Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 240 / Wednesday, December 15, 2010 / Rules and Regulations 78167 

• Do not contain any unfunded 

mandate or significantly or uniquely 

affect small governments, as described 

in the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act 

of 1995 (Pub. L. 104–4); 

• Do not have Federalism 

implications as specified in Executive 

Order 13132 (64 FR 43255, August 10, 

1999); 

• Are not economically significant 

regulatory actions based on health or 

safety risks subject to Executive Order 

13045 (62 FR 19885, April 23, 1997); 

• Are not significant regulatory 

actions subject to Executive Order 

13211 (66 FR 28355, May 22, 2001); 

• Are not subject to requirements of 

Section 12(d) of the National 

Technology Transfer and Advancement 

Act of 1995 (15 U.S.C. 272 note) because 

application of those requirements would 

be inconsistent with the CAA; and 

• Do not provide EPA with the 

discretionary authority to address, as 

appropriate, disproportionate human 

health or environmental effects, using 

practicable and legally permissible 

methods, under Executive Order 12898 

(59 FR 7629, February 16, 1994). 

In addition, this rule does not have 

tribal implications as specified by 

Executive Order 13175 (65 FR 67249, 

November 9, 2000), because a 

determinations of attainment is an 

action that affects the status of a 

geographical area and does not impose 

any new regulatory requirements on 

tribes, impact any existing sources of air 

pollution on tribal lands, nor impair the 

maintenance of ozone national ambient 

air quality standards in tribal lands. 

However, because there are tribal lands 

located in Milwaukee County, we 

provided the affected tribe with the 

opportunity to consult with EPA on the 

attainment determination. The 

consultation occurred on November 15, 

2010. The affected tribe raised no 

concerns. 

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 action 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. 

These actions are not ‘‘major rules’’ as 

defined by 5 U.S.C. 804(2). 

Under section 307(b)(1) of the CAA, 

petitions for judicial review of this 

action must be filed in the United States 

Court of Appeals for the appropriate 

circuit by February 14, 2011. Filing a 

petition for reconsideration by the 

Administrator of this final rule does not 

affect the finality of these actions 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. Parties with 

objections to this direct final rule are 

encouraged to file a comment in 

response to the parallel notice of 

proposed rulemaking for this action 

published in the proposed rules section 

of today’s Federal Register, rather than 

file an immediate petition for judicial 

review of this direct final rule, so that 

EPA can withdraw these direct final 

rules and address the comment in the 

proposed rulemaking. These actions 

may not be challenged later in 

proceedings to enforce their 

requirements. (See section 307(b)(2).) 

List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52 

Environmental protection, Air 

pollution control, Incorporation by 

reference, Intergovernmental relations, 

Ozone, Reporting and recordkeeping 

requirements, Volatile organic 

compounds. 

Dated: November 24, 2010. 

Susan Hedman, 

Regional Administrator, Region 5. 

■ 40 CFR part 52 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 YY—Wisconsin 

■ 2. Section 52.2585 is amended by 

adding paragraph (y) to read as follows: 

§ 52.2585 Control strategy: Ozone. 

* * * * * 

(y) Determination of attainment. EPA 

has determined, as of December 15, 

2010 that the Milwaukee-Racine, WI 

and Sheboygan, WI areas have attained 

the 1997 8-hour ozone standard. These 

determinations suspend the 

requirements for these areas to submit 

attainment demonstrations and 

associated reasonably available control 

measures (RACM), reasonable further 

progress plans (RFP), contingency 

measures, and other State 

Implementation Plan (SIP) revisions 

related to attainment of the standard for 

as long as the areas continue to attain 

the 1997 8-hour ozone standard. These 

determinations also stay the 

requirement for EPA to promulgate 

attainment demonstration and RFP 

Federal Implementation Plans (FIPs) for 

these areas. 

[FR Doc. 2010–31339 Filed 12–14–10; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 6560–50–P 

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION 

AGENCY 

40 CFR Part 52 

[EPA–R09–OAR–2010–0521; FRL–9233–3] 

Revisions to the Arizona State 

Implementation Plan, Maricopa County 

AGENCY: Environmental Protection 

Agency (EPA). 

ACTION: Final rule. 

SUMMARY: EPA is finalizing approval of 

revisions to the Maricopa County 

portion of the Arizona State 

Implementation Plan (SIP). These 

revisions were proposed in the Federal 

Register on September 2, 2010 and 

concern particulate matter (PM) 

emissions from fugitive dust sources 

such as construction sites and related 

activities, unpaved roads, unpaved 

parking lots, and disturbed soils on 

vacant lots. We are approving local rules 

that regulate these emission sources 

under the Clean Air Act as amended in 

1990 (CAA or the Act). 

DATES: Effective Date: This rule is 

effective on January 14, 2011. 

ADDRESSES: EPA has established docket 

number EPA–R09–OAR–2010–0521 for 

this action. The index to the docket is 

available electronically at http:// 

www.regulations.gov and in hard copy 

at EPA Region IX, 75 Hawthorne Street, 

San Francisco, California. While all 

documents in the docket are listed in 

the index, some information may be 

publicly available only at the hard copy 

location (e.g., copyrighted material), and 

some may not be publicly available in 

either location (e.g., CBI). To inspect the 

hard copy materials, please schedule an 

appointment during normal business 

hours with the contact listed in the FOR

FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Andrew Steckel, EPA Region IX, (415) 

947–4115, steckel.andrew@epa.gov. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

Throughout this document, ‘‘we,’’ ‘‘us’’ 

and ‘‘our’’ refer to EPA. 

Table of Contents 

I. Proposed Action 

II. Public Comments and EPA Responses 

III. EPA Action 


emcdonald on DSK2BSOYB1PROD with RULES
78168 Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 240 / Wednesday, December 15, 2010 / Rules and Regulations 

IV. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews I. Proposed Action 

On September 2, 2010 (75 FR 53907), 

EPA proposed to approve the following 

rules into the Arizona SIP. 

Local agency Rule No. Rule title Adopted Submitted 

MCAPCD ...................................... 310 Fugitive Dust From Dust-Generating Operations ............................. 01/27/10 04/12/10 

MCAPCD ...................................... 310.01 Fugitive Dust From Non-Traditional Sources of Fugitive Dust ......... 01/27/10 04/12/10 

MCAPCD ...................................... Appendix C–Fugitive Dust Test Methods ......................................... 03/26/08 07/10/08 

We proposed to approve these rules 

because we determined that they 

complied with the relevant CAA 

requirements. Our proposed action 

contains more information on the rules 

and our evaluation. 

II. Public Comments and EPA 

Responses 

EPA’s proposed action provided a 30- 

day public comment period. During this 

period, we received no comments. 

III. EPA Action 

No comments were submitted that 

change our assessment that the 

submitted rules comply with the 

relevant CAA requirements. Therefore, 

as authorized in section 110(k)(3) of the 

Act, EPA is fully approving these rules 

into the Arizona SIP. 

IV. Statutory and Executive Order 

Reviews 

Under the Clean Air Act, the 

Administrator is required to approve a 

SIP submission that complies with the 

provisions of the Act and applicable 

Federal regulations. 42 U.S.C. 7410(k); 

40 CFR 52.02(a). Thus, in reviewing SIP 

submissions, EPA’s role is to approve 

State choices, provided that they meet 

the criteria of the Clean Air Act. 

Accordingly, this action merely 

approves State law as meeting Federal 

requirements and does not impose 

additional requirements beyond those 

imposed by State law. For that reason, 

this action: 

• Is not a ‘‘significant regulatory 

action’’ subject to review by the Office 

of Management and Budget under 

Executive Order 12866 (58 FR 51735, 

October 4, 1993); 

• Does not impose an information 

collection burden under the provisions 

of the Paperwork Reduction Act (44 

U.S.C. 3501 et seq.); 

• Is certified as not having a 

significant economic impact on a 

substantial number of small entities 

under the Regulatory Flexibility Act (5 

U.S.C. 601 et seq.); 

• Does not contain any unfunded 

mandate or significantly or uniquely 

affect small governments, as described 

in the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act 

of 1995 (Pub. L. 104–4); 

• Does not have Federalism 

implications as specified in Executive 

Order 13132 (64 FR 43255, August 10, 

1999); 

• Is not an economically significant 

regulatory action based on health or 

safety risks subject to Executive Order 

13045 (62 FR 19885, April 23, 1997); 

• Is not a significant regulatory action 

subject to Executive Order 13211 (66 FR 

28355, May 22, 2001); 

• Is not subject to requirements of 

Section 12(d) of the National 

Technology Transfer and Advancement 

Act of 1995 (15 U.S.C. 272 note) because 

application of those requirements would 

be inconsistent with the Clean Air Act; 

and 

• Will not have disproportionately 

high and adverse human health or 

environmental effects on minority, lowincome or Tribal populations because it 

maintains or increases the level of 

environmental protection for all affected 

populations without having any 

disproportionately high and adverse 

human health or environmental effects 

on any population, including any 

minority or low-income population as 

described in Executive Order 12898 (59 

FR 7629, February 16, 1994). 

In addition, this rule does not have 

tribal implications as specified by 

Executive Order 13175 (65 FR 67249, 

November 9, 2000), because the SIP is 

not approved to apply in Indian country 

located in the State, and EPA notes that 

it will not impose substantial direct 

costs on tribal governments or preempt 

tribal law. 

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 action 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). 

List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52 

Environmental protection, Air 

pollution control, Incorporation by 

reference, Intergovernmental relations, 

particulate matter, Reporting and 

recordkeeping requirements. 

Dated: November 3, 2010. 

Jared Blumenfeld, 

Regional Administrator, Region IX. 

■ Part 52, chapter I, title 40 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 D—Arizona 

■ 2. Section 52.120 is amended by 

adding paragraphs (c)(146) and (c)(147) 

to read as follows: 

§ 52.120 Identification of plan. 

* * * * * 

(c) * * * 

(146) The following plan was 

submitted on April 12, 2010 by the 

Governor’s designee. 

(i) Incorporation by reference. 

(A) Maricopa County Air Quality 

Department. 

(1) Rule 310, ‘‘Fugitive Dust From 

Dust-Generating Operations,’’ adopted 

on January 27, 2010. 

(2) Rule 310.01, ‘‘Fugitive Dust From 

Non-Traditional Sources of Fugitive 

Dust,’’ adopted on January 27, 2010. 

(147) The following plan was 

submitted on July 10, 2008 by the 

Governor’s designee. 

(i) Incorporation by reference. 

(A) Maricopa County Air Quality 

Department. 

(1) Appendix C—‘‘Fugitive Dust Test 

Methods,’’ adopted on March 26, 2008. 

[FR Doc. 2010–31331 Filed 12–14–10; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 6560–50–P 


emcdonald on DSK2BSOYB1PROD with RULES