Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 161 / Monday, August 20, 2012 / Rules and Regulations 50033 

the SJVUAPCD 1-hour ozone 

nonattainment area to meet the 

requirements for a program no less 

stringent than that of section 185. Final 

approval of Rule 3170 and SJVUAPCD’s 

equivalent alternative program also 

permanently terminates all sanctions 

and the Federal Implementation Plan 

(FIP) implications associated with 

section 185 for the 1-hour ozone 

NAAQS and previous action (75 FR 

1716, January 13, 2010) regarding SJV. 

V. 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 

disproportionate human health or 

environmental effects with practical, 

appropriate, 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 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 October 19, 2012. 

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, 

Nitrogen dioxide, Ozone, Reporting and 

recordkeeping requirements, Volatile 

organic compounds. 

Dated: June 11, 2012. 

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 F—California 

■ 2. Section 52.220 is amended by 

adding paragraph (c)(412) to read as 

follows: 

§ 52.220 Identification of plan. 

* * * * * 

(412) New regulations were submitted 

on June 14, 2011 by the Governor’s 

designee. 

(i) Incorporation by Reference. 

(A) San Joaquin Valley Unified Air 

Pollution Control District. 

(1) Rule 3170, ‘‘Federally Mandated 

Ozone Nonattainment Fee,’’ amended 

on May 19, 2011. 

* * * * * 

[FR Doc. 2012–20268 Filed 8–17–12; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 6560–50–P 

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION 

AGENCY 

40 CFR Parts 52 and 81 

[EPA–R06–OAR–2008–0633; FRL–9713–8] 

Approval and Promulgation of Air 

Quality Implementation Plans; 

Arkansas; Infrastructure Requirements 

for the 1997 Ozone NAAQS and the 

1997 and 2006 PM2.5 NAAQS and 

Interstate Transport Requirements for 

the 1997 Ozone NAAQS and 2006 PM2.5

NAAQS 

AGENCY: Environmental Protection 

Agency (EPA). 

ACTION: Final rule. 

SUMMARY: EPA is partially approving 

and partially disapproving submittals 

from the State of Arkansas pursuant to 

the Clean Air Act (CAA or the Act) that 

address certain infrastructure elements 

specified in the CAA necessary to 

implement, maintain, and enforce the 

1997 8-hour ozone and the 1997 and 

2006 fine particulate matter (PM2.5) 

national ambient air quality standards 

(NAAQS or standards). EPA is also 

making a correction to an attainment 

status table in its regulations to 

accurately reflect the redesignation date 

of Crittenden County, Arkansas to 

attainment for the 1997 8-hour ozone 

standard. 

DATES: This final rule is effective on 

September 19, 2012. 

ADDRESSES: EPA has established a 

docket for this action under Docket 

Identification No. EPA–R06–OAR– 


emcdonald on DSK67QTVN1PROD with RULES
50034 Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 161 / Monday, August 20, 2012 / Rules and Regulations 

2008–0633. All documents in the docket 

are listed at www.regulations.gov. 

Although listed in the index, some 

information is not publicly available, 

e.g., 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 

www.regulations.gov or in hard copy at 

the Air Planning Section (6PD–L), 

Environmental Protection Agency, 1445 

Ross Avenue, Suite 700, Dallas, Texas 

75202–2733. The file will be made 

available by appointment for public 

inspection in the Region 6 Freedom of 

Information Act (FOIA) Review Room 

between the hours of 8:30 a.m. and 4:30 

p.m. weekdays except for legal holidays. 

Contact the person listed in the FOR

FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT

paragraph below or Mr. Bill Deese at 

214–665–7253 to make an appointment. 

If possible, please make the 

appointment at least two working days 

in advance of your visit. There will be 

a 15 cent per page fee for making 

photocopies of documents. On the day 

of the visit, please check in at the EPA 

Region 6 reception area at 1445 Ross 

Avenue, Suite 700, Dallas, Texas. 

The State submittal is also available 

for public inspection during official 

business hours, by appointment, at the 

Arkansas Department of Environmental 

Quality, Planning and Air Quality 

Analysis Branch, 5301 Northshore 

Drive, North Little Rock, Arkansas 

72118. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Jeffrey Riley, Air Planning Section 

(6PD–L), Environmental Protection 

Agency, Region 6, 1445 Ross Avenue, 

Suite 700, Dallas, Texas 75202–2733, 

telephone (214) 665–8542; fax number 

(214) 665–7263; email address: 

riley.jeffrey@epa.gov. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

Throughout this document wherever 

‘‘we,’’ ‘‘us,’’ or ‘‘our’’ is used, we mean 

the EPA. 

Table of Contents 

I. Background 

II. Final Action 

III. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews 

I. Background 

The background for today’s action is 

discussed in detail in our February 9, 

2012, proposal (77 FR 6711). In that 

notice, we proposed to partially approve 

and partially disapprove submittals 

from the State of Arkansas, pursuant to 

the CAA, that address the infrastructure 

elements specified in the CAA section 

110(a)(2), necessary to implement, 

maintain, and enforce the 1997 8-hour 

ozone, the 1997 and 2006 PM2.5

NAAQS. Those submittals are dated 

December 17, 2007, March 28, 2008, and 

September 16, 2009, respectively. We 

noted that those submittals did not 

include revisions to the SIP, but 

documented how the current Arkansas 

SIP already included the required 

infrastructure elements. Therefore, we 

proposed to find that the following 

section 110(a)(2) elements were 

contained in the current Arkansas SIP 

and provided the infrastructure for 

implementing the 1997 8-hour ozone 

standard: CAA Sections 110(a)(2)(A), 

(B), (E), (F), (G), (H), (K), (L), (M), and 

portions of (C), (D)(ii), and (J). EPA also 

proposed to find that the following 

section 110(a)(2) elements were 

contained in the current Arkansas SIP 

and provided the infrastructure for 

implementing the 1997 and 2006 PM2.5

standards: CAA Sections 110(a)(2)(A), 

(B), (E), (F), (G), (H), (K), (L), and (M). 

EPA also proposed to find that the 

current Arkansas SIP does not meet the 

infrastructure requirements for the 1997 

8-hour ozone NAAQS and the 1997 and 

2006 PM2.5 NAAQS at 110(a)(2) for 

portions of (C), (D)(ii), and (J) because 

the EPA-approved SIP prevention of 

significant deterioration (PSD) program 

does not apply to greenhouse gas (GHG) 

emitting sources. We also proposed to 

find that the current Arkansas SIP does 

not meet the infrastructure requirements 

for the 1997 and 2006 PM2.5 NAAQS at 

110(a)(2) for (C), (D)(ii), and (J) because 

Arkansas has not submitted the PSD SIP 

revision required by EPA’s 

Implementation of the New Source 

Review (NSR) Program for Particulate 

Matter Less Than 2.5 Micrometers (73 

FR 28321, May 16, 2008). Further, for 

the 1997 8-hour ozone NAAQS, we 

proposed to partially approve and 

partially disapprove the provisions of 

SIP submissions intended to satisfy the 

section 110(a)(2)(D)(i)(II) infrastructure 

element pertaining to emissions from 

sources in Arkansas not interfering with 

measures required in the SIP of any 

other State under part C of the CAA to 

prevent significant deterioration of air 

quality. For the 2006 PM2.5 NAAQS, we 

proposed to disapprove the provisions 

of SIP submissions intended to satisfy 

this section 110(a)(2)(D)(i)(II) 

infrastructure element. Finally, for 

purposes of the 1997 8-hour ozone 

NAAQS, EPA proposed to approve four 

severable portions of SIP revisions to 

modify the Arkansas PSD SIP to include 

NOX as an ozone precursor. 

Our February 9, 2012, proposal 

provides a detailed description of the 

submittals and the rationale for EPA’s 

proposed actions, together with a 

discussion of the opportunity to 

comment. The public comment period 

for these actions closed on March 12, 

2012, and we did not receive any 

comments. 

II. Final Action 

We are partially approving and 

partially disapproving the submittals 

provided by the State of Arkansas to 

demonstrate that the Arkansas SIP 

meets the requirements of Section 

110(a)(1) and (2) of the Act for the 1997 

ozone and 1997 and 2006 PM2.5

NAAQS. For the 1997 ozone standard, 

we are finding that the current Arkansas 

SIP meets the infrastructure elements 

listed below: 

Emission limits and other control 

measures (110(a)(2)(A) of the Act); 

Ambient air quality monitoring/data 

system (110(a)(2)(B) of the Act); 

Program for enforcement of control 

measures (110(a)(2)(C) of the Act), 

except for the portion that addresses 

GHGs; 

Interstate Transport, pursuant to 

section 110(a)(2)(D)(ii) of the Act, except 

for the portion that addresses GHGs; 

Adequate resources (110(a)(2)(E) of 

the Act); 

Stationary source monitoring system 

(110(a)(2)(F) of the Act); 

Emergency power (110(a)(2)(G) of the 

Act); 

Future SIP revisions (110(a)(2)(H) of 

the Act); 

Consultation with government 

officials (110(a)(2)(J) of the Act); 

Public notification (110(a)(2)(J) of the 

Act); 

Prevention of significant deterioration 

and visibility protection (110(a)(2)(J) of 

the Act), except for the portion that 

addresses GHGs; 

Air quality modeling data 

(110(a)(2)(K) of the Act); 

Permitting fees (110(a)(2)(L) of the 

Act); and 

Consultation/participation by affected 

local entities (110(a)(2)(M) of the Act). 

For the 1997 ozone standard, we are 

finding that the current Arkansas SIP 

does not meet the infrastructure 

elements listed below: 

Program for enforcement of control 

measures (110(a)(2)(C) of the Act), only 

as it relates to GHGs; 

Interstate transport, pursuant to 

section 110(a)(2)(D)(ii) of the Act, only 

as it relates to GHGs; and 

Prevention of significant deterioration 

(110(a)(2)(J) of the Act), only as it relates 

to GHGs. 

We are also approving the Arkansas 

Interstate Transport SIP provisions that 


emcdonald on DSK67QTVN1PROD with RULES
Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 161 / Monday, August 20, 2012 / Rules and Regulations 50035 

address the requirement of section 

110(a)(2)(D)(i)(II) that emissions from 

sources in Arkansas do not interfere 

with measures required in the SIP of 

any other State under part C of the CAA 

to prevent significant deterioration of air 

quality, except as they relate to GHGs 

for the 1997 ozone NAAQS. 

We are disapproving the portion of 

the Arkansas Interstate Transport SIP 

provisions that address the requirement 

of section 110(a)(2)(D)(i)(II), as it relates 

to GHGs, that emissions from sources in 

Arkansas do not interfere with measures 

required in the SIP of any other State 

under part C of the CAA to prevent 

significant deterioration of air quality, 

for the 1997 ozone NAAQS. 

For the 1997 and 2006 PM2.5

standards, we are finding that the 

current Arkansas SIP meets the 

infrastructure elements listed below: 

Emission limits and other control 

measures (110(a)(2)(A) of the Act); 

Ambient air quality monitoring/data 

system (110(a)(2)(B) of the Act); 

Adequate resources (110(a)(2)(E) of 

the Act); 

Stationary source monitoring system 

(110(a)(2)(F) of the Act); 

Emergency power (110(a)(2)(G) of the 

Act); 

Future SIP revisions (110(a)(2)(H) of 

the Act); 

Consultation with government 

officials (110(a)(2)(J) of the Act); 

Public notification (110(a)(2)(J) of the 

Act); 

Air quality modeling data 

(110(a)(2)(K) of the Act); 

Permitting fees (110(a)(2)(L) of the 

Act); and 

Consultation/participation by affected 

local entities (110(a)(2)(M) of the Act). 

For the 1997 and 2006 PM2.5

standards, we are finding that the 

current Arkansas SIP does not address 

the 110(a)(2) infrastructure elements 

listed below: 

Program for enforcement of control 

measures (110(a)(2)(C) of the Act); 

Interstate Transport, pursuant to 

section 110(a)(2)(D)(ii) of the Act; and 

Prevention of significant deterioration 

and visibility protection (110(a)(2)(J) of 

the Act). 

We are also disapproving the portion 

of the Arkansas Interstate Transport SIP 

that addresses the requirement of 

section 110(a)(2)(D)(i)(II)—that 

emissions from sources in Arkansas do 

not interfere with measures required in 

the SIP of any other State under part C 

of the CAA to prevent significant 

deterioration of air quality—for the 2006 

PM2.5 NAAQS. 

Under section 110(c) of the Act, 

disapproval of a SIP in whole or in part 

requires EPA to promulgate a federal 

implementation plan (FIP) at any time 

within two years following final 

disapproval, unless the State submits a 

plan or plan revision that corrects the 

deficiency—and the EPA approves the 

plan or plan revision—before the EPA 

promulgates such FIP. This two-year 

period is commonly referred to as the 

‘‘FIP clock.’’ Here, based on Arkansas’s 

failure to submit the required PM2.5 PSD 

SIP revision, and because Arkansas 

cannot issue permits for GHG emissions, 

we are disapproving for the 1997 and 

2006 PM2.5 standard and partially 

disapproving for the 1997 ozone 

NAAQS certain severable elements of 

the Arkansas infrastructure SIP. 

Accordingly, EPA is required by law to 

promulgate a FIP at any time within two 

years of this final rulemaking, unless 

Arkansas submits and we approve a 

new SIP or SIP revisions that correct the 

deficiencies, or unless EPA has already 

fulfilled its FIP obligation. 

EPA is also approving the following 

revisions to APCEC Regulation 19, 

Chapter 9, submitted by the State of 

Arkansas on February 17, 2010: 

1. The substantive change adding 

NOX to the definition of Major 

Modification through incorporation by 

reference of 40 CFR 52.21(b) and 40 CFR 

51.301 as of November 29, 2005. 

2. The substantive change adding 

NOX to the definition of Major 

Stationary Source through incorporation 

by reference of 40 CFR 52.21(b) and 40 

CFR 51.301 as of November 29, 2005. 

3. The substantive change adding 

NOX as a precursor to the table’s criteria 

and other pollutants listing for ozone 

through incorporation by reference of 40 

CFR 52.21(b)(23)(i). 

4. The substantive change allowing 

for an exemption with respect to ozone 

monitoring for a source with a net 

emissions increase less than 100 tpy of 

NOX through incorporation by reference 

of 40 CFR 52.21(i)(5)(i). 

EPA is taking these actions in 

accordance with section 110 and part C 

of the Act and EPA’s regulations and 

consistent with EPA guidance. We are 

also making ministerial corrections to 

the attainment status table in 40 CFR 

81.304 to accurately reflect the 

redesignation date of Crittenden County, 

Arkansas to attainment for the 1997 8- 

hour ozone standard. On March 24, 

2010, we redesignated the county with 

an effective date of April 23, 2010 (75 

FR 14077). 

III. Statutory and Executive Order 

Reviews 

Under the CAA, 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 act on State law as 

meeting Federal requirements and does 

not impose additional requirements 

beyond those imposed by State law. 

A. Executive Order 12866: Regulatory 

Planning and Review and Executive 

Order 13563: Improving Regulation and 

Regulatory Review 

This action is not a ‘‘significant 

regulatory action’’ under the terms of 

Executive Order 12866 (58 FR 51735, 

October 4, 1993) and is therefore not 

subject to review under Executive 

Orders 12866 and 13563 (76 FR 3821, 

January 21, 2011). 

B. Paperwork Reduction Act 

This action does not impose an 

information collection burden under the 

provisions of the Paperwork Reduction 

Act, 44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq., because this 

SIP partial approval/partial disapproval 

under section 110 and subchapter I, part 

D of the CAA will not in-and-of itself 

create any new information collection 

burdens but simply disapproves certain 

State requirements for inclusion into the 

SIP. Burden is defined at 5 CFR 

1320.3(b). 

C. 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. For 

purposes of assessing the impacts of 

today’s rule on small entities, small 

entity is defined as: (1) A small business 

as defined by the Small Business 

Administration’s (SBA) regulations at 13 

CFR 121.201; (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; and (3) a small 

organization that is any not-for-profit 

enterprise which is independently 

owned and operated and is not 

dominant in its field. 

After considering the economic 

impacts of today’s rule on small entities, 

I certify that this action will not have a 

significant impact on a substantial 

number of small entities. This rule does 

not impose any requirements or create 

impacts on small entities. This SIP 

partial approval/partial disapproval 

under section 110 and subchapter I, part 

D of the CAA will not in-and-of itself 


emcdonald on DSK67QTVN1PROD with RULES
50036 Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 161 / Monday, August 20, 2012 / Rules and Regulations 

create any new requirements but simply 

approves, in part, and disapproves, in 

part, certain State requirements for 

inclusion into the SIP. Accordingly, it 

affords no opportunity for EPA to 

fashion for small entities less 

burdensome compliance or reporting 

requirements or timetables or 

exemptions from all or part of the rule. 

The fact that the CAA prescribes that 

various consequences (e.g., a FIP) may 

or will flow from this partial 

disapproval does not mean that EPA 

either can or must conduct a regulatory 

flexibility analysis for this action. 

Therefore, this action will not have a 

significant economic impact on a 

substantial number of small entities. 

D. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act 

This action contains no Federal 

mandates under the provisions of Title 

II of the Unfunded Mandates Reform 

Act of 1995 (UMRA), 2 U.S.C. 1531– 

1538 for State, local, or tribal 

governments or the private sector. EPA 

has determined that the action 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 action partially 

approves and partially disapproves preexisting 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. 

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 action 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, because it 

merely partially approves and partially 

disapproves certain State requirements 

for inclusion into the SIP and does not 

alter the relationship or the distribution 

of power and responsibilities 

established in the CAA. Thus, Executive 

Order 13132 does not apply to this 

action. 

F. Executive Order 13175, Coordination 

With Indian Tribal Governments 

This action does not have tribal 

implications, as specified in Executive 

Order 13175 (65 FR 67249, November 9, 

2000), because the action EPA is 

finalizing neither imposes substantial 

direct compliance costs on tribal 

governments, nor preempts tribal law. 

Therefore, the requirements of section 

5(b) and 5(c) of the Executive Order do 

not apply to this rule. Consistent with 

EPA policy, EPA nonetheless is offering 

consultation to Tribes regarding this 

rulemaking action. EPA will respond to 

relevant comments in the final 

rulemaking action. 

G. Executive Order 13045, Protection of 

Children From Environmental Health 

Risks and Safety Risks 

EPA interprets Executive Order 13045 

(62 FR 19885, April 23, 1997) as 

applying only to those regulatory 

actions that concern health or safety 

risks, such that the analysis required 

under section 5–501 of the Executive 

Order has the potential to influence the 

regulation. This action is not subject to 

Executive Order 13045 because it is not 

an economically significant regulatory 

action based on health or safety risks 

subject to Executive Order 13045 (62 FR 

19885, April 23, 1997). This SIP partial 

approval/disapproval under section 110 

and subchapter I, part D of the CAA will 

not in-and-of itself create any new 

regulations but simply partially 

approves and partially disapproves 

certain State requirements for inclusion 

into the SIP. 

H. Executive Order 13211, Actions That 

Significantly Affect Energy Supply, 

Distribution or Use 

This action is not subject to Executive 

Order 13211 (66 FR 28355, May 22, 

2001) because it is not a significant 

regulatory action under Executive Order 

12866. 

I. National Technology Transfer and 

Advancement Act 

Section 12(d) of the National 

Technology Transfer and Advancement 

Act of 1995 (‘‘NTTAA’’), Public Law 

104–113, section 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 (e.g., materials specifications, 

test methods, sampling procedures, and 

business practices) that are developed or 

adopted by voluntary consensus 

standards bodies. NTTAA directs EPA 

to provide Congress, through OMB, 

explanations when the Agency decides 

not to use available and applicable 

voluntary consensus standards. 

The EPA believes that this action is 

not subject to requirements of Section 

12(d) of NTTAA because application of 

those requirements would be 

inconsistent with the CAA. 

J. Executive Order 12898: Federal 

Actions To Address Environmental 

Justice in Minority Populations and 

Low-Income Populations 

Executive Order 12898 (59 FR 7629, 

February 16, 1994) establishes Federal 

executive policy on environmental 

justice. Its main provision directs 

Federal agencies, to the greatest extent 

practicable and permitted by law, to 

make environmental justice part of their 

mission by identifying and addressing, 

as appropriate, disproportionately high 

and adverse human health or 

environmental effects of their programs, 

policies, and activities on minority 

populations and low-income 

populations in the United States. 

EPA lacks the discretionary authority 

to address environmental justice in this 

action. In reviewing SIP submissions, 

EPA’s role is to approve or disapprove 

state choices, based on the criteria of the 

CAA. Accordingly, this action merely 

partially approves and partially 

disapproves certain State requirements 

for inclusion into the SIP under section 

110 and subchapter I, part D of the CAA 

and will not in-and-of itself create any 

new requirements. Accordingly, it 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. 

K. 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 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 


emcdonald on DSK67QTVN1PROD with RULES
Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 161 / Monday, August 20, 2012 / Rules and Regulations 50037 

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). 

L. 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 October 19, 2012. 

Filing a petition for reconsideration by 

the Administrator of this final rule does 

not affect the finality of this action for 

the purpose 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 

40 CFR Part 52 

Environmental protection, Air 

pollution control, Incorporation by 

reference, Intergovernmental relations, 

Nitrogen dioxides, Ozone, Particulate 

matter, Reporting and recordkeeping 

requirements, Volatile organic 

compounds. 

40 CFR Part 81 

Environmental protection, Air 

pollution control, National parks, 

Wilderness areas. 

Dated: July 31, 2012. 

Samuel Coleman, 

Acting Regional Administrator, Region 6. 

40 CFR parts 52 and 81 are 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 E—Arkansas 

■ 2. Section 52.170 is amended as 

follows: 

■ a. In the table in paragraph (c), revise 

the entries for Reg. 19.903 and Reg. 

19.904. 

■ b. At the end of the third table in 

paragraph (e) entitled ‘‘EPA-Approved 

Non-Regulatory Provisions and QuasiRegulatory Measures in the Arkansas 

SIP’’, add entries for ‘‘Infrastructure for 

the 1997 Ozone NAAQS’’, 

‘‘Infrastructure for the 1997 and 2006 

PM2.5 NAAQS’’, and ‘‘Interstate 

transport for the 1997 ozone NAAQS 

(Noninterference with measures 

required to prevent significant 

deterioration of air quality in any other 

State)’’. 

The revisions and additions read as 

follows: 

§ 52.170 Identification of plan. 

* * * * * 

(c) * * * 

EPA-APPROVED REGULATIONS IN THE ARKANSAS SIP 

State citation Title/subject area 

State 

submittal/ 

effective date 

EPA approval date Explanation 

*******

Reg. 19.903 ................... Definitions .................... 02/03/2005 04/12/2007 (72 FR 

18394).

The addition of NOX to the definitions of Major 

Modification and Major Stationary Source 

submitted on 2/17/2010 is approved 8/20/ 

2012. 

[Insert FR page number where document begins]. 

Reg. 19.904 ................... Adoption of Regulations 02/03/2005 04/12/2007 (72 FR 

18394).

The following revisions submitted on 2/17/2010 

are approved: 

(1) Addition of 40 tons per year of NOX to the 

definition of ‘‘significant’’, and 

(2) The ozone monitoring exemption for a 

source with a net emissions increase less 

than 100 tons per year of NOX. 8/20/2012 

[Insert FR page number where document begins]. 

* * * * * * * 

* * * * * (e) * * * 

EPA-APPROVED NON-REGULATORY PROVISIONS AND QUASI-REGULATORY MEASURES IN THE ARKANSAS SIP 

Name of SIP provision Applicable geographic 

or nonattainment area 

State submittal 

date EPA approval date Explanation 

*******

Infrastructure for the 

1997 Ozone NAAQS.

Statewide ..................... 12/17/2007 

3/28/2008 

8/20/2012 [Insert FR 

page number where 

document begins].

Approval for CAA elements 110(a)(2)(A), (B), 

(E), (F), (G), (H), (K), (L), and (M). Approval 

for CAA elements 110(a)(2)(C), (D)(i)(II) 

(interfere with measures in any other state to 

prevent significant deterioration of air quality), 

(D)(ii), and (J) for the 1997 ozone NAAQS, 

except as it relates to Greenhouse Gas 

(GHG) emissions. 


emcdonald on DSK67QTVN1PROD with RULES
50038 Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 161 / Monday, August 20, 2012 / Rules and Regulations 

EPA-APPROVED NON-REGULATORY PROVISIONS AND QUASI-REGULATORY MEASURES IN THE ARKANSAS SIP—Continued 

Name of SIP provision Applicable geographic 

or nonattainment area 

State submittal 

date EPA approval date Explanation 

Infrastructure for the 

1997 and 2006 PM2.5

NAAQS.

Statewide ..................... 3/28/2008 

9/16/2009 

8/20/2012 .....................

[Insert FR page number 

where document begins].

Approval for CAA elements 110(a)(2)(A), (B), 

(E), (F), (G), (H), (K), (L), and (M). 

Interstate transport for 

the 1997 ozone 

NAAQS (Noninterference with measures 

required to prevent 

significant deterioration of air quality in 

any other State).

Statewide ..................... 4/5/2011 8/20/2012 .....................

[Insert FR page number 

where document begins].

Approved except as it relates to GHGs. 

■ 3. Section 52.172 is amended by 

designating the existing text as 

paragraph (a) and adding paragraphs (b), 

(c), and (d) to read as follows: 

§ 52.172 Approval status. 

* * * * * 

(b) 1997 8-hour ozone NAAQS: The 

SIPs submitted December 17, 2007 and 

March 28, 2008 are partially 

disapproved for Clean Air Act (CAA) 

elements 110(a)(2)(C), (D)(i)(II) (interfere 

with measures in any other state to 

prevent significant deterioration of air 

quality), (D)(ii), and (J), only as it relates 

to Greenhouse Gas emissions. 

(c) 1997 PM2.5 NAAQS: The SIP 

submitted March 28, 2008 is 

disapproved for CAA elements 

110(a)(2)(C), (D)(ii), and (J). 

(d) 2006 PM2.5 NAAQS: The SIPs 

submitted March 28, 2008 and 

September 16, 2009 are disapproved for 

CAA elements 110(a)(2)(C), (D)(i)(II)) 

(interfere with measures in any other 

state to prevent significant deterioration 

of air quality), (D)(ii), and (J). 

PART 81—[AMENDED] 

■ 4. The authority citation for part 81 

continues to read as follows: 

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

Subpart C—Section 107 Attainment 

Status Designations 

■ 5. Section 81.304 is amended: 

■ a. By revising the entry for entitled for 

‘‘Memphis TN–AR: (AQCR Metropolitan 

Memphis Interstate) Crittenden County’’ 

in the table entitled ‘‘Arkansas—1997 8- 

Hour Ozone NAAQS (Primary and 

Secondary)’’. 

■ b. By revising footnote 2 in the table 

entitled ‘‘Arkansas—1997 8-Hour Ozone 

NAAQS (Primary and Secondary)’’. 

The revisions read as follows: 

§ 81.304 Arkansas. 

* * * * * 

ARKANSAS—1997 8-HOUR OZONE NAAQS (PRIMARY AND SECONDARY) 

Designated area 

Designation a Category/classification 

Date1 Type Date1 Type 

*******

Memphis TN–AR: (AQCR Metropolitan Memphis Interstate) 

Crittenden County.

..................... Attainment ................................ (2) 

* * * * * * * 

a Includes Indian Country located in each county or area, except as otherwise specified. 1This date is June 15, 2004, unless otherwise noted. 

2Effective April 23, 2010. 

* * * * * 

[FR Doc. 2012–20085 Filed 8–17–12; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 6560–50–P 

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION 

AGENCY 

40 CFR Part 300 

[EPA–HQ–SFUND–1983–0002; FRL–9718–4] 

National Oil and Hazardous 

Substances Pollution Contingency 

Plan; National Priorities List: Deletion 

of the Hooker (Hyde Park) Superfund 

Site 

AGENCY: Environmental Protection 

Agency. 

ACTION: Direct final rule. 

SUMMARY: The Environmental Protection 

Agency (EPA) Region 2 is publishing a 

direct final Notice of Deletion of the 

Hooker (Hyde Park) Superfund Site 

(Site), located in Niagara Falls, New 

York, from the National Priorities List 

(NPL). The NPL, promulgated pursuant 

to section 105 of the Comprehensive 

Environmental Response, 

Compensation, and Liability Act 

(CERCLA) of 1980, as amended, is an 

appendix of the National Oil and 

Hazardous Substances Pollution 

Contingency Plan (NCP). This direct 

final deletion is being published by EPA 

with the concurrence of the State of 

New York, through the Department of 

Environmental Conservation, because 

EPA has determined that all appropriate 


emcdonald on DSK67QTVN1PROD with RULES