communities;
(2) create a serious inconsistency or otherwise interfere with an action taken or planned by another agency;
(3) materially alter the budgetary impact of entitlements, grants, user fees, or loan programs or the rights and obligations of recipients thereof; or
(4) raise novel legal or policy issues arising out of legal mandates, the President's priorities, or the principles set forth in the Executive Order.

It has been determined that the proposed rule amendments are not a ``significant regulatory action'' under the terms of Executive Order 12866 and are, therefore, not subject to OMB review.

B. Paperwork Reduction Act

This action does not impose any new information collection burden. This action gives a source owner or operator the option of using vapor balancing to comply with the standards. Since it is only an option, this action will not increase the information collection burden. However, the OMB has previously approved the information collection requirements contained in the existing regulations under the provisions of the Paperwork Reduction Act, 44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq., and has assigned OMB control number 20600282 (EPA ICR No. 1414.04).

A copy of the OMB approved Information Collection Request (ICR) may be obtained from Susan Auby, Collection Strategies Division; U.S. EPA (2822T); 1200 Pennsylvania Ave., NW., Washington, DC 20460, or by calling (202) 5661672. Include the ICR or OMB number in any correspondence.

Burden means the total time, effort, or financial resources expended by persons to generate, maintain, retain, or disclose or provide information to or for a Federal agency. This includes the time needed to review instructions; develop, acquire, install, and utilize technology and systems for the purposes of collecting, validating, and verifying information, processing and maintaining information, and disclosing and providing information; adjust the existing ways to comply with any previously applicable instructions and requirements; train personnel to be able to respond to a collection of information; search data sources; complete and review the collection of information; and transmit or otherwise disclose the information.

An Agency may not conduct or sponsor, and a person is not required to respond to a collection of information unless it displays a currently valid OMB
[[Page 76896]]
control number. The OMB control numbers for EPA's regulations are listed in 40 CFR part 9 and 48 CFR chapter 15.

C. Regulatory Flexibility Analysis

The EPA has determined that it is not necessary to prepare a regulatory flexibility analysis in connection with the proposed rule.

For purposes of assessing the impacts of today's proposed amendments on small entities, a small entity is defined as: (1) A small business in the North American Industrial Classification System (NAICS) code 325 that has up to 500 employees; (2) a small governmental jurisdiction that is a government of a city, county, town, school district or special district with a population of less than 50,000; and (3) a small organization that is any notforprofit enterprise which is independently owned and operated and is not dominant in its field.

After considering the economic impacts of today's proposed amendments on small entities, EPA has concluded that this action will not have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities. In determining whether a proposed rule has a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities, the impact of concern is any significant adverse economic impact, since the primary purpose of the regulatory flexibility analysis is to identify and address regulatory alternatives ``which minimize any significant economic impact of the proposed rule on small entities (5 U.S.C. sections 603 and 604).'' Thus, any agency may conclude that a rule will not have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities if the rule relieves regulatory burden or otherwise has a positive economic effect on all of the small entities subject to the rule. The proposed amendments add a compliance option granting greater flexibility to small entities subject to the HON that may result in a more efficient use of resources for them and, therefore, impose no additional regulatory costs or requirements on owners or operators of affected sources.

D. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act

Title II of the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995 (UMRA), Public Law 1044, establishes requirements for Federal agencies to assess the effects of their regulatory actions on State, local, and tribal governments and the private sector. Under section 202 of the UMRA, the EPA generally must prepare a written statement, including a cost benefit analysis, for proposed and final rules with ``Federal mandates'' that may result in expenditures by State, local, and tribal governments, in the aggregate, or by the private sector, of $100 million or more in any 1 year. Before promulgating an EPA rule for which a written statement is needed, section 205 of the UMRA generally requires the EPA to identify and consider a reasonable number of regulatory alternatives and adopt the leastcostly, most cost effective, or least burdensome alternative that achieves the objectives of the rule. The provisions of section 205 do not apply when they are inconsistent with applicable law. Moreover, section 205 allows the EPA to adopt an alternative other than the leastcostly, most cost effective, or leastburdensome alternative if the Administrator publishes with the rule an explanation why that alternative was not adopted. Before the EPA establishes any regulatory requirements that may significantly or uniquely affect small governments, including tribal governments, it must have developed under section 203 of the UMRA a small government agency plan. The plan must provide for notifying potentially affected small governments to have meaningful and timely input in the development of EPA regulatory proposals with significant Federal intergovernmental mandates, and informing, educating, and advising small governments on compliance with the regulatory requirements.

The EPA has determined that the proposed rule amendments do not contain a Federal mandate that may result in expenditures of $100 million or more for State, local, and tribal governments, in the aggregate, or the private sector in any 1 year. The proposed rule amendments provide a source owner or operator with another option to comply with the standards. Therefore, the proposed rule amendments are not subject to the requirements of sections 202 and 205 of the UMRA. E. Executive Order 13132: Federalism

Executive Order 13132 (64 FR 43255, August 10, 1999) requires the 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.''

The proposed rule amendments do not have federalism implications. They 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. The proposed rule amendments provide a source owner or operator with another option to comply with the standards and, therefore, impose no additional burden on sources. Thus, Executive Order 13132 does not apply to the proposed rule amendments.

In the spirit of Executive Order 13132 and consistent with EPA policy to promote communications between the EPA and State and local governments, the EPA specifically solicits comment on the proposed rule amendments from State and local officials.
F. Executive Order 13175: Consultation and Coordination With Indian Tribal Governments

Executive Order 13175 (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.'' The proposed rule amendments do not have tribal implications, as specified in Executive Order 13175. The proposed rule amendments provide a source owner or operator with another option to comply with the standards and, therefore, impose no additional burden on sources. Thus, Executive Order 13175 does not apply to the proposed rule amendments.

The EPA specifically solicits additional comment on the proposed rule amendments from tribal officials.
G. Executive Order 13045: Protection of Children From Environmental Health Risks and Safety Risks

Executive Order 13045 (62 FR 19885, April 23, 1997) applies to any rule that: (1) is determined to be ``economically significant'' as defined under Executive Order 12866, and (2) concerns an environmental health or safety risk that the EPA has reason to believe may have a disproportionate effect on children. If the regulatory action meets both criteria, the EPA must evaluate the environmental health or safety effects of the planned rule on children, and explain why the planned regulation is preferable to other potentially effective and reasonably feasible alternatives considered by the EPA.

The EPA interprets Executive Order 13045 as applying only to those [[Page 76897]]
regulatory actions that are based on health or safety risks, such that the analysis required under section 5501 of the Executive Order has the potential to influence the regulation. Today's proposed rule amendments are not subject to Executive Order 13045 because they are based on technology performance, not health or safety risks. Furthermore, the proposed rule amendments have been determined not to be ``economically significant'' as defined under Executive Order 12866. H. Executive Order 13211: Actions That Significantly Affect Energy Supply, Distribution, or Use

The proposed rule amendments are not subject to Executive Order 13211 (66 FR 28355, May 22, 2001) because they are not a significant regulatory action under Executive Order 12866.

I. National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act

Section 12(d) of the National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act of 1995 (NTTAA), Public Law No. 104113, 12(d) (15 U.S.C. 272 note), directs the EPA to use voluntary consensus standards in its regulatory activities unless to do so would be inconsistent with applicable law or otherwise impractical. Voluntary consensus standards are technical standards (e.g., materials specifications, test methods, sampling procedures, and business practices) that are developed or adopted by voluntary consensus standards bodies. The NTTAA directs the EPA to provide Congress, through OMB, explanations when the Agency decides not to use available and applicable voluntary consensus standards.

No new standard requirements are cited in the proposed rule amendments. Therefore, the EPA is not proposing or adopting any voluntary consensus standards in the proposed rule amendments. List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 63

Environmental protection, Administrative practice and procedure, Air pollution control, Hazardous substances, Intergovernmental relations, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements.

Dated: December 16, 2004.
Michael O. Leavitt,
Administrator.
[FR Doc. 0427991 Filed 122204; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 656050P

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT Mr. Randy McDonald, Organic Chemicals Group, Emission Standards Division (Mail Code C50404), U.S. EPA, Research Triangle Park, North Carolina 27711, telephone number (919) 5415402, electronic mail address mcdonald.randy@epa.gov.