5272 Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 20 / Monday, January 31, 2011 / Rules and Regulations 

VI. Statutory and Executive Order 

Reviews 

Under the CAA, the Administrator is 

required to approve a SIP submission 

that complies with the provisions of the 

CAA 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 CAA. 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 CAA; 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. 

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). 

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 April 1, 2011. Filing a petition 

for reconsideration by the Administrator 

of this final rule does not affect the 

finality of this action 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, 

Particulate matter, Reporting and 

recordkeeping requirements. 

Dated: December 29, 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 52.2570 is amended by 

revising paragraph (c)(121) to read as 

follows: 

§ 52.2570 Identification of plan. 

* * * * * 

(c) * * * 

(121) On September 11, 2009, the 

Wisconsin Department of Natural 

Resources submitted a State 

Implementation Plan revision request. 

The State’s ambient air quality 

standards were revised by adding fine 

particulate matter, PM2.5, standards and 

revising the coarse particulate matter, 

PM10, standards. Wisconsin added 

annual and 24-hour PM2.5 standards. It 

also revoked the annual PM10 ambient 

air quality standard while retaining the 

24-hour PM10 standard. 

(i) Incorporation by reference. The 

following sections of the Wisconsin 

Administrative Code are incorporated 

by reference: 

(A) NR 404.02 Definitions. NR 

404.02(4e) ‘‘PM2.5’’ as published in the 

Wisconsin Administrative Register, on 

September 30, 2009, No. 645, effective 

October 1, 2009. 

(B) NR 404.04 Ambient Air Quality 

Standards. NR 404.04 (8) ‘‘PM10: 

PRIMARY AND SECONDARY 

STANDARDS.’’ and NR 404.04(9) 

‘‘PM2.5: PRIMARY AND SECONDARY 

STANDARDS’’ as published in the 

Wisconsin Administrative Register, on 

September 30, 2009, No. 645, effective 

October 1, 2009. 

(ii) Additional material. 

(A) NR 484.03 Code of Federal 

Regulations. NR 484.03(5) in Table 1 as 

published in the Wisconsin 

Administrative Register, on September 

30, 2009, No. 645, effective October 1, 

2009. 

(B) NR 484.04 Code of Federal 

Regulations appendices. NR 484.04 (6), 

(6g), and (6r) in Table 2, as published in 

the Wisconsin Administrative Register, 

on September 30, 2009, No. 645, 

effective October 1, 2009. 

* * * * * 

[FR Doc. 2011–2042 Filed 1–28–11; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 6560–50–P 

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION 

AGENCY 

40 CFR Part 52 

[EPA–R04–OAR–2010–0697–201102, FRL– 

9259–8] 

Removal of Limitation of Approval of 

Prevention of Significant Deterioration 

Provisions Concerning Greenhouse 

Gas Emitting-Sources in State 

Implementation Plans; Alabama 

AGENCY: Environmental Protection 

Agency (EPA). 

ACTION: Final rule. 

SUMMARY: EPA is amending its 

regulations to remove language which 

narrowed its previous approval of 

Alabama’s New Source Review (NSR) 

Prevention of Significant Deterioration 

(PSD) program regarding thresholds for 

determining which new stationary 

sources and modification projects 

become subject to Alabama’s PSD 


jdjones on DSK8KYBLC1PROD with RULES
Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 20 / Monday, January 31, 2011 / Rules and Regulations 5273 

permitting requirements for their 

greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions. On 

December 14, 2010, the State of 

Alabama, through the Alabama 

Department of Environmental 

Management (ADEM), provided a 

revision to its State Implementation 

Plan (SIP) to establish appropriate 

emission thresholds for determining 

which new stationary sources and 

modification projects become subject to 

permitting requirements for GHG 

emissions in Alabama. EPA has taken 

final action to approve Alabama’s 

December 14, 2010, SIP revision, and 

this makes EPA’s narrowing of its 

previous approval of Alabama’s PSD 

program as it relates to GHG permitting 

thresholds unnecessary. Today’s action 

removes the regulatory language related 

to the narrowing action that is no longer 

applicable to Alabama as a result of 

EPA’s approval of Alabama’s December 

14, 2010, SIP revision. Because this 

action is ministerial, EPA is applying 

the ‘‘good cause’’ exemption from public 

notice and comment requirements 

under the Administrative Procedure Act 

(APA). 

DATES: This action is effective January 

31, 2011. 

ADDRESSES: EPA has established a 

docket for this action under Docket 

Identification No. EPA–R04–OAR– 

2010–0697. All documents in the docket 

are listed on the http:// 

www.regulations.gov Web site. Although 

listed in the index, some information is 

not publicly available, i.e., Confidential 

Business Information or other 

information whose disclosure is 

restricted by statute. Certain other 

material, such as copyrighted material, 

is not placed on the Internet and will be 

publicly available only in hard copy 

form. Publicly available docket 

materials are available either 

electronically through http:// 

www.regulations.gov or in hard copy at 

the 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. EPA 

requests that if at all possible, you 

contact the person listed in the FOR

FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section to 

schedule your inspection. The Regional 

Office’s official hours of business are 

Monday through Friday, 8:30 to 4:30 

excluding Federal holidays. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Lynorae Benjamin, Regulatory 

Development Section, Air Planning 

Branch, Air, Pesticides and Toxics 

Management Division, Region 4, U.S. 

Environmental Protection Agency, 61 

Forsyth Street, SW., Atlanta, Georgia 

30303–8960. The telephone number is 

(404) 562–9040. Ms. Benjamin can also 

be reached via electronic mail at 

benjamin.lynorae@epa.gov. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

I. What is today’s action? 

II. When is today’s action effective? 

III. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews 

I. What is today’s action? 

On December 30, 2010, EPA 

published a final rule entitled 

‘‘Limitation of Approval of Prevention of 

Significant Deterioration Provisions 

Concerning Greenhouse Gas EmittingSources in State Implementation Plans.’’ 

See 75 FR 82536 (Narrowing Rule). This 

action narrowed EPA’s previous 

approval of PSD programs as applicable 

to GHG-emitting sources in SIPs in 24 

States, including Alabama. Specifically, 

in the Narrowing Rule, EPA withdrew 

its previous approval of those programs 

to the extent they apply PSD to GHGemitting sources below the thresholds in 

EPA’s Tailoring Rule (75 FR 31514). 

Having narrowed its prior approval, 

EPA asked that each affected State 

withdraw from EPA consideration the 

part of its SIP that was no longer 

approved, and stated that approval of a 

SIP revision incorporating the Tailoring 

Rule thresholds into a SIP would count 

as removing these no-longer-approved 

provisions. 

On December 14, 2010, the State of 

Alabama, through ADEM, provided a 

revision to its SIP to incorporate 

changes to Alabama’s air quality 

regulations, Regulation 335–3–14–.04, 

Air Permits Authorizing Construction in 

Clean Air Areas—Prevention of 

Significant Deterioration Permitting 

(PSD), to establish appropriate emission 

thresholds, consistent with EPA’s 

Tailoring Rule, for determining which 

new stationary sources and modification 

projects become subject to Alabama’s 

PSD permitting requirements for their 

GHG emissions. On December 29, 2010, 

EPA approved Alabama’s December 14, 

2010, SIP revision, effective January 18, 

2011. See 75 FR 81863. As a result of 

EPA’s approval of Alabama’s changes to 

its air quality regulations to incorporate 

the appropriate thresholds for GHG 

permitting applicability into Alabama’s 

SIP, paragraph (b) in Section 52.53 of 40 

CFR part 52, as included in EPA’s 

Narrowing Rule—which applies the 

Narrowing Rule to Alabama’s SIP—is no 

longer necessary. The current action 

removes the approval narrowing 

language relating to Alabama’s SIP from 

the CFR to reflect that, to the extent the 

Narrowing Rule withdrew EPA approval 

from any provisions in the Alabama SIP, 

those provisions have been removed 

from the SIP and thus the narrowing 

language in 40 CFR 52.1272(b) now 

serves no purpose. EPA is publishing 

this rulemaking to amend Section 52.53 

of 40 CFR part 52 to remove this 

unnecessary regulatory language. 

II. When is today’s action effective? 

This action removes content from the 

CFR that now serves no purpose 

because EPA has approved Alabama’s 

SIP revision to establish thresholds for 

GHG permitting applicability consistent 

with EPA’s Tailoring Rule. This is a 

ministerial but necessary action on the 

part of EPA. EPA has determined that 

today’s action falls under the ‘‘good 

cause’’ exemption in section 553(b)(3)(B) 

of the APA. That provision authorizes 

agencies, upon finding ‘‘good cause,’’ to 

dispense with public notice and 

participation where they are 

impracticable, unnecessary, or contrary 

to the public interest. EPA finds that it 

is unnecessary to provide public notice 

prior to finalizing this action, or to 

provide an opportunity for public 

comment on this action, because this 

action does not establish any new 

regulatory requirements, but instead 

merely removes language contained in 

40 CFR 52.53 that no longer serves any 

purpose. 

EPA also finds that there is good 

cause under APA section 553(d)(3) for 

this action to become effective on the 

date of publication. Section 553(d)(3) of 

the APA allows an effective date less 

than 30 days after publication ‘‘as 

otherwise provided by the agency for 

good cause found and published with 

the rule.’’ 5 U.S.C. 553(d)(3). The 

purpose of the 30-day waiting period 

prescribed in APA section 553(d)(3) is 

to give affected parties a reasonable time 

to adjust their behavior and prepare 

before the final rule takes effect. Today’s 

rule, however, does not create any new 

regulatory requirements such that 

affected parties would need time to 

prepare before the rule takes effect. 

Rather, today’s action merely removes 

language contained in 40 CFR 52.53 that 

no longer serves any purpose. For this 

reason, EPA finds good cause under 

APA section 553(d)(3) for this action to 

become effective on the date of 

publication. 

III. Statutory and Executive Order 

Reviews 

Under Executive Order 12866 (58 FR 

51735, October 4, 1993), this action is 

not a ‘‘significant regulatory action’’ and 

therefore is not subject to review by the 

Office of Management and Budget. For 

this reason, this action is also not 

subject to Executive Order 13211, 


jdjones on DSK8KYBLC1PROD with RULES
5274 Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 20 / Monday, January 31, 2011 / Rules and Regulations 

‘‘Actions Concerning Regulations That 

Significantly Affect Energy Supply, 

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

22, 2001). This action removes 

unnecessary language contained in 40 

CFR 52.53 related to Alabama’s SIP, and 

imposes no new requirements. 

Accordingly, the Administrator certifies 

that this rule will not have a significant 

economic impact on a substantial 

number of small entities under the 

Regulatory Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 601 

et seq.). Because this rule removes 

unnecessary language contained in 40 

CFR 52.53 related to Alabama’s SIP, and 

does not impose any new enforceable 

duty, it does not contain any unfunded 

mandate or significantly or uniquely 

affect small governments, as described 

in the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act 

of 1995 (Pub. L. 104–4). 

This rule also does not have Tribal 

implications because it will not have a 

substantial direct effect on one or more 

Indian Tribes, on the relationship 

between the Federal Government and 

Indian Tribes, or on the distribution of 

power and responsibilities between the 

Federal Government and Indian Tribes, 

as specified by Executive Order 13175 

(65 FR 67249, November 9, 2000). This 

rule also does not have Federalism 

implications because it does not have 

substantial direct effects on the States, 

on the relationship between the national 

government and the States, or on the 

distribution of power and 

responsibilities among the various 

levels of government, as specified in 

Executive Order 13132 (64 FR 43255, 

August 10, 1999). This rule removes 

unnecessary language contained in 40 

CFR 52.53 related to Alabama’s SIP, and 

does not alter the relationship or the 

distribution of power and 

responsibilities established in the Clean 

Air Act (CAA). This rule also is not 

subject to Executive Order 13045 

‘‘Protection of Children from 

Environmental Health Risks and Safety 

Risks’’ (62 FR 19885, April 23, 1997), 

because it is not economically 

significant. In addition, this rule does 

not involve technical standards, thus 

the requirements of section 12(d) of the 

National Technology Transfer and 

Advancement Act of 1995 (15 U.S.C. 

272 note) do not apply. This rule also 

does not impose an information 

collection burden under the provisions 

of the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 

(44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.). 

The Congressional Review Act, 

5 U.S.C. section 801 et seq., as added by 

the Small Business Regulatory 

Enforcement Fairness Act of 1996, 

generally provides that before a rule 

may take effect, the agency 

promulgating the rule must submit a 

rule report, which includes a copy of 

the rule, to each House of the Congress 

and to the Comptroller General of the 

United States. EPA will submit a report 

containing this rule and other required 

information to the U.S. Senate, the U.S. 

House of Representatives, and the 

Comptroller General of the United 

States prior to publication of the rule in 

the Federal Register. A major rule 

cannot take effect until 60 days after it 

is published in the Federal Register. 

This action is not a ‘‘major rule’’ as 

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

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

petitions for judicial review of this 

action must be filed in the United States 

Court of Appeals for the appropriate 

circuit by April 1, 2011. 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 CAA 

section 307(b)(2).) 

List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52 

Environmental protection, Air 

pollution control, Greenhouse gases, 

Incorporation by reference, 

Intergovernmental relations, Ozone, 

Volatile organic compounds, and 

Reporting and recordkeeping 

requirements. 

Dated: January 20, 2011. 

A. Stanley Meiburg, 

Acting Regional Administrator, Region 4. 

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 B—Alabama 

■ 2. Section 52.53 is revised to read as 

follows: 

§ 52.53 Approval Status. 

With the exceptions set forth in this 

subpart, the Administrator approves 

Alabama’s plans for the attainment and 

maintenance of the national standards 

under section 110 of the Clean Air Act. 

Furthermore, the Administrator finds 

the plans satisfy all requirements of Part 

D, Title I, of the Clean Air Act as 

amended in 1977. In addition, 

continued satisfaction of the 

requirements of Part D for the ozone 

portion of the SIP depends on the 

adoption and submittal of RACT 

requirements by July 1, 1980 for the 

sources covered by CTGs issued 

between January 1978 and January 1979 

and adoption and submittal by each 

subsequent January of additional RACT 

requirements for sources covered by 

CTGs issued by the previous January. 

[FR Doc. 2011–1931 Filed 1–28–11; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 6560–50–P 

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION 

AGENCY 

40 CFR Part 52 

[EPA–R04–OAR–2010–0811–201101, FRL– 

9259–7] 

Removal of Limitation of Approval of 

Prevention of Significant Deterioration 

Provisions Concerning Greenhouse 

Gas Emitting-Sources in State 

Implementation Plans; Mississippi 

AGENCY: Environmental Protection 

Agency (EPA). 

ACTION: Final rule. 

SUMMARY: EPA is amending its 

regulations to remove language which 

narrowed its previous approval of 

Mississippi’s New Source Review (NSR) 

Prevention of Significant Deterioration 

(PSD) program regarding emission 

thresholds for determining which new 

stationary sources and modification 

projects become subject to Mississippi’s 

PSD permitting requirements for their 

greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions. On 

December 9, 2010, the State of 

Mississippi, through the Mississippi 

Department of Environmental Quality 

(MDEQ), provided a revision to its State 

Implementation Plan (SIP) to establish 

appropriate thresholds for determining 

which new stationary sources and 

modification projects become subject to 

permitting requirements for GHG 

emissions in Mississippi. EPA has taken 

final action to approve Mississippi’s 

December 9, 2010, SIP revision, and this 

makes EPA’s narrowing of its previous 

approval of Mississippi’s PSD program 

as it relates to GHG permitting 

thresholds unnecessary. Today’s action 

removes the regulatory language related 

to the narrowing action that is no longer 

applicable to Mississippi as a result of 

EPA’s approval of Mississippi’s 

December 9, 2010, SIP revision. Because 

this action is ministerial, EPA is 

applying the ‘‘good cause’’ exemption 

from public notice and comment 

requirements under the Administrative 

Procedure Act (APA). 

DATES: This action is effective January 

31, 2011. 

ADDRESSES: EPA has established a 

docket for this action under Docket 


jdjones on DSK8KYBLC1PROD with RULES