+(,121/,1(

Citation: 68 Fed. Reg. 14151 2003 

Content downloaded/printed from 

HeinOnline (http://heinonline.org)

Thu Jul 31 18:44:19 2014

-- Your use of this HeinOnline PDF indicates your acceptance

 of HeinOnline's Terms and Conditions of the license

 agreement available at http://heinonline.org/HOL/License

-- The search text of this PDF is generated from 

 uncorrected OCR text.
Federal Register/Vol. 68, No. 56 / Monday, March 24, 2003 / Rules and Regulations

compliance on them. We have analyzed

this rule under that Order and have

determined that it does not have

implications for federalism.

Unfunded Mandates Reform Act

The Unfunded Mandates Reform Act

of 1995 (2 U.S.C. 1531-1538) requires

Federal agencies to assess the effects of

their discretionary regulatory actions. In

particular, the Act addresses actions

that may result in the expenditure by a

State, local, or tribal government, in the

aggregate, or by the private sector of

$100,000,000 or more in any one year.

Though this rule would not result in

such an expenditure, we do discuss the

effects of this rule elsewhere in this

preamble.

Taking of Private Property

This rule will not effect a taking of

private property or otherwise have

taking implications under Executive

Order 12630, Governmental Actions and

Interference with Constitutionally

Protected Property Rights.

Civil Justice Reform

This rule meets applicable standards

in sections 3(a) and 3(b)(2) of Executive

Order 12988, Civil Justice Reform, to

minimize litigation, eliminate

ambiguity, and reduce burden.

Protection of Children

We have analyzed this rule under

Executive Order 13045, Protection of

Children from Environmental Health

Risks and Safety Risks. This rule is not

an economically significant rule and

will not create an environmental risk to

health or risk to safety that might

disproportionately affect children.

Indian Tribal Governments

This rule does not have tribal

implications under Executive Order

13175, Consultation and Coordination

with Indian Tribal Governments,

because it does 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.

Energy Effects

We have analyzed this rule under

Executive Order 13211, Actions

Concerning Regulations That

Significantly Affect Energy Supply,

Distribution, or Use. We have

determined that it is not a "significant

energy action" under that order because

it is not a "significant regulatory action"

under Executive Order 12866 and is not

likely to have a significant adverse effect

on the supply, distribution, or use of

energy. The Administrator of the Office

of Information and Regulatory Affairs

has not designated it as a significant

energy action. Therefore, it does not

require a Statement of Energy Effects

under Executive Order 13211

Environment

We have considered the

environmental impact of this rule and

concluded that, under figure 2-1,

paragraph (34)(g), of Commandant

Instruction M16475.lD, this rule is

categorically excluded from further

environmental documentation because

this rule is not expected to result in any

significant environmental impact as

described in the National

Environmental Policy Act of 1969

(NEPA). A "Categorical Exclusion

Determination" is available in the

docket where indicated under

ADDRESSES.

List of Subjects in 33 CFR Part 165

Harbors, Marine safety, Navigation

(water), Reporting and recordkeeping

requirements, Security measures,

Waterways.

For the reasons discussed in the

preamble, the Coast Guard amends 33

CFR part 165 as follows:

PART 165-REGULATED NAVIGATION

AREAS AND LIMITED ACCESS AREAS

1. The authority citation for part 165

continues to read as follows:

Authority: 33 U.S.C. 1231; 50 U.S.C. 191;

33 CFR 1.05-1(g), 6.04-1, 6.04-6, and 160.5;

Department of Homeland Security Delegation

No. 0170.

2. Add § 165.822 to read as follows:

§ 165.822 Security Zone; Ohio River Mile

119.0 to 119.8 Natrium, WV.

(a) Location. The following area is a

security zone: the waters of the Ohio

River extending 200 feet from the

water's edge of the left descending bank

between mile markers 119.0 and 119.8.

(b) Regulations. (1) Entry into or

remaining in this zone is prohibited

unless authorized by the Coast Guard

Captain of the Port Pittsburgh or a

designated representative.

(2) Persons or vessels desiring to

transit the area of the security zone may

contact the Captain of the Port

Pittsburgh at telephone number 412-

644-5808 or on VHF channel 16 to seek

permission to transit the area. If

permission is granted, all persons and

vessels must comply with the

instructions of the Captain of the Port

Pittsburgh or a designated

representative.

(c) Authority. In addition to 33 U.S.C.

1231, the authority for this section

includes 33 U.S.C. 1226.

Dated: March 10, 2003.

Steve L. Hudson,

Commander, U.S. Coast Guard, Captain of

the Port, Pittsburgh.

[FR Doc. 03-6916 Filed 3-21-03; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4910-15-P

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION

AGENCY

40 CFR Part 52

[AZ 078-0068; FRL-7460-9]

Revision to the Arizona State

Implementation Plan, Arizona

Department of Environmental Quality

AGENCY: Environmental Protection

Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Final rule.

SUMMARY: EPA is finalizing a limited

approval and limited disapproval of a

revision to the Arizona Department of

Environmental Quality (ADEQ) portion

of the Arizona State Implementation

Plan (SIP). This action was proposed in

the Federal Register on October 11,

2002 and concerns definitions, volatile

organic compound (VOC) emissions

from dry cleaning plants, VOC

emissions from spray painting

operations, and particulate matter (PM10) emissions from mobile sources.

Under authority of the Clean Air Act as

amended in 1990 (CAA or the Act), this

action directs Arizona to correct the

deficiencies in the submitted rules.

EPA is also finalizing a full approval

of a revision to the Arizona Department

of Environmental Quality (ADEQ)

portion of the Arizona SIP. This action

was proposed in the Federal Register on

October 11, 2002 and concerns VOC

emissions from petroleum storage

vessels and PM-10 emissions from

mobile sources.

EFFECTIVE DATE: Today's final rule is

effective on April 23, 2003.

ADDRESSES: You can inspect copies of

the administrative record for this action

at EPA's Region IX office during normal

business hours. You can inspect a copy

of the submitted rule revisions at the

following locations:

Environmental Protection Agency, Region IX,

75 Hawthorne Street, San Francisco, CA

94105.

Environmental Protection Agency, Air

Docket (6102), Ariel Rios Building, 1200

Pennsylvania Avenue, NW., Washington

DC 20460.

Arizona Department of Environmental

Quality, 1110 West Washington Street,

Phoenix, AZ 85007.

14151
Federal Register/Vol. 68, No. 56 / Monday, March 24, 2003 / Rules and Regulations

A copy of the rule may also be FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Al I. Proposed Action

available via the Internet at http:// Petersen, Rulemaking Office (AIR-4), On October 11, 2002 (67 FR 63354),

www.sosaz.com/public services/Title U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, EPA published a notice of proposed

18/18-02.htm. Please be advised that Region IX; (415) 947-4118. rulemaking (NPRM) proposing a limited

this is not an EPA Web site and may not SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: approval and limited disapproval of the

contain the same version of the rule that Throughout this document, "we," "us" rules in table 1 that were submitted for

was submitted to EPA. and "our" refer to EPA. incorporation into the Arizona SIP.

TABLE 1 .- SUBMITTED RULES

Local agency Rule # Rule title Adopted Submitted

A D EQ ......................................... R 18-2-701 Definitions .......................... ........................................... 11/15/93 07/15/98

ADEQ ......................................... R18-2-725 Standards of Performance for Existing Dry Cleaning Plants ......... 11/15/93 07/15/98

ADEQ ......................................... R18-2-727 Standards of Performance for Spray Painting Operations ............ 11/15/93 07/15/98

ADEQ ......................................... R18-2-801 Classification of M obile Sources .................................................... 11/15/93 07/15/98

A D EQ ......................................... R 18-2-802 O ff-Road M achinery ..................................................................... 11/15/93 07/15/98

A summary of the deficiencies * The enforceability is limited, through an opacity standard), once the

identified in these rules follows. Rule because there are no monitoring and engine is no longer new, according to 40

R18-2-701 has the following recordkeeping requirements. CFR part 89, subpart A, appendix A.

deficiencies: * The enforceability is limited, * The rules should exclude from

* "Calcine" should not be limited to because there is no test method given applicability locomotives or engines

only lime plants. for the efficiency of recovery of which are used in locomotives.

"Process Weight" should be overspray. Locomotives are required to be in

0 Rules R18-2-801 and R18-2-802 compliance with federal emission eliminated, because it has no meaning have the following deficiencies: standards throughout their useful life.

unless it is given for a specific time * The rules should be restricted to * The rules should exempt nonroad

period. apply to used or in-use nonroad engines engines from any potential requirement

* "Process Weight Rate" should be and not to new nonroad engines, to retrofit in order to meet the opacity

defined in the rule and not be based on Section 209(e) of the CAA prohibits standard unless California has an

Rule R18-2-702, which is not in the states from adopting or attempting to identical retrofitting requirement. States

SIP. enforce any standard relating to the are precluded from requiring retrofitting

Rule R18-2-725 has the following control of emissions from (A) new of used nonroad engines to meet

deficiencies: engines which are used in construction emission standards, except that States

* The enforceability is limited, equipment or vehicles or used in farm may adopt and enforce retrofitting

because there are no monitoring and equipment or vehicles and which are requirements identical to California recordeterereeoments g asmaller than 175 horsepower and (B) retrofitting requirements which have recordkeeping requirements. new (or remanufactered) locomotives or been authorized by EPA, according to 40

* The enforceability is limited, new (or remanufactered) engines which CFR part 89, subpart A, appendix A.

because there is no test method given are used in locomotives. States are not At the same time, EPA published a

for the efficiency of recovery of solvent precluded under section 209(e) from notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM)

emissions. regulating the use and operation of proposing a full approval of the rules in

Rule R18-2-727 has the following nonroad engines, including regulating table 2 that were submitted for

deficiencies: daily mass emission limits (such as incorporation into the Arizona SIP.

TABLE 2.-SUBMITTED RULES

Local agency Rule # Rule title Adopted Submitted

ADEQ ......................................... R18-2-710 Standards of Performance for Existing Vessels for Petroleum 11/15/93 07/15/98

Liquids.

A D EQ ......................................... R 18-2-803 H eater-P laner U nits ................................... ...... ............................ 11/15/93 07/15/98

ADEQ ......................................... R18-2-804 Roadway and Site cleaning Machinery .......................................... 11/15/93 07/15/98

A D EQ ......................................... R 18-2-805 A sphalt or Tar Kettles ................................................................... 11/15/93 07/15/98

The NPRM 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 did not receive any

comments.

III. EPA Action

No comments were submitted that

change our assessment of the rules as

described in our proposed action.

Therefore, as authorized in sections

110(k)(3) and 301(a) of the CAA, EPA is

finalizing a limited approval of

submitted Rules 701, 725, 727, 801, and

802. This action incorporates the

submitted rules into the Arizona SIP,

including those provisions identified as

deficient. As authorized under section

110(k)(3), EPA is simultaneously

finalizing a limited disapproval of the

rules. Sanctions will not be imposed

under section 179 of the CAA according

to 40 CFR 52.31, because the rules are

not required submittals. Note that the

submitted rules have been adopted by

the ADEQ, and EPA's final limited

14152
Federal Register/Vol. 68, No. 56 / Monday, March 24, 2003 / Rules and Regulations

disapproval does not prevent the local

agency from enforcing them.

As authorized in sections 110(k)(3)

and 301(a) of the CAA, EPA is also

finalizing a full approval of submitted

Rules 710, 803, 804, and 805. This

action incorporates the submitted rules

into the Arizona SIP.

IV. Statutory and Executive Order

Reviews

A. Executive Order 12866, Regulatory

Planning and Review

The Office of Management and Budget

(OMB) has exempted this regulatory

action from Executive Order 12866,

entitled "Regulatory Planning and

Review."

B. Regulatory Flexibility Act

The Regulatory Flexibility Act (RFA)

generally requires an agency to conduct

a regulatory flexibility analysis of any

rule subject to notice and comment

rulemaking requirements unless the

agency certifies that the rule will not

have a significant economic impact on

a substantial number of small entities.

Small entities include small businesses,

small not-for-profit enterprises, and

small governmental jurisdictions.

This rule will not have a significant

impact on a substantial number of small

entities because SIP approvals under

section 110 and subchapter I, part D of

the Clean Air Act do not create any new

requirements but simply approve

requirements that the State is already

imposing. Therefore, because the

Federal SIP approval does not create

any new requirements, I certify that this

action will not have a significant

economic impact on a substantial

number of small entities.

Moreover, due to the nature of the

Federal-State relationship under the

Clean Air Act, preparation of flexibility

analysis would constitute Federal

inquiry into the economic

reasonableness of state action. The

Clean Air Act forbids EPA to base its

actions concerning SIPs on such

grounds. Union Electric Co., v. U.S.

EPA, 427 U.S. 246, 255-66 (1976); 42

U.S.C. 7410(a)(2).

C. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act

Under sections 202 of the Unfunded

Mandates Reform Act of 1995

("Unfunded Mandates Act"), signed

into law on March 22, 1995, EPA must

prepare a budgetary impact statement to

accompany any proposed or final rule

that includes a Federal mandate that

may result in estimated costs to State,

local, or tribal governments in the

aggregate; or to the private sector, of

$100 million or more. Under section

205, EPA must select the most costeffective and least burdensome

alternative that achieves the objectives

of the rule and is consistent with

statutory requirements. Section 203

requires EPA to establish a plan for

informing and advising any small

governments that may be significantly

or uniquely impacted by the rule.

EPA has determined that the approval

action promulgated does not include a

Federal mandate that may result in

estimated costs of $100 million or more

to either State, local, or tribal

governments in the aggregate, or to the

private sector. This Federal action

approves pre-existing requirements

under State or local law, and imposes

no new requirements. Accordingly, no

additional costs to State, local, or tribal

governments, or to the private sector,

result from this action.

D. Executive Order 13132, Federalism

Federalism (64 FR 43255, August 10,

1999) revokes and replaces Executive

Orders 12612 (Federalism) and 12875

(Enhancing the Intergovernmental

Partnership). Executive Order 13132

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." Under

Executive Order 13132, EPA may not

issue a regulation that has federalism

implications, that imposes substantial

direct compliance costs, and that is not

required by statute, unless the Federal

government provides the funds

necessary to pay the direct compliance

costs incurred by State and local

governments, or EPA consults with

State and local officials early in the

process of developing the proposed

regulation. EPA also may not issue a

regulation that has federalism

implications and that preempts State

law unless the Agency consults with

State and local officials early in the

process of developing the proposed

regulation.

This rule 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, because it

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. Thus, the requirements of

section 6 of the Executive Order do not

apply to this rule.

E. Executive Order 13175, 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." This final rule does not

have tribal implications, as specified in

Executive Order 13175. It will not have

substantial direct effects on tribal

governments, 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.

Thus, Executive Order 13175 does not

apply to this rule.

F. Executive Order 13045, Protection of

Children From Environmental Health

Risks and Safety Risks

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 rule is not subject to Executive

Order 13045 because it does not involve

decisions intended to mitigate

environmental health or safety risks.

G. Executive Order 13211, Actions That

Significantly Affect Energy Supply,

Distribution, or Use

This rule is not subject to Executive

Order 13211, "Actions Concerning

Regulations That Significantly Affect

Energy Supply, Distribution, or Use" (66

FR 28355, May 22, 2001) because it is

not a significant regulatory action under

Executive Order 12866.

14153
Federal Register/Vol. 68, No. 56 / Monday, March 24, 2003 / Rules and Regulations

H. National Technology Transfer and

Advancement Act

Section 12 of the National Technology

Transfer and Advancement Act

(NTTAA) of 1995 requires Federal

agencies to evaluate existing technical

standards when developing a new

regulation. To comply with NTTAA,

EPA must consider and use "voluntary

consensus standards" (VCS) if available

and applicable when developing

programs and policies unless doing so

would be inconsistent with applicable

law or otherwise impractical.

The EPA believes that VCS are

inapplicable to this action. Today's

action does not require the public to

perform activities conducive to the use

of VCS.

L 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. 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). This rule

will be effective April 23, 2003.

J. Petitions for Judicial Review

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 May 23, 2003.

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,

Ozone, Particulate matter, Reporting

and recordkeeping requirements,

Volatile organic compounds.

Dated: February 19, 2003.

Laura Yoshii,

Acting 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 paragraph (c)(110) to read as

follows:

§52.120 Identification of plan. * * * * *

(c) * * *

(110) New and amended regulations

were submitted on July 15, 1998, by the

Governor's designee.

(i) Incorporation by reference.

(A) Arizona Department of

Environmental Quality.

(1) Rules R18-2-701, R18-2-710,

R18-2-725,R18-2-727,R18-2-801,

R18-2-802,R18-2-803,R18-2-804,

and R18-2-805, amended on November

15, 1993. * * * * *

[FR Doc. 03-6817 Filed 3-21-03; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6560-50-P

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION

AGENCY

40 CFR Part 52

[PAl 88-4204a; FRL-7465-3]

Approval and Promulgation of Air

Quality Implementation Plans;

Pennsylvania; NOx RACT

Determinations for PPG Industries, Inc.

AGENCY: Environmental Protection

Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Direct final rule.

SUMMARY: EPA is taking direct final

action to approve revisions to the

Commonwealth of Pennsylvania's State

Implementation Plan (SIP). The

revisions were submitted by the

Pennsylvania Department of

Environmental Protection (PADEP) to

establish and require reasonably

available control technology (RACT) for

PPG Industries, Inc. (PPG). PPG is a

major source of nitrogen oxides (NOx)

located in Greenwood Township,

Crawford County, Pennsylvania. EPA is

approving these revisions to establish

NOx RACT requirements in the SIP in

accordance with the Clean Air Act

(CAA).

DATES: This rule is effective on May 23,

2003, without further notice, unless

EPA receives adverse written comment

by April 23, 2003. If EPA receives such

comments, it will publish a timely

withdrawal of the direct final rule in the

Federal Register and inform the public

that the rule will not take effect.

ADDRESSES: Written comments should

be mailed to Makeba Morris, Acting

Branch Chief, Air Quality Planning and

Information Services Branch, Mailcode

3AP21, U.S. Environmental Protection

Agency, Region III, 1650 Arch Street,

Philadelphia, Pennsylvania 19103.

Copies of the documents relevant to this

action are available for public

inspection during normal business

hours at the Air Protection Division,

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency,

Region III, 1650 Arch Street,

Philadelphia, Pennsylvania 19103; the

Air and Radiation Docket and

Information Center, U.S. Environmental

Protection Agency, 1301 Constitution

Avenue, NW., Room B108, Washington,

DC 20460; and Pennsylvania

Department of Environmental

Protection, Bureau of Air Quality, P.O.

Box 8468, 400 Market Street, Harrisburg,

Pennsylvania 17105.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Rose

Quinto, (215) 814-2182, or by e-mail at

quinto.rose@epa.gov.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

I. Background

Pursuant to sections 182(b)(2) and

182(f) of the CAA, the Commonwealth

of Pennsylvania (the Commonwealth or

Pennsylvania) is required to establish

and implement RACT for all major

volatile organic compound (VOC) and

NOx sources. The major source size is

determined by its location, the

classification of that area and whether it

is located in the ozone transport region

(OTR). Under section 184 of the CAA,

RACT as specified in sections 182(b)(2)

and 182(f) applies throughout the OTR.

The entire Commonwealth is located

within the OTR. Therefore, RACT is

applicable statewide in Pennsylvania.

II. Summary of SIP Revision

On October 30, 2002, PADEP

submitted a formal revision to its SIP to

establish and impose case-by-case RACT

for three major sources of VOC and

NOx. This rulemaking pertains to one of

those sources. The other sources are

subject to separate rulemaking actions.

The RACT determinations and

requirements are included in the

operating permit issued by PADEP. PPG

is a facility that produces flat glass using

float bath technology. PPG is located in

Greenwood Township, Crawford

14154