11316 Federal Register / Vol. 68, No. 46 / Monday, March 10, 2003 / Rules and Regulations 

officer for an explanation of FC’s failure to 

file U.S. income tax returns after Year 6. FC 

immediately engaged a U.S. tax advisor and 

cooperated with the Internal Revenue Service 

in determining FC’s income tax liability, for 

example, by preparing and filing the 

appropriate income tax returns for Year 7 

through Year 10 and by making FC’s books 

and records available to the examiner. FC did 

not present evidence that intervening events 

beyond its control prevented it from filing a 

return, and there were no other mitigating 

factors. FC has not met the standard 

described in paragraph (a)(3)(ii) of this 

section for waiver of any applicable filing 

deadlines in paragraph (a)(3)(i) of this 

section.

(iv) Paragraphs (a)(3)(ii) and (iii) of 

this section are applicable to open years 

for which a request for a waiver is filed 

on or after January 29, 2002.

* * * * *

§ 1.882–4T [Removed] 

Par. 5. Section 1.882–4T is removed.

Approved: January 17, 2003. 

David A. Mader, 

Assistant Deputy Commissioner. 

Pamela F. Olson, 

Assistant Secretary of the Treasury.

[FR Doc. 03–5461 Filed 3–07–03; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 4830–01–P

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION 

AGENCY 

40 CFR Part 52 

[AD–FRL–7456–9] 

RIN–2060–AE11 

Approval and Promulgation of 

Implementation Plans; Prevention of 

Significant Deterioration (PSD)

AGENCY: Environmental Protection 

Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Final rule.

SUMMARY: This final action revises the 

applicable implementation plans 

concerning the PSD program mandated 

by part C of title I of the Clean Air Act 

(CAA or Act). These revisions 

incorporate newly promulgated 

paragraphs of the Federal PSD rule into 

the federal implementation plan portion 

of a State’s implementation plan where 

the State does not have an approved 

PSD State Implementation Plan (SIP) in 

place. Specifically, the revisions 

incorporate new applicability 

provisions in the Federal PSD rules for 

baseline emissions determination, 

actual-to-projected-actual methodology, 

plantwide applicability limitations 

(PAL’s), clean units, and pollution 

control projects (PCP’s). The changes are 

intended to ensure comprehensive and 

consistent implementation of the 

Federal PSD program by State, local, 

and tribal agencies where EPA has 

determined that they have the 

responsibility to implement the Federal 

PSD program.

EFFECTIVE DATE: This final rule is 

effective on March 3, 2003.

ADDRESSES: Docket. Docket No. A–90–

37 is located at the EPA Docket Center, 

EPA West, U.S. EPA (6102T), 1301 

Constitution Avenue, NW, Room B–102, 

Washington, DC 20460.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Ms. 

Lynn Hutchinson, Information Transfer 

and Program Integration Division 

(C339–03), U.S. EPA Office of Air 

Quality Planning and Standards, 

Research Triangle Park, North Carolina 

27711, telephone number (919) 541–

5795, facsimile number (919) 541–5509, 

electronic mail email) address: 

hutchinson.lynn@epa.gov.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

Regulated Entities 

Entities potentially affected by this 

final action include sources in all 

industry groups. The majority of sources 

potentially affected are expected to be in 

the following groups.

Industry group SIC a NAICSb

Electric Services .......................................................................................... 491 221111, 221112, 221113, 221119, 221121, 221122. 

Petroleum Refining ...................................................................................... 291 32411. 

Chemical Processes .................................................................................... 281 325181, 32512, 325131, 325182, 211112, 325998, 

331311, 325188. 

Natural Gas Transport ................................................................................. 492 48621, 22121. 

Pulp and Paper Mills ................................................................................... 261 32211, 322121, 322122, 32213 

Paper Mills ................................................................................................... 262 322121, 322122. 

Automobile Manufacturing ........................................................................... 371 336111, 336112, 336712, 336211, 336992, 336322, 

336312, 33633, 33634, 33635, 336399, 336212, 

336213. 

Pharmaceuticals .......................................................................................... 283 325411, 325412, 325413, 325414. 

aStandard Industrial Classification 

b North American Industry Classification System. 

Entities potentially affected by this final 

action also include State, local, and 

tribal governments that are delegated 

authority to implement these 

regulations. 

The EPA has established an official 

public docket for this action under 

Docket No. A–90–37. The official public 

docket consists of the documents 

specifically referenced in this action, 

any public comments received, and 

other information related to this action. 

Although a part of the official docket, 

the public docket does not include 

Confidential Business Information or 

other information whose disclosure is 

restricted by statute. The official public 

docket is the collection of materials that 

is available for public viewing at the 

EPA Docket Center, EPA West, Room B–

102, 1301 Constitution Avenue, NW, 

Washington, DC 20460. The Docket 

Center is open from 8:30 a.m. to 4:30 

p.m., Monday through Friday, excluding 

legal holidays. The telephone number 

for the Reading Room is (202) 566–1744, 

and the telephone number for the 

Docket is (202) 566–1742. A reasonable 

fee may be charged for copying docket 

materials. 

Electronic Access. You may access 

this Federal Register document 

electronically through the EPA Internet 

under the Federal Register listings at 

http://www.epa.gov/fedrgstr/.

Worldwide Web (WWW). In addition 

to being available in the docket, an 

electronic copy of today’s final rule will 

also be available on the WWW through 

EPA’s Technology Transfer Network 

(TTN). Following signature by the EPA 

Administrator, a copy of the rule will be 

posted on the TTN’s policy and 

guidance page for newly proposed or 

promulgated 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) 541–5384. 

Federal Register / Vol. 68, No. 46 / Monday, March 10, 2003 / Rules and Regulations 11317

1 In this preamble the term ‘‘we’’ refers to EPA 

and the term ‘‘you’’ refers to major stationary 

sources of air pollution and their owners and 

operators. All other entities are referred to by their 

respective names (for example, reviewing 

authorities).

Judicial Review 

Under section 307(b) of the CAA, 

judicial review of the final rule is 

available only by filing a petition for 

review in the United States Court of 

Appeals for the District of Columbia 

Circuit May 9, 2003. Under section 

307(d)(7)(B) of the CAA, only an 

objection to the rule that was raised 

with reasonable specificity during the 

period for public comment can be raised 

during judicial review. Moreover, under 

section 307(b)(2) of the CAA, the 

requirements established by today’s 

final action may not be challenged 

separately in any civil or criminal 

proceeding we bring to enforce these 

requirements. 

Outline 

The information presented in this 

preamble is organized as follows:

I. Today’s Final Action 

A. Background 

B. Revisions to Part 52 

C. Effective Date for Today’s Final Action 

II. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews 

A. Executive Order 12866–Regulatory 

Planning and Review 

B. Paperwork Reduction Act

C. Regulatory Flexibility Act (RFA), as 

Amended by the Small Business 

Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act of 

1996 (SBREFA), 5 U.S.C. 601 et seq.

D. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995 

E. Executive Order 13132–Federalism 

F. Executive Order 13175–Consultation 

and Coordination with Indian Tribal 

Governments 

G. Executive Order 13045–Protection of 

Children from Environmental Health 

Risks and Safety Risks 

H. Executive Order 13211–Actions 

Concerning Regulations That 

Significantly Affect Energy Supply, 

Distribution, or Use 

I. National Technology Transfer and 

Advancement Act of 1995 

J. Congressional Review Act

I. Today’s Final Action 

A. Background 

The 1970 Clean Air Act at section 110 

required States to submit plans to 

provide for the implementation and 

maintenance of the national ambient air 

quality standards (NAAQS). While the 

1970 CAA established requirements for 

protecting the NAAQS through SIP’s, it 

did not address prevention of significant 

deterioration of air quality. On May 31, 

1972 (37 FR 10842), the Administrator 

published initial approvals and 

disapprovals of SIP’s submitted 

pursuant to section 110 of the CAA. On 

November 9, 1972 (37 FR 23836), all 

SIP’s were disapproved insofar as they 

failed to provide for significant 

deterioration of air quality. This action 

was taken in response to a preliminary 

injunction issued by the District Court 

for the District of Columbia, which also 

required the Administrator to 

promulgate regulations as to any State 

plan that either permits the significant 

deterioration of air quality in any 

portion of any State, or fails to take the 

measures necessary to prevent 

significant deterioration. 

On July 16, 1973 (38 FR 18986), we 1

proposed several alternative plans for 

prevention of significant deterioration. 

On December 5, 1974 (39 FR 42510), we 

promulgated the Federal PSD program, 

40 CFR 52.21. These regulations 

established a Federal program under 

section 101(b)(1) of the 1970 Clean Air 

Act (CAA) to conduct preconstruction 

review of specified source categories 

where State agencies fail to provide for 

prevention of significant deterioration of 

air quality. This final action also 

disapproved all State plans as lacking 

procedures or regulations for preventing 

significant deterioration of air quality 

and incorporated the Federal PSD 

regulations by reference into all State 

plans. Specifically, it incorporated the 

provisions of § 52.21 by reference into 

the SIP’s in subparts B through DDD of 

part 52. (See 39 FR 42514 concerning 

§ 52.21(a), plan disapproval.)

On June 19, 1978 (43 FR 26388), we 

amended our PSD regulations to 

implement the new requirements of the 

Clean Air Act Amendments of 1977 

(Pub. L. 95–95). These regulations built 

on the previous ones, but provided a 

more comprehensive program pursuant 

to part C (sections 160–165) of title I, 

which was added in the 1977 CAA 

Amendments. The 1977 CAA 

Amendments also added the statutory 

requirement that the PSD program be 

implemented through SIP’s submitted 

pursuant to CAA section 110. Our final 

rules in 1978 also amended § 52.21 to 

incorporate all of the new requirements 

of CAA sections 160–165 into the 

Federal PSD program. This final rule 

contained the same language concerning 

plan disapprovals that is contained in 

§ 52.21(a)(1) as promulgated on 

December 31, 2002.

Section 52.21(a) Plan disapproval. The 

provisions of this section are applicable to 

any State implementation plan which has 

been disapproved with respect to prevention 

of significant deterioration of air quality in 

any portion of any State where the existing 

air quality is better than the national ambient 

air quality standards. Specific disapprovals 

are listed where applicable in subparts B 

through DDD of this part. The provisions of 

this section have been incorporated by 

reference into the applicable implementation 

plans for various States, as provided in 

subparts B through DDD of this part. Where 

this section is so incorporated, the provisions 

shall also be applicable to all lands owned 

by the Federal government and Indian 

reservations located in such State. No 

disapproval with respect to a State’s failure 

to prevent significant deterioration of air 

quality shall invalidate or otherwise affect 

the obligation of States, emission sources, or 

other persons with respect to all portions of 

these plans approved or promulgated under 

this part (46 FR 26403).

The 1978 final rule also incorporated 

section 52.21 by reference into the SIP’s 

for 54 programs (50 States, Puerto Rico, 

Virgin Islands, American Samoa, and 

Guam) as follows:

(a) The requirements of sections 160 

through 165 of the Clean Air Act are not met, 

since the plan does not include approvable 

procedures for preventing the significant 

deterioration of air quality. 

(b) The provisions of section 52.21 (b) 

through (v) are hereby incorporated and 

made part of the applicable State plan for the 

State of llll (see 43 FR 26410).

On August 7, 1980 (43 FR 52676), we 

amended our PSD regulations in 

response to the decision by the U.S. 

Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit in 

Alabama Power Company v. Costle, 636 

F.2d 323 (D.C.Cir. 1979). In addition to 

revising the PSD rules to respond to the 

court, this final rule disapproved a 

number of SIP’s for PSD purposes and 

incorporated § 52.21 by reference into 

the implementation plans for those 

States. It also contained the same 

language concerning plan disapprovals 

that is contained in the newly 

promulgated provisions at § 52.21(a)(1), 

as well as the same language concerning 

incorporation by reference in the 

relevant State-specific subparts of part 

52 (see 45 FR 52741). 

B. Revisions to Part 52 

We proposed revisions to the 

nonattainment new source review (NSR) 

and PSD rules in a notice published in 

the Federal Register on July 23, 1996 

(61 FR 38250). That Federal Register

notice proposed a number of changes to 

our existing major NSR and PSD 

requirements. (Please refer to the outline 

of that proposed rulemaking for a list of 

changes that were proposed to our 

existing regulations.) Following the 

1996 proposal, we held two public 

hearings and more than 50 stakeholder 

meetings. Environmental groups, 

industry, and State, local, and Federal 

agency representatives participated in 

these many discussions on all aspects of 

the proposed rules. On July 24, 1998, we 

published a notice of availability (NOA) 

11318 Federal Register / Vol. 68, No. 46 / Monday, March 10, 2003 / Rules and Regulations 

at 63 FR 39857 to solicit further 

comment on three specific aspects of the 

proposed revisions: Determining 

baseline emissions, actual-to-futureactual methodology (later renamed as 

the actual-to-projected-actual test), and 

PAL’s. More than 400 letters from the 

public were received concerning the 

proposal and the NOA and can be found 

in Docket A–90–37. On December 31, 

2002 (67 FR 80186), we published 

notice of final action on several of the 

changes that were proposed in 1996 and 

noticed in 1998: Baseline emissions 

determinations, the actual-to-projectedactual methodology, actual PAL’s, clean 

Units, and PCP’s. 

Today, we are taking final action on 

one of the aspects of the 1996 proposal 

that was not included in our December 

31 final regulations and which is 

necessary to ensure implementation of 

those final rules. Specifically, we are 

finalizing our proposal that PSD 

applicability changes would also be 

included in the part 52 regulations 

governing Federal permitting programs 

in those jurisdictions that lack a SIPapproved PSD program. In our 1996 

proposal (61 FR 38252), we listed five 

proposed changes to NSR applicability: 

(1) Clean units, (2) baseline emissions, 

(3) PCP’s, (4) PAL’s, and (5) the actualto-future-actual test (renamed as the 

actual-to-projected-actual test). In that 

proposal, we specifically noted that we 

were proposing these changes for the 

part 52 Federal PSD program as well.

The EPA also proposes to include these 

applicability approaches in the part 52 

regulations governing Federal permitting 

programs (61 FR 38253).

The part 52 regulations governing 

Federal permitting programs include the 

Federal PSD rule at 40 CFR 52.21, as 

well as the various sections of subparts 

C through DDD of part 52 that 

incorporate the Federal permitting 

program by reference for those 

jurisdictions where EPA has 

promulgated a federal implementation 

plan (FIP) because there is no SIPapproved PSD program in those 

jurisdictions. (See, for example, 

§ 52.632, which incorporates § 52.21 by 

reference into the State plan for the 

State of Hawaii.) Although we received 

a limited number of comments 

regarding whether States with approved 

PSD programs in their SIPs should be 

required to adopt the five applicability 

provisions, we received no comments 

on whether the five applicability 

provisions should be adopted in those 

jurisdictions where EPA has 

promulgated a FIP because there is no 

SIP-approved PSD program in those 

jurisdictions. This lack of comment is 

not surprising since we did not propose 

to change our longstanding procedures 

concerning incorporation by reference 

of § 52.21 as a FIP for those jurisdictions 

where there is no SIP-approved PSD 

permitting program. Public comments 

concerning specific changes to the 

provisions in § 52.21 subpart A were 

addressed in our December 31, 2002 

Federal Register notice and 

accompanying Technical Support 

Document. The opportunity for judicial 

review of specific changes to subpart A 

has also been provided as part of that 

rulemaking. (See 67 FR 80244.) 

As of December 31, 2002, a number of 

State and local agencies did not have 

approved PSD programs in their SIPs. 

Instead, as described above, EPA 

promulgated the Federal PSD program 

in those jurisdictions through regulatory 

provisions in 40 CFR part 52, subparts 

C through DDD. In most of those 

jurisdictions, the State or local agency 

administers the federal PSD program 

pursuant to a delegation of authority 

under § 52.21 (u). When finalizing the 

new applicability provisions that we 

proposed in 1996, however, the relevant 

parts of § 52.21 were extended from 

§ 52.21(b) through (w) to § 52.21(a)(2) 

and (b) through (bb). Therefore, today’s 

final regulations incorporate by 

reference the new § 52.21(a)(2) and (b) 

through (bb) into the applicable 

implementation plan for those 

jurisdictions that currently do not have 

approved PSD programs. With this final 

action, we are not approving or 

disapproving the PSD programs for any 

State, local, or Tribal agencies. Instead, 

we are updating the FIP’s, using the 

same language that we have used at 

each major revision to the PSD rules, to 

reflect the fact that all of the relevant 

provisions of the new § 52.21 now 

apply. 

No tribal government currently has an 

approved tribal implementation plan 

(TIP) under the CAA to implement the 

PSD program. The Federal Government 

is currently the PSD reviewing authority 

in Indian Country. Pursuant to 

§ 52.21(a)(1), the provisions of § 52.21 

are applicable to all lands owned by the 

Federal Government and Indian 

Reservations located in each State. 

Therefore, we are incorporating the 

Federal PSD Program contained in 

§ 52.21 by reference into 

implementation plans where the 

requirements of CAA 160–165 are not 

met for federally designated Indian 

lands. By this final action, we are not 

changing the authority for implementing 

and enforcing the Federal PSD 

permitting program for any sources 

located in Indian Country. This 

incorporation by reference only applies 

to those sections of subparts B through 

DDD of part 52 that currently 

incorporate the Federal PSD program for 

Indian lands.

C. Effective Date for Today’s Final 

Action 

Today’s final regulations are effective 

on March 3, 2003. This is consistent 

with the March 3, 2003 effective date for 

the changes to the Federal PSD program 

in § 52.21 that were promulgated on 

December 31, 2002. (See 67 FR 80240.) 

II. Statutory and Executive Order 

Reviews 

A. Executive Order12866—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 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. 

(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. 

Pursuant to the terms of Executive 

Order 12866, it has been determined 

that this rule is not a significant 

regulatory action and therefore it was 

not submitted to OMB for review. 

B. Paperwork Reduction Act 

The information collection 

requirements for the revisions to the 

major NSR rules at §§ 51.165, 51.166, 

and 52.21 (67 FR 80243) will be 

contained in two different information 

collection requests (ICR’s). 

The OMB has approved the 

information collection requirements 

under the provisions of the Paperwork 

Reduction Act, 44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.

and has assigned OMB control number 

2060–0003 (ICR 1230.10). The EPA 

prepared an ICR document (ICR No. 

1230.10) extending the approval of the

Federal Register / Vol. 68, No. 46 / Monday, March 10, 2003 / Rules and Regulations 11319

ICR for the promulgated NSR 

regulations on March 30, 2001. On 

October 29, 2001, OMB approved EPA’s 

request for extension for 3 years until 

October 31, 2004. The OMB number for 

this approval is 2060–0003. 

In addition to the existing ICR, the 

information collection requirements in 

the final rules on December 31, 2002 (67 

FR 80243), have been submitted for 

approval to OMB under the 

requirements of the Paperwork 

Reduction Act, 44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.

An ICR document has been prepared by 

EPA (ICR No. 2074.01), and a copy may 

be obtained from Susan Auby, U.S. 

Environmental Protection Agency, 

Office of Environmental Information, 

Collection Strategies Division (2822T), 

1200 Pennsylvania Avenue, NW., 

Washington, DC 20460–0001, by e-mail 

at auby.susan@epa.gov, or by calling 

(202) 566–1672. A copy may also be 

downloaded off the Internet at http://

www.epa.gov/icr. The information 

requirements included in ICR No. 

2074.01 are not effective until OMB 

approves them.

The information that ICR No. 2074.01 

covers is required for the submittal of 

complete permit applications for the 

construction or modification of all major 

new stationary sources of pollutants in 

attainment and nonattainment areas, as 

well as for applicable minor stationary 

sources of pollutants. This information 

collection is necessary for the proper 

performance of EPA’s functions, has 

practical utility, and is not 

unnecessarily duplicative of 

information we otherwise can 

reasonably access. We have reduced, to 

the extent practicable and appropriate, 

the burden on persons providing the 

information to or for EPA. 

According to ICR No. 2074.01, as a 

result of the rule changes on December 

31, 2002, the total 3-year burden change 

of the revised collection is estimated at 

about 219,741 hours at a total cost of 

$7.7 million. The annual burden change 

to industry is about 64,287 hours at a 

cost of $2.2 million. The annual burden 

change to reviewing agencies is about 

8,960 hours at a cost of $331,520. The 

total annual respondent change is 

73,247 hours for a total respondent 

change in cost of $2.6 million. These 

cost changes are based upon 62 PSD and 

123 NSR nonutility sources (185 total); 

and 85 PSD and 169 NSR (254 total) 

sources, including utilities. For the 

number of respondent reviewing 

authorities, the analysis uses the 112 

reviewing authorities count used by 

other permitting ICR’s for the one-time 

tasks (for example, SIP revisions) and 

the appropriate source count for 

individual permit-related items (for 

example, attending pre-application 

meetings with the source). There is only 

one Federal source listed in the ICR. 

Based on the burden assessed in ICR 

No. 2074.01, we estimate there is no 

burden for today’s final rule. The result 

of today’s final rules is to incorporate 

provisions that were promulgated on 

December 31, 2002 (67 FR 80186) into 

the SIP’s and no additional burden on 

reviewing authorities or regulated 

entities is incurred as a result of today’s 

final rules. 

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 purpose of 

responding to the information 

collection; adjust existing ways to 

comply with any previously applicable 

instructions and requirements; train 

personnel to respond to a collection of 

information; search existing 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 

control number. The OMB control 

numbers for EPA’s regulations are listed 

in 40 CFR part 9 and 48 CFR chapter 15. 

We will continue to present OMB 

control numbers in a consolidated table 

format to be codified in 40 CFR part 9 

of the Agency’s regulations, and in each 

CFR volume containing EPA 

regulations. The table lists the section 

numbers with reporting and 

recordkeeping requirements, and the 

current OMB control numbers. This 

listing of the OMB control numbers and 

their subsequent codification in the CFR 

satisfy the requirements of the 

Paperwork Reduction Act (44 U.S.C. 

3501 et seq.) and OMB’s implementing 

regulations at 5 CFR part 1320. 

C. Regulatory Flexibility Act (RFA), as 

Amended by the Small Business 

Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act of 

1996 (SBREFA), 5 U.S.C. 601 et seq. 

The EPA has determined that it is not 

necessary to prepare a regulatory 

flexibility analysis in connection with 

this final rule. The EPA has also 

determined that this rule will not have 

a significant economic impact on a 

substantial number of small entities. For 

purposes of assessing the impacts of 

today’s rule on small entities, small 

entity is defined as: (1) Any small 

business employing fewer than 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; or (3) a small organization 

that is any not-for-profit enterprise that 

is independently owned and operated 

and is not dominant in its field.

After considering the economic 

impacts of today’s final rule on small 

entities, we have concluded that this 

action will not have a significant 

economic impact on a substantial 

number of small entities. In determining 

whether a rule has a significant 

economic impact on a substantial 

number of small entities, the impact of 

concern is any significant adverse 

economic impact on small entities, 

since the primary purpose of the 

regulatory flexibility analyses is to 

identify and address regulatory 

alternatives ‘‘which minimize any 

significant economic impact of the 

proposed rule on small entities’’ (5 

U.S.C. 603 and 604). Thus, an 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. 

A Regulatory Flexibility Act 

Screening Analysis, developed as part of 

a 1994 draft Regulatory Impact Analysis 

(RIA) and incorporated into the 

September 1995 ICR renewal analysis, 

showed that the changes to the NSR 

program due to the 1990 CAA 

Amendments would not have an 

adverse impact on small entities. This 

analysis encompassed the entire 

universe of applicable major sources 

that were likely to also be small 

businesses (approximately 50 ‘‘small 

business’’ major sources). Because the 

administrative burden of the NSR 

program is the primary source of the 

NSR program’s regulatory costs, the 

analysis estimated a negligible ‘‘cost to 

sales’’ (regulatory cost divided by the 

business category mean revenue) ratio 

for this source group. Currently, and as 

reported in the current ICR, there is no 

economic basis for a different 

conclusion. 

We believe these rule changes will 

reduce the regulatory burden associated 

with the major NSR program for all 

sources, including all small businesses, 

by improving the operational flexibility 

of owners and operators, improving the 

clarity of requirements, and providing 

alternatives that sources may take 

advantage of to further improve their 

operational flexibility. As a result, the 

program changes provided in the final 

rule are not expected to result in any 

11320 Federal Register / Vol. 68, No. 46 / Monday, March 10, 2003 / Rules and Regulations 

increases in expenditure by any small 

entity. 

We have therefore concluded that 

today’s final rule will relieve regulatory 

burden for all small entities. 

D. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 

1995 

Title II of the Unfunded Mandates 

Reform Act of 1995 (UMRA), Pub. L. 

104–4, 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, 

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 to State, local, 

and tribal governments, in the aggregate, 

or to 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 EPA to 

identify and consider a reasonable 

number of regulatory alternatives and 

adopt the least costly, 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 EPA to adopt an alternative other 

than the least costly, most cost effective 

or least burdensome alternative if the 

Administrator publishes with the final 

rule an explanation as to why that 

alternative was not adopted. Before 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, 

enabling officials of 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. 

We have determined that this rule 

does 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. There 

is no burden for State, local, and tribal 

agencies in order for this rule to be 

included in the SIP, as this final action 

directly incorporates the changes into 

the SIP. Moreover, these revisions will 

ultimately provide greater operational 

flexibility to sources permitted by the 

States, which will in turn reduce the 

overall burden of the program on State 

and local authorities by reducing the 

number of required permit 

modifications. In addition, we believe 

the rule changes will actually reduce the 

regulatory burden associated with the 

major NSR program by improving the 

operational flexibility of owners and 

operators, improving the clarity of 

requirements, and providing 

alternatives that sources may take 

advantage of to further improve their 

operational flexibility. Thus, today’s 

rule is not subject to the requirements 

of sections 202 and 205 of the UMRA.

For the same reasons stated above, we 

have determined that this rule contains 

no regulatory requirements that might 

significantly or uniquely affect small 

governments. Thus, today’s rule is not 

subject to the requirements of section 

203 of the UMRA. 

E. Executive Order 13132—Federalism 

Executive Order 13132, entitled 

‘‘federalism’’ (64 FR 43255, August 10, 

1999), 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.’’

This final rule does not have 

federalism implications. It 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. We do not 

expect this final rule to result in 

expenditures by the States. Today’s final 

rules only apply in States that have been 

delegated the authority to implement 

the Federal PSD rules. Therefore, 

reviewing authorities will not incur a 

burden to revise their SIP’s. Moreover, 

these revisions provide greater 

operational flexibility to sources 

permitted by the States, which will in 

turn reduce the overall burden of the 

program on State and local authorities 

by reducing the number of required 

permit modifications. Thus, Executive 

Order 13132 does not apply to this rule. 

Nevertheless, in the spirit of Executive 

Order 13132, and consistent with EPA 

policy to promote communications 

between EPA and State and local 

governments, we specifically solicited 

comment on the proposed rule from 

State and local officials. 

F. Executive Order 13175—Consultation 

and Coordination With Indian Tribal 

Governments 

Executive Order 13175, entitled 

‘‘Consultation and Coordination with 

Indian Tribal Governments’’ (65 FR 

67249, November 9, 2000), requires 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.’’ We believe that this final 

rule does not have tribal implications as 

specified in Executive Order 13175. 

Thus, Executive Order 13175 does not 

apply to this rule. 

The EPA began considering potential 

revisions to the NSR rules in the early 

1990’s and proposed changes in 1996. 

The purpose of today’s final rule is to 

add greater flexibility to the existing 

major NSR regulations. These changes 

will benefit both reviewing authorities 

and the regulated community by 

providing increased certainty as to 

when the requirements apply, and by 

providing alternative ways to comply 

with the requirements. Taken as a 

whole, today’s final rule should result 

in no added burden or compliance costs 

and should not substantially change the 

level of environmental performance 

achieved under the previous rules. 

No tribal government currently has an 

approved tribal implementation plan 

(TIP) under the CAA to implement the 

NSR program. The Federal government 

is currently the NSR reviewing authority 

in Indian country, thus tribal 

governments should not experience 

added burden, nor should their laws be 

affected with respect to implementation 

of this rule. Additionally, although 

major stationary sources affected by 

today’s final rule could be located in or 

near Indian country and/or be owned or 

operated by tribal governments, such 

sources would not incur additional 

costs or compliance burdens as a result 

of this rule. Instead, the only effect on 

such sources should be the benefit of 

the added certainty and flexibility 

provided by the rule. 

We recognize the importance of 

including tribal consultation as part of 

the rulemaking process. Although we 

did not include specific consultation 

with tribal officials as part of our 

outreach process on this final rule, 

which was developed largely prior to 

issuance of Executive Order 13175 and 

which does not have tribal implications 

under Executive Order 13175, we will 

continue to consult with tribes on future 

rulemakings to assess and address tribal 

Federal Register / Vol. 68, No. 46 / Monday, March 10, 2003 / Rules and Regulations 11321

implications, and will work with tribes 

interested in seeking TIP approval to 

implement the NSR program to ensure 

consistency of tribal plans with this 

rule. 

G. Executive Order 13045—Protection of 

Children From Environmental Health 

Risks and Safety Risks 

Executive Order 13045, entitled 

‘‘Protection of Children from 

Environmental Health Risks and Safety 

Risks’’ (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 

EPA has reason to believe may have a 

disproportionate effect on children. If 

the regulatory action meets both criteria, 

the Agency 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 Agency. 

This final rule is not subject to the 

Executive Order because it is not 

economically significant as defined in 

Executive Order 12866, and because the 

Agency does not have reason to believe 

the environmental health or safety risks 

addressed by this action present a 

disproportionate risk to children 

because we believe that this package as 

a whole will result in equal or better 

environmental protection than currently 

provided by the existing regulations, 

and do so in a more streamlined and 

effective manner.

H. Executive Order 13211—Actions 

Concerning Regulations That 

Significantly Affect Energy Supply, 

Distribution, or Use 

This rule is not a ‘‘significant energy 

action’’ as defined in Executive Order 

13211, ‘‘Actions Concerning Regulations 

That Significantly Affect Energy Supply, 

Distribution, or Use’’ (66 FR 28355, May 

22, 2001) because it is not likely to have 

a significant adverse effect on the 

supply, distribution, or use of energy. 

Today’s rule improves the ability of 

sources to undertake pollution 

prevention or energy efficiency projects, 

switch to less polluting fuels or raw 

materials, maintain the reliability of 

production facilities, and effectively 

utilize and improve existing capacity. 

The rule also includes a number of 

provisions to streamline administrative 

and permitting processes so that 

facilities can quickly accommodate 

changes in supply and demand. The 

regulations provide several alternatives 

that are specifically designed to reduce 

administrative burden for sources that 

use pollution prevention or energy 

efficient projects. 

I. National Technology Transfer and 

Advancement Act of 1995 

Section 12(d) of the National 

Technology Transfer and Advancement 

Act of 1995 (NTTAA), Pub. L. 104–113, 

12(d) (15 U.S.C. 272 note) directs 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 (for example, 

materials specifications, test methods, 

sampling procedures, and business 

practices) that are developed or adopted 

by voluntary consensus standards 

bodies. The NTTAA directs EPA to 

provide Congress, through OMB, 

explanations when the Agency decides 

not to use available and applicable 

voluntary consensus standards. 

This action does not involve technical 

standards. This final rule does not 

create new requirements but, rather, 

revises an existing permitting program 

by providing a series of program options 

that affected facilities may choose to 

adopt. These options will reduce the 

regulatory burden associated with the 

major NSR program by improving the 

operational flexibility of owners and 

operators, improving the clarity of 

requirements, and providing 

alternatives that sources may take 

advantage of to further improve their 

operational flexibility. Therefore, EPA 

did not consider the use of any 

voluntary consensus standards. 

J. 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. The EPA submitted 

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). Therefore, 

this rule will be effective on March 3, 

2003.

List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52 

Environmental protection, 

Administrative practices and 

procedures, Air pollution control, Best 

available control technology, Baseline 

emissions, Carbon monoxide, Clean 

units, Federal implementation Plans, 

Hydrocarbons, Intergovernmental 

relations, Lowest achievable emission 

rate, Lead, Major modifications, 

Nitrogen oxides, Ozone, Particular 

matter, Plantwide applicability 

limitations, Pollution control projects, 

State implementation plans, Sulfur 

oxides.

Dated: February 28, 2003. 

Christine Todd Whitman, 

Administrator.

For the reasons set out in the 

preamble, title 40, chapter I of the Code 

of Federal Regulations is amended 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 C—[Amended] 

2. Section 52.96 is amended by 

revising paragraph (b) to read as follows.

§ 52.96 Significant deterioration of air 

quality.

* * * * *

(b) The requirements of sections 160 

through 165 of the Clean Air Act are not 

met for Indian reservations since the 

plan does not include approvable 

procedures for preventing the 

significant deterioration of air quality on 

Indian reservations and, therefore, the 

provisions of § 52.21(a)(2) and (b) 

through (bb) are hereby incorporated 

and made part of the applicable 

reservation in the State of Alaska.

Subpart D—[Amended] 

3. Section 52.144 is amended by 

revising paragraph (b) to read as follows.

§ 52.144 Significant deterioration of air 

quality.

* * * * *

(b) Regulation for preventing 

significant deterioration of air quality. 

The provisions of § 52.21(a)(2) and (b) 

through (bb) are hereby incorporated 

and made a part of the applicable State 

plan for the State of Arizona for that 

portion applicable to the Pima County 

Health Department and the Maricopa 

County Department of Health Services 

and sources locating on Indian lands.

11322 Federal Register / Vol. 68, No. 46 / Monday, March 10, 2003 / Rules and Regulations 

Subpart E—[Amended] 

4. Section 52.181 is amended by 

revising paragraph (b) to read as follows.

§ 52.181 Significant deterioration of air 

quality.

* * * * *

(b) The requirements of sections 160 

through 165 of the Clean Air Act are not 

met for federally designated Indian 

lands. Therefore, the provisions of 

§ 52.21(a)(2) and (b) through (bb) are 

hereby incorporated by reference and 

made a part of the applicable 

implementation plan and are applicable 

to sources located on land under the 

control of Indian governing bodies.

Subpart F—[Amended] 

5. Section 52.270 is amended by 

revising paragraphs (a)(3), (b)(1) 

introductory text, (b)(2) introductory 

text, (b)(3) introductory text, and (b)(4) 

introductory text to read as follows.

§ 52.270 Significant deterioration of air 

quality. 

(a) * * * 

(3) The provisions of § 52.21(a)(2) and 

(b) through (bb) are hereby incorporated 

and made a part of the applicable State 

plan for the State of California. 

(b) * * * 

(1) The PSD rules for Sacramento 

County Air Pollution Control District 

are approved under Part C, Subpart 1, of 

the Clean Air Act. However, EPA is 

retaining authority to apply § 52.21 in 

certain cases. The provisions of 

§ 52.21(a)(2) and (b) through (bb) are 

therefore incorporated and made a part 

of the State plan for California for the 

Sacramento County Air Pollution 

Control District for:

* * * * *

(2) The PSD rules for North Coast 

Unified Air Quality Management 

District are approved under Part C, 

Subpart 1, of the Clean Air Act. 

However, EPA is retaining authority to 

apply § 52.21 in certain cases. The 

provisions of § 52.21(a)(2) and (b) 

through (bb) are therefore incorporated 

and made a part of the State plan for 

California for the North Coast Unified 

Air Quality Management District for:

* * * * *

(3) The PSD rules for Mendocino 

County Air Pollution Control District 

are approved under Part C, Subpart 1, of 

the Clean Air Act. However, EPA is 

retaining authority to apply § 52.21 in 

certain cases. The provisions of 

§ 52.21(a)(2) and (b) through (bb) are 

therefore incorporated and made a part 

of the State plan for California for the 

Mendocino County Air Pollution 

Control District for:

* * * * *

(4) The PSD rules for Northern 

Sonoma County Air Pollution Control 

District are approved under Part C, 

Subpart 1, of the Clean Air Act. 

However, EPA is retaining authority to 

apply § 52.21 in certain cases. The 

provisions of § 52.21(a)(2) and (b) 

through (bb) are therefore incorporated 

and made a part of the State plan for 

California for the Northern Sonoma 

County Air Pollution Control District 

for:

* * * * *

Subpart G—[Amended] 

6. Section 52.343 is amended by 

revising paragraph (b) to read as follows.

§ 52.343 Significant deterioration of air 

quality.

* * * * *

(b) Regulations for preventing 

significant deterioration of air quality. 

The provisions of § 52.21(a)(2) and (b) 

through (bb) are hereby incorporated 

and made a part of the applicable State 

plan for the State of Colorado for the 

sources identified in paragraph (a) of 

this section as not meeting the 

requirements of sections 160–165 of the 

Clean Air Act.

* * * * *

Subpart H—[Amended] 

7. Section 52.382 is amended by 

revising paragraph (b) to read as follows.

* * * * *

(b) The increments for nitrogen 

dioxide and related requirements 

promulgated on October 17, 1988 (53 FR 

40671), and amended on December 31, 

2002 (67 FR 80186) to 40 CFR 

52.21(a)(2) and (b) through (bb) are 

hereby incorporated and made part of 

the applicable State implementation 

plan for the State of Connecticut.

Subpart J—[Amended] 

8. Section 52.499 is amended by 

revising paragraph (b) to read as follows.

§ 52.499 Significant deterioration of air 

quality.

* * * * *

(b) Regulations for preventing 

significant deterioration of air quality. 

The provisions of § 52.21(a)(2) and (b) 

through (bb) are hereby incorporated 

and made a part of the applicable State 

plan for the District of Columbia.

Subpart K—[Amended] 

9. Section 52.530 is amended by 

revising paragraph (d) introductory text 

to read as follows.

§ 52.530 Significant deterioration of air 

quality.

* * * * *

(d) The requirements of sections 160 

through 165 of the Clean Air Act are not 

met since the Florida plan, as 

submitted, does not apply to certain 

sources. Therefore, the provisions of 

§ 52.21(a)(2) and (b) through (bb) are 

hereby incorporated by reference and 

made a part of the Florida plan for:

* * * * *

Subpart M—[Amended] 

10. Section 52.632 is amended by 

revising paragraph (b) to read as follows.

§ 52.632 Significant deterioration of air 

quality.

* * * * *

(b) Regulations for preventing 

significant deterioration of air quality. 

The provisions of § 52.21(a)(2) and (b) 

through (bb) are hereby incorporated 

and made a part of the applicable State 

plan for the State of Hawaii.

Subpart N—[Amended] 

11. Section 52.683 is amended by 

revising paragraphs (b) and (c) to read 

as follows.

§ 52.683 Significant deterioration of air 

quality.

* * * * *

(b) The requirements of sections 160 

through 165 of the Clean Air Act are not 

met for Indian reservations since the 

plan does not include approvable 

procedures for preventing significant 

deterioration of air quality on Indian 

reservations. Therefore, the provisions 

of § 52.21(a)(2) and (b) through (bb) are 

hereby incorporated and made part of 

the applicable plan for Indian 

reservations in the State of Idaho. 

(c) The requirements of section 165 of 

the Clean Air Act are not met for 

sources subject to prevention of 

significant deterioration requirements 

prior to August 22, 1986, the effective 

date of EPA’s approval of the rules cited 

in paragraph (a) of this section. 

Therefore, the provisions of 

§ 52.21(a)(2), (b), (c), (d), and (h) through 

(bb) are hereby incorporated and made 

part of the applicable plan for sources 

subject to § 52.21 prior to August 22, 

1986.

Federal Register / Vol. 68, No. 46 / Monday, March 10, 2003 / Rules and Regulations 11323

Subpart O—[Amended] 

12. Section 52.738 is amended by 

revising paragraph (b) to read as follows.

§ 52.738 Significant deterioration of air 

quality.

* * * * *

(b) Regulations for preventing 

significant deterioration of air quality.

The provisions of § 52.21(a)(2) and (b) 

through (bb) are hereby incorporated 

and made a part of the applicable State 

plan for the State of Illinois.

* * * * *

Subpart P—[Amended] 

13. Section 52.793 is amended by 

revising paragraph (b) to read as follows.

§ 52.793 Significant deterioration of air 

quality.

* * * * *

(b) Regulations for preventing 

significant deterioration of air quality.

The provisions of § 52.21(a)(2) and (b) 

through (bb) are hereby incorporated 

and made a part of the applicable state 

plan for the State of Indiana.

* * * * *

Subpart Q—[Amended] 

14. Section 52.833 is amended by 

revising paragraph (b) to read as follows.

§ 52.833 Significant deterioration of air 

quality.

* * * * *

(b) Regulations for preventing 

significant deterioration of air quality. 

The provisions of § 52.21(a)(2) and (b) 

through (bb) are hereby incorporated 

and made a part of the applicable State 

plan for the State of Iowa for sources 

wishing to locate on Indian lands; 

sources constructed under permits 

issued by EPA; and certain sources as 

identified in Iowa’s April 22, 1987, 

letter.

Subpart T—[Amended] 

15. Section 52.986 is amended by 

revising paragraph (b) to read as follows.

§ 52.986 Significant deterioration of air 

quality.

* * * * *

(b) The requirements of sections 160 

through 165 of the Clean Air Act are not 

met for federally designated Indian 

lands since the plan (specifically LAC: 

33:III:509.A.1) excludes all federally 

recognized Indian lands from the 

provisions of this regulation. Therefore, 

the provisions of § 52.21(a)(2) and (b) 

through (bb) are hereby incorporated by 

reference and made a part of the 

applicable implementation plan, and are 

applicable to sources located on land 

under the control of Indian governing 

bodies.

Subpart W—[Amended] 

16. Section 52.1165 is amended by 

revising paragraph (b) to read as follows.

§ 52.1165 Significant deterioration of air 

quality.

* * * * *

(b) Regulation for preventing 

significant deterioration of air quality. 

The provisions of § 52.21(a)(2) and (b) 

through (bb) are hereby incorporated 

and made a part of the applicable State 

plan for the State of Massachusetts.

Subpart X—[Amended] 

17. Section 52.1180 is amended by 

revising paragraph (b) to read as follows.

§ 52.1180 Significant deterioration of air 

quality.

* * * * *

(b) Regulations for preventing 

significant deterioration of air quality. 

The provisions of § 52.21(a)(2) and (b) 

through (bb) are hereby incorporated 

and made a part of the applicable State 

plan for the State of Michigan.

* * * * *

Subpart Y—[Amended] 

18. Section 52.1234 is amended by 

revising paragraph (b) to read as follows.

§ 52.1234 Significant deterioration of air 

quality.

* * * * *

(b) Regulations for preventing 

significant deterioration of air quality. 

The provisions of § 52.21(a)(2) and (b) 

through (bb) are hereby incorporated 

and made a part of the applicable State 

plan for the State of Minnesota.

* * * * *

Subpart BB—[Amended] 

19. Section 52.1382 is amended by 

revising paragraph (b) to read as follows.

§ 52.1382 Prevention of significant 

deterioration of air quality.

* * * * *

(b) Regulation for preventing 

significant deterioration of air quality. 

The provisions of § 52.21(a)(2) and (b) 

through (bb) are hereby incorporated by 

reference and made a part of the 

Montana State implementation plan and 

are applicable to proposed major 

stationary sources or major 

modifications to be located on Indian 

Reservations.

* * * * *

Subpart CC—[Amended] 

20. Section 52.1436 is amended by 

revising the introductory text to read as 

follows.

§ 52.1436 Significant deterioration of air 

quality. 

The requirements of sections 160 

through 165 of the Clean Air Act are met 

except as noted below. The EPA is 

retaining § 52.21(a)(2) and (b) through 

(bb) as part of the Nebraska SIP for the 

following types of sources:

* * * * *

Subpart DD—[Amended] 

21. Section 52.1485 is amended by 

revising paragraph (b) to read as follows.

§ 52.1485 Significant deterioration of air 

quality.

* * * * *

(b) Regulation for preventing 

significant deterioration of air quality. 

The provisions of § 52.21(a)(2) and (b) 

through (bb) are incorporated and made 

a part of the applicable State plan for 

the State of Nevada except for that 

portion applicable to the Clark County 

Health District.

* * * * *

Subpart FF—[Amended] 

22. Section 52.1603 is amended by 

revising paragraph (b) to read as follows.

§ 52.1603 Significant deterioration of air 

quality.

* * * * *

(b) Regulations for preventing 

significant deterioration of air quality. 

The provisions of § 52.21(a)(2) and (b) 

through (bb) are hereby incorporated 

and made a part of the applicable State 

plan for the State of New Jersey.

Subpart GG—[Amended] 

23. Section 52.1634 is amended by 

revising paragraph (b) to read as follows.

§ 52.1634 Significant deterioration of air 

quality.

* * * * *

(b) The requirements of sections 160 

through 165 of the Clean Air Act are not 

met for federally designated Indian 

lands. Therefore, the provisions of 

§ 52.21 (a)(2) and (b) through (bb) are 

hereby incorporated by reference and 

made a part of the applicable 

implementation plan, and are applicable 

to sources located on land under the 

control of Indian governing bodies.

* * * * *

11324 Federal Register / Vol. 68, No. 46 / Monday, March 10, 2003 / Rules and Regulations 

Subpart HH—[Amended] 

24. Section 52.1689 is amended by 

revising paragraph (b) to read as follows.

§ 52.1689 Significant deterioration of air 

quality.

* * * * *

(b) Regulations for preventing 

significant deterioration of air quality.

The provisions of § 52.21(a)(2) and (b) 

through (bb) are hereby incorporated 

and made a part of the applicable state 

plan for the State of New York.

Subpart JJ—[Amended] 

25. Section 52.1829 is amended by 

revising paragraph (b) to read as follows.

§ 52.1829 Prevention of significant 

deterioration of air quality.

* * * * *

(b) Regulation for preventing of 

significant deterioration of air quality. 

The provisions of § 52.21(a)(2) and (b) 

through (bb) are hereby incorporated by 

reference and made a part of the North 

Dakota State implementation plan and 

are applicable to proposed major 

stationary sources or major 

modifications to be located on Indian 

Reservations.

Subpart LL—[Amended] 

26. Section 52.1929 is amended by 

revising paragraph (a) introductory text 

to read as follows.

§ 52.1929 Significant deterioration of air 

quality. 

(a) Regulation for preventing 

significant deterioration of air quality. 

The Oklahoma plan, as submitted, does 

not apply to certain sources in the State. 

Therefore the provisions of § 52.21(a)(2) 

and (b) through (bb) are hereby 

incorporated by reference, made part of 

the Oklahoma State implementation 

plan and are applicable to the following 

major stationary sources or major 

modifications:

* * * * *

Subpart MM—[Amended] 

27. Section 52.1987 is amended by 

revising paragraph (c) to read as follows.

§ 52.1987 Significant deterioration of air 

quality.

* * * * *

(c) The requirements of sections 160 

through 165 of the Clean Air Act are not 

met for Indian reservations since the 

plan does not include approvable 

procedures for preventing the 

significant deterioration of air quality on 

Indian reservations and, therefore, the 

provisions of § 52.21(a)(2) and (b) 

through (bb) are hereby incorporated 

and made part of the applicable plan for 

Indian reservations in the State of 

Oregon.

Subpart QQ—[Amended] 

28. Section 52.2178 is amended by 

revising paragraph (b) to read as follows.

§ 52.2178 Significant deterioration of air 

quality.

* * * * *

(b) Regulations for preventing 

significant deterioration of air quality. 

The provisions of § 52.21(a)(2) and (b) 

through (bb) are hereby incorporated 

and made a part of the applicable State 

plan for the State of South Dakota.

* * * * *

Subpart RR—[Amended] 

29. Section 52.2233 is amended by 

revising paragraph (b) introductory text 

to read as follows.

§ 52.2233 Significant deterioration of air 

quality.

* * * * *

(b) The requirements of § 52.21(a)(2) 

and (b) through (bb) are hereby 

incorporated by reference and made part 

of the applicable SIP for the State of 

Tennessee for the following purposes:

* * * * *

Subpart SS—[Amended] 

30. Section 52.2303 is amended by 

revising paragraphs (c) and (d) to read 

as follows.

§ 52.2303 Significant deterioration of air 

quality.

* * * * *

(c) The requirements of section 160 

through 165 of the Clean Air Act are not 

met for federally designated Indian 

lands. Therefore, the provisions of 

§ 52.21(a)(2) and (b) through (bb) are 

hereby adopted and made a part of the 

applicable implementation plan and are 

applicable to sources located on land 

under the control of Indian governing 

bodies.

(d) The requirements of section 160 

through 165 of the Clean Air Act are not 

met for new major sources or major 

modifications to existing stationary 

sources for which applicability 

determinations would be affected by 

dockside emissions of vessels. 

Therefore, the provisions of § 52.21(a)(2) 

and (b) through (bb) are hereby adopted 

and made a part of the applicable 

implementation plan and are applicable 

to such sources.

Subpart TT—[Amended] 

31. Section 52.2346 is amended by 

revising paragraph (b) to read as follows.

§ 52.2346 Significant deterioration of air 

quality.

* * * * *

(b) Regulation for prevention of 

significant deterioration of air quality.

The provisions of § 52.21(a)(2) and (b) 

through (bb) are hereby incorporated by 

reference and made a part of the Utah 

State implementation plan and are 

applicable to proposed major stationary 

sources or major modifications to be 

located on Indian Reservations.

* * * * *

Subpart WW—[Amended] 

32. Section 52.2497 is amended by 

revising paragraph (b) to read as follows.

§ 52.2497 Significant deterioration of air 

quality.

* * * * *

(b) Regulations for preventing 

significant deterioration of air quality. 

The provisions of § 52.21(a)(2) and (b) 

through (bb) are hereby incorporated 

and made a part of the applicable State 

plan for the State of Washington.

* * * * *

Subpart YY—[Amended] 

33. Section 52.2581 is amended by 

revising paragraph (e) to read as follows.

§ 52.2581 Significant deterioration of air 

quality.

* * * * *

(e) Regulations for the prevention of 

the significant deterioration of air 

quality. The provisions of § 52.21(a)(2) 

and (b) through (bb) are hereby 

incorporated and made a part of the 

applicable State plan for the State of 

Wisconsin for sources wishing to locate 

in Indian country; and sources 

constructed under permits issued by 

EPA.

Subpart ZZ—[Amended] 

34. Section 52.2630 is amended by 

revising paragraph (b) introductory text 

to read as follows.

§ 52.2630 Prevention of significant 

deterioration of air quality.

* * * * *

(b) Regulation for preventing 

significant deterioration of air quality. 

The Wyoming plan, as submitted does 

not apply to certain sources in the State. 

Therefore, the provisions of § 52.21(a)(2) 

and (b) through (bb) are hereby 

incorporated by reference and made a 

part of the State implementation plan 

Federal Register / Vol. 68, No. 46 / Monday, March 10, 2003 / Rules and Regulations 11325

for the State of Wyoming and are 

applicable to the following proposed 

major stationary sources or major 

modifications:

* * * * *

Subpart AAA—[Amended] 

35. Section 52.2676 is amended by 

revising paragraph (b) to read as follows.

§ 52.2676 Significant deterioration of air 

quality.

* * * * *

(b) Regulations for preventing 

significant deterioration of air quality. 

The provisions of § 52.21(a)(2) and (b) 

through (bb) are hereby incorporated 

and made a part of the applicable State 

plan for the State of Guam.

Subpart BBB—[Amended] 

36. Section 52.2729 is amended by 

revising paragraph (b) to read as follows.

§ 52.2729 Significant deterioration of air 

quality.

* * * * *

(b) Regulations for preventing 

significant deterioration of air quality. 

The provisions of § 52.21(a)(2) and (b) 

through (bb) are hereby incorporated 

and made a part of the applicable State 

plan for the State of Puerto Rico.

Subpart CCC—[Amended] 

37. Section 52.2779 is amended by 

revising paragraph (b) to read as follows.

§ 52.2779 Significant deterioration of air 

quality.

* * * * *

(b) Regulations for preventing 

significant deterioration of air quality. 

The provisions of § 52.21(a)(2) and (b) 

through (bb) are hereby incorporated 

and made a part of the applicable State 

plan for the Virgin Islands.

Subpart DDD—[Amended] 

38. Section 52.2827 is amended by 

revising paragraph (b) to read as follows.

§ 52.2827 Significant deterioration of air 

quality.

* * * * *

(b) Regulations for preventing 

significant deterioration of air quality. 

The provisions of § 52.21(a)(2) and (b) 

through (bb) are hereby incorporated 

and made a part of the applicable State 

plan for American Samoa.

[FR Doc. 03–5470 Filed 3–7–03; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 6560–50–P

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION 

AGENCY 

40 CFR Part 122 

[FRL–7464–2] 

RIN 2040–AC82 

Modification of National Pollutant 

Discharge Elimination System 

(NPDES) Permit Deadline for Storm 

Water Discharges for Oil and Gas 

Construction Activity That Disturbs 

One to Five Acres of Land

AGENCY: Environmental Protection 

Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Final rule.

SUMMARY: Today’s action postpones 

until March 10, 2005, the requirement to 

obtain National Pollutant Discharge 

Elimination System (NPDES) storm 

water permit for oil and gas 

construction activity that disturbs one to 

five acres of land. On December 8, 1999 

(64 FR 68722), the U.S. Environmental 

Protection Agency (EPA) published a 

final rule expanding the then-existing 

NPDES permitting program to require 

permit coverage by March 10, 2003 for, 

among other things, construction sites 

that disturb one to five acres. As part of 

that rulemaking, EPA assumed that few, 

if any, oil and gas exploration, 

production, processing, or treatment 

operations or transmission facilities 

would be affected by the rule. Since rule 

promulgation, EPA has become aware 

that close to 30,000 oil and gas sites per 

year may be affected by the December 8, 

1999, storm water regulations. 

The two-year postponement of the 

deadline from March 10, 2003, to March 

10, 2005, will allow time for EPA to 

analyze and better evaluate: the impact 

of the permit requirements on the oil 

and gas industry; the appropriate best 

management practices for preventing 

contamination of storm water runoff 

resulting from construction associated 

with oil and gas exploration, 

production, processing, or treatment 

operations or transmission facilities; 

and the scope and effect of 33 U.S.C. 

1342 (l)(2) and other storm water 

provisions of the Clean Water Act.

DATES: This final regulation is effective 

on March 10, 2003. For the purposes of 

judicial review, this final rule is 

promulgated as of March 10, 2003 as 

provided in 40 CFR 23.2.

ADDRESSES: The administrative record is 

available for inspection and copying at 

the Water Docket, located at the EPA 

Docket Center in the basement of the 

EPA West Building, Room B–102, at 

1301 Constitution Ave., NW., 

Washington, DC.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Wendy Bell, Office of Wastewater 

Management, Office of Water, 

Environmental Protection Agency, at 

(202) 564–0746 or e-mail: 

bell.wendy@epa.gov.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

I. General Information 

A. Regulated Entities. 

Entities Potentially Regulated by This 

Action Include:

Category Examples of regulated entities 

Industry ............. Oil and gas producers constructing drilling sites disturbing one to five acres of land; construction site operators associated 

with oil and gas construction projects disturbing one to five acres of land; and operators of transmission facilities as defined 

herein. 

This table is not intended to be 

exhaustive, but rather provides a guide 

for readers regarding entities likely to be 

regulated by this action. This table lists 

the types of entities that EPA is now 

aware could potentially be regulated by 

this action. Other types of entities not 

listed in the table could also be 

regulated. To determine whether your 

facility or company is regulated by this 

action, you should carefully examine 

the applicability criteria in 40 CFR 

122.26(b)(15). If you have questions 

regarding the applicability of this action 

to a particular entity, consult the person 

listed in the preceding FOR FURTHER

INFORMATION CONTACT section. 

B. How Can I Get Copies of this 

Document and Other Related 

Information ? 

1. Docket. EPA has established an 

official public docket for this action 

under Docket ID No. OW–2002–0068. 

The official public docket consists of the 

documents specifically referenced in 

this action, any public comments 

received, and other information related