Federal Register: November 1, 2006 (Volume 71, Number 211)
DOCID: FR Doc E6-18377
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
Environmental Protection Agency
CFR Citation: 40 CFR Part 52
EPA ID: [EPA-R08-OAR-2006-0564, FRL-8236-8]
NOTICE: RULES
ACTION: Air quality implementation plans; approval and promulgation; various States:
DOCUMENT ACTION: Direct final rule.
SUBJECT CATEGORY:
Approval and Promulgation of Air Quality Implementation Plans; Utah; Revisions to the Utah Administrative Code; Direct Final Rule
DATES: This rule is effective on January 2, 2007 without further notice, unless EPA receives adverse comment by December 1, 2006. If adverse comment is received, EPA will publish a timely withdrawal of the direct final rule in the Federal Register informing the public that the rule will not take effect.
DOCUMENT SUMMARY:
EPA is taking direct final action to approve State Implementation Plan (SIP) revisions submitted by the State of Utah on February 7, 2006. These changes to the Utah Administrative Code revise some minor technical requirements of Utah's continuous emission monitoring rules and correct several grammatical errors. The intended effect of this action is to make federally enforceable those provisions that EPA is approving. This action is being taken under section 110 of the Clean Air Act.
SUMMARY:
Utah,
SUPPLEMENTAL INFORMATION
Table of Contents
I. General Information
II. Background
III. EPA's Review of the State of Utah's February 7, 2006 Submittal IV. Final Action
V. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews
Definitions
For the purpose of this document, we are giving meaning to certain words or initials as follows:
(i) The words or initials Act or CAA mean or refer to the Clean Air Act, unless the context indicates otherwise.
(ii) The words EPA, we, us or our mean or refer to the United States Environmental Protection Agency.
(iii) The initials SIP mean or refer to State Implementation Plan.
(iv) The words State or Utah mean the State of Utah, unless the context indicates otherwise.
I. General Information
A. What Should I Consider as I Prepare My Comments for EPA?
1. Submitting CBI. Do not submit this information to EPA through http://www.regulations.gov or email. Clearly mark the part or all of the information that you claim to be CBI. For CBI information in a disk or CD ROM that you mail to EPA, mark the outside of the disk or CD ROM as CBI and then identify electronically within the disk or CD ROM the specific information that is claimed as CBI. In addition to one complete version of the comment that includes information claimed as CBI, a copy of the comment that does not contain the information claimed as CBI must be submitted for inclusion in the public docket. Information so marked will not be disclosed except in accordance with procedures set forth in 40 CFR part 2.
2. Tips for Preparing Your Comments. When submitting comments, remember to:
a. Identify the rulemaking by docket number and other identifying information (subject heading, Federal Register date and page number).
b. Follow directionsThe agency may ask you to respond to specific questions or organize comments by referencing a Code of Federal Regulations (CFR) part or section number.
c. Explain why you agree or disagree; suggest alternatives and substitute language for your requested changes.
d. Describe any assumptions and provide any technical information and/or data that you used.
e. If you estimate potential costs or burdens, explain how you arrived at your estimate in sufficient detail to allow for it to be reproduced.
f. Provide specific examples to illustrate your concerns, and suggest alternatives.
g. Explain your views as clearly as possible, avoiding the use of profanity or personal threats.
h. Make sure to submit your comments by the comment period deadline identified.
II. Background
On February 7, 2006, the Governor of Utah submitted a SIP revision
that contains amendments to Rule R307170 of the Utah Administrative
Code. The amendments update a key provision of the State's continuous
emissions monitoring rule to be consistent with 40 CFR part 75,
Appendix A, Section 6.2 on which part of the State's rule is based. In
addition, the revision corrects several inconsequential grammatical
errors. The Utah Air Quality Board adopted these amendments on January 4, 2006 and they became effective on January 5, 2006.
III. EPA's Review of the State of Utah's February 7, 2006 Submittal
A. Revisions to the Utah Administrative Code Adopted January 4, 2006 and Effective January 5, 2006
1. Changes to R3071707 (1). Performance Specification Audits
a. The state is adding language consistent with 40 CFR part 75,
Appendix A, Section 6.2, Acid Rain program provisions. This will exempt
sources with monitors subject to the Acid Rain rules from the
requirement for quarterly monitor audits. Under 40 CFR part 75,
Appendix A, Section 6.2, acid rain related monitors require only annual
audits. Without the addition of this exemption the acid rain monitors
would be unnecessarily subject to the same quarterly audits required
under 40 CFR part 60, Appendix B (Standards of Performance for New
Stationary Sources) monitoring standards. EPA is approving the revision to R3071707(1).
2. Typographical and Grammatical Corrections to R3071704. Definitions
a. The state is making typographical and grammatical corrections to
several definitions. EPA is approving the paragraphs which are the
definitions of the following terms: Continuous Emission Monitoring
System; Description Report; Excess Emission Report; Monitor; State Electronic Data Report; and Summary Report.
3. Typographical and Grammatical Corrections to Assorted Sections
a. The state is making numerous typographical and grammatical corrections to several sections. EPA is approving these inconsequential corrections in the following sections: R3071705 (7); R3071707 (6); R3071707(6)(a) and (b); and in R3071709 sections (5)(a) and (b), (6)(b), (7)(b), and (9)(a).
IV. Final Action
EPA is approving the following changes to the Utah Administrative Code that were submitted by the Governor on February 7, 2006 and effective on January 5, 2006: R3071707(1); R3071704; R3071705 (7); R3071707 (6); R3071707(6)(a) and (b); and in R3071709 sections (5)(a) and (b), (6)(b), (7)(b), and (9)(a).
Section 110(l) of the Clean Air Act states that a SIP revision cannot be approved if the revision would interfere with any applicable requirement concerning attainment and reasonable further progress towards attainment of any National Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS) or any other applicable requirements of the Act. The Utah SIP revisions that are the subject of this document do not interfere with attainment or maintenance of any NAAQS or any other applicable requirement of the Act. The Governor's February 7, 2006 submittal merely makes changes to the operational audits of Acid Rain monitors and inconsequential typographical and grammatical changes. Therefore, section 110(l) requirements are satisfied.
EPA is publishing this rule without prior proposal because the
Agency views this as a noncontroversial amendment and anticipates no
adverse comments; we are approving one minor change and typographical
and grammatical corrections to Utah's air quality rules. However, in
the ``Proposed Rules'' section of today's Federal Register publication, EPA is publishing a separate document that
[[Page 64127]]
will serve as the proposal to approve the SIP revision if adverse
comments are filed. This rule will be effective January 1, 2007 without
further notice unless the Agency receives adverse comments by December
1, 2006. If the EPA receives adverse comments, EPA will publish a
timely withdrawal in the Federal Register informing the public that the
rule will not take effect. EPA will address all public comments in a
subsequent final rule based on the proposed rule. The EPA will not
institute a second comment period on this action. Any parties
interested in commenting must do so at this time. Please note that if
EPA receives adverse comment on an amendment, paragraph, or section of
this rule and if that provision may be severed from the remainder of
the rule, EPA may adopt as final those provisions of the rule that are not the subject of an adverse comment.
V. 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 preexisting 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. 1044).
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), because it is not economically significant.
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 January 2, 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, Nitrogen dioxide, Ozone,
Reporting and recordkeeping requirements, Sulfur oxides, Volatile organic compounds.
Dated: September 27, 2006.
Carol Rushin,
Acting Regional Administrator, Region 8.
40 CFR part 52 is amended to read as follows:
PART 52[AMENDED]
1. The authority citation for Part 52 continues to read as follows:
Authority: 42 U.S.C. 7401 et seq.
Subpart TTUtah
2. Section 52.2320 is amended by adding paragraph (c)(64) to read as follows:
Sec. 52.2320 Identification of plan.
* * * * *
(c) * * *
(64) Revisions to State Implementation Plan were submitted by the
State of Utah on February 7, 2006. The revisions are to the Utah
Administrative Code to revise the continuous emission monitoring
requirements for performance audits of acid rain monitors and to correct several typographical and grammatical errors.
(i) Incorporation by reference.
(A) Utah Administrative Code sections: R3071707(1); R3071704;
R3071705 (7); R3071707 (6); R3071707(6)(a) and (b); and in R307
1709 sections (5)(a) and (b), (6)(b), (7)(b), and (9)(a); effective January 5, 2006.
[FR Doc. E618377 Filed 103106; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 656050P
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT
Jeffrey Kimes, Air and Radiation Program, Mailcode 8PAR, Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), Region 8, 999 18th Street, Suite 200, Denver, Colorado 802022466, (303) 312 6445, kimes.jeffrey@epa.gov.