1894 Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 8 / Thursday, January 12, 2012 / Proposed Rules 

V. Consideration of Section 110(1) of 

the Clean Air Act 

Section 110(1) of the CAA states that 

a SIP revision cannot be approved if the 

revision would interfere with any 

applicable requirement concerning 

attainment and reasonable further 

progress towards attainment of a 

NAAQS or any other applicable 

requirement of the CAA. EPA has 

concluded that the above-described 

revision to Regulation No. 11 will not 

interfere with attainment, reasonable 

further progress, or any other applicable 

requirement of the CAA. This revision 

to Regulation No. 11 will not adversely 

affect the approved maintenance plans 

for Metro-Denver and Longmont for 

carbon monoxide (see 72 FR 46148, 

August 17, 2007), Metro-Denver for 

PM10 (see 72 FR 62571, November 6, 

2007), or Greeley for carbon monoxide 

(see 70 FR 48650), or the approved 

attainment plan for Metro-Denver/NFR 

for the 1997 8-hour (80 ppb) ozone 

standard (see 76 FR 47443, August 5, 

2011). For each of these areas and 

pollutants, the State demonstrated 

maintenance or attainment of the 

relevant NAAQS assuming either the 

complete absence of an I/M program or 

the implementation of the 2003 

cutpoints. 

VI. Proposed Action 

EPA is proposing approval of the 

revision to Regulation No. 11 that the 

State of Colorado submitted on August 

8, 2006. The revision removes from 

Regulation No. 11, Part F, section 

III.A.2, the light duty vehicle emission 

testing limits that went into effect on 

January 1, 2006. 

VII. 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 

• Does 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 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. 

List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52 

Environmental protection, Air 

pollution control, Carbon monoxide, 

Intergovernmental relations, Nitrogen 

dioxide, Ozone, Reporting and 

recordkeeping requirements, and 

Volatile organic compounds. 

Authority: 42 U.S.C. 7401 et seq. 

Dated: December 21, 2011. 

James B. Martin, 

Regional Administrator, Region 8. 

[FR Doc. 2012–458 Filed 1–11–12; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 6560–50–P 

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION 

AGENCY 

40 CFR Part 52 

[EPA–R04–OAR–2011–0849–201153(b); 

FRL–9617–3] 

Approval and Promulgation of 

Implementation Plans; Georgia; Rome; 

Fine Particulate Matter 2002 Emissions 

Inventory 

AGENCY: Environmental Protection 

Agency (EPA). 

ACTION: Proposed rule. 

SUMMARY: EPA is proposing to approve 

the fine particulate matter (PM2.5) 2002 

base year emissions inventory portion of 

the State Implementation Plan (SIP) 

revision submitted by the State of 

Georgia on October 27, 2009. The 

emissions inventory is part of the Rome, 

Georgia PM2.5 attainment demonstration 

that was submitted for the 1997 annual 

PM2.5 National Ambient Air Quality 

Standards. This action is being taken 

pursuant to section 110 of the Clean Air 

Act. In the Rules Section of this Federal 

Register, EPA is approving Georgia’s SIP 

revision as a direct final rule without 

prior proposal because the Agency 

views this as a noncontroversial 

submittal and anticipates no adverse 

comments. 

DATES: Written comments must be 

received on or before February 13, 2012. 

ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, 

identified by Docket ID No. EPA–R04– 

OAR–2011–0849, by one of the 

following methods: 

1. www.regulations.gov: Follow the 

on-line instructions for submitting 

comments. 

2. Email: benjamin.lynorae@epa.gov. 

3. Fax: (404) 562–9019. 

4. Mail: ‘‘EPA–R04–OAR–2011– 

0849,’’ Regulatory Development Section, 

Air Planning Branch, Air, Pesticides and 

Toxics Management Division, U.S. 

Environmental Protection Agency, 

Region 4, 61 Forsyth Street SW., 

Atlanta, Georgia 30303–8960. 

5. Hand Delivery or Courier: Lynorae 

Benjamin, Regulatory Development 

Section, Air Planning Branch, Air, 

Pesticides and Toxics Management 

Division, U.S. Environmental Protection 

Agency, Region 4, 61 Forsyth Street 

SW., Atlanta, Georgia 30303–8960. Such 

deliveries are only accepted during the 

Regional Office’s normal hours of 

operation. The Regional Office’s official 

hours of business are Monday through 

Friday, 8:30 to 4:30, excluding federal 

holidays. 

Please see the direct final rule which 

is located in the Rules section of this 


pmangrum on DSK3VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 8 / Thursday, January 12, 2012 / Proposed Rules 1895 

Federal Register for detailed 

instructions on how to submit 

comments. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Sean Lakeman, Regulatory Development 

Section, Air Planning Branch, Air, 

Pesticides and Toxics Management 

Division, U.S. Environmental Protection 

Agency, Region 4, 61 Forsyth Street 

SW., Atlanta, Georgia 30303–8960. The 

telephone number is (404) 562–9043. 

Mr. Lakeman can be reached via 

electronic mail at 

lakeman.sean@epa.gov. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: For 

additional information see the direct 

final rule which is published in the 

Rules Section of this Federal Register. 

A detailed rationale for the approval is 

set forth in the direct final rule. If no 

adverse comments are received in 

response to this rule, no further activity 

is contemplated. If EPA receives adverse 

comments, the direct final rule will be 

withdrawn and all public comments 

received will be addressed in a 

subsequent final rule based on this 

proposed rule. EPA will not institute a 

second comment period on this 

document. Any parties interested in 

commenting on this document should 

do so at this time. 

Dated: December 22, 2011. 

Gwendolyn Keyes Fleming, 

Regional Administrator, Region 4. 

[FR Doc. 2012–347 Filed 1–11–12; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 6560–50–P 

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION 

AGENCY 

40 CFR Part 52 

[EPA–R09–OAR–2011–0876; FRL–9617–9] 

Revisions to the California State 

Implementation Plan, South Coast Air 

Quality Management District 

AGENCY: Environmental Protection 

Agency (EPA). 

ACTION: Proposed rule. 

SUMMARY: In this action, we are 

proposing to approve South Coast Air 

Quality Management District 

(SCAQMD) Rule 317, ‘‘Clean Air Act 

Non-Attainment Fee,’’ as a revision to 

SCAQMD’s portion of the California 

State Implementation Plan (SIP). Rule 

317 is a local rule submitted to address 

section 185 of the Clean Air Act (CAA 

or Act). We are proposing that Rule 317, 

an equivalent alternative program, is not 

less stringent than the program required 

by section 185, and, therefore, is 

approvable, consistent with the 

principles of section 172(e) of the Act. 

As part of this action, we are inviting 

public comment on whether it is 

appropriate for EPA to consider 

equivalent alternative programs, and, if 

so, whether Rule 317 would constitute 

an approvable equivalent alternative 

program. We are taking comments on 

these proposals and plan to follow with 

a final action. 

DATES: Any comments must arrive by 

February 13, 2012. 

ADDRESSES: Submit comments, 

identified by docket number EPA–R09– 

OAR–2011–0876, by one of the 

following methods: 

1. Federal eRulemaking Portal: 

http://www.regulations.gov. Follow the 

on-line instructions. 

2. Email: steckel.andrew@epa.gov. 

3. Mail or deliver: Andrew Steckel 

(Air–4), U.S. Environmental Protection 

Agency Region IX, 75 Hawthorne Street, 

San Francisco, CA 94105–3901. 

Instructions: All comments will be 

included in the public docket without 

change and may be made available 

online at http://www.regulations.gov, 

including any personal information 

provided, unless the comment includes 

Confidential Business Information (CBI) 

or other information whose disclosure is 

restricted by statute. Information that 

you consider CBI or otherwise protected 

should be clearly identified as such and 

should not be submitted through 

http://www.regulations.gov or email. 

http://www.regulations.gov is an 

‘‘anonymous access’’ system, and EPA 

will not know your identity or contact 

information unless you provide it in the 

body of your comment. If you send 

email directly to EPA, your email 

address will be automatically captured 

and included as part of the public 

comment. If EPA cannot read your 

comment due to technical difficulties 

and cannot contact you for clarification, 

EPA may not be able to consider your 

comment. 

Docket: Generally, documents in the 

docket for this action are 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 at 

http://www.regulations.gov, some 

information may be publicly available 

only at the hard copy location (e.g., 

copyrighted material, large maps), 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: Lily 

Wong, EPA Region IX, (415) 947–4114, 

wong.lily@epa.gov. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

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

and ‘‘our’’ refer to EPA. 

Table of Contents 

I. What did the State submit? 

II. Are there other versions of this rule? 

III. What action is EPA taking? 

IV. Background 

V. What is the legal rationale for this action? 

VI. What is EPA’s analysis of SCAQMD’s 

alternative program? 

VII. Proposed Action 

VIII. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews 

I. What did the State submit? 

On February 4, 2011, SCAQMD 

adopted Rule 317, ‘‘Clean Air Act Nonattainment Fee,’’ to meet the 

requirements of CAA section 185. On 

April 22, 2011, the California Air 

Resources Board (CARB) submitted 

SCAQMD’s Rule 317 to EPA. On May 

19, 2011, EPA determined that the 

submittal met the completeness criteria 

in 40 CFR part 51 Appendix V, which 

must be met before formal EPA review. 

SCAQMD provided supplemental 

information in a letter dated 

December 21, 2011. 

II. Are there other versions of this rule? 

There are no previous versions of 

Rule 317 in the SIP. Although the 

SCAQMD adopted an earlier version of 

Rule 317 on December 5, 2008, that rule 

was never submitted to EPA for 

approval as a SIP revision. 

III. What action is EPA taking? 

EPA is proposing to approve Rule 317 

as a revision to SCAQMD’s portion of 

the California SIP. The purpose of Rule 

317 is to satisfy the requirements of 

sections 182 and 185 of the Act by 

utilizing an equivalency approach 

consistent with the principles of section 

172(e) of the Act. Under Rule 317, 

SCAQMD will track, calculate, analyze, 

and report to demonstrate that the 

requirements of section 185 of the Act 

have been met. Rule 317 includes: 

Calculation of CAA non-attainment 

(section 185) fee obligation, 

establishment of a ‘‘section 172(e) fee 

equivalency account,’’ an annual 

demonstration of equivalency, an 

annual preliminary determination of 

equivalency, reporting to CARB and 

EPA, and a backstop provision for 

failure to achieve equivalency. The 

‘‘section 172(e) fee equivalency 

account’’ will include funds from 

qualified programs that are surplus to 

the 1-hour ozone SIP and designed to 

result in direct reductions or facilitate 


pmangrum on DSK3VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS