Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 197 / Wednesday, October 14, 2009 / Rules and Regulations 52693 

comments are filed. This rule will be 

effective December 14, 2009 without 

further notice unless we receive relevant 

adverse written comments by November 

13, 2009. If we receive such comments, 

we will withdraw this action before the 

effective date by publishing a 

subsequent document that will 

withdraw the final action. All public 

comments received will then be 

addressed in a subsequent final rule 

based on the proposed action. EPA will 

not institute a second comment period. 

Any parties interested in commenting 

on this action should do so at this time. 

If we do not receive any comments, this 

action will be effective December 14, 

2009. 

IV. 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 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. 

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 December 14, 

2009. 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, 

Ozone, Volatile organic compounds. 

Dated: September 9, 2009. 

Bharat Mathur, 

Acting Regional Administrator, Region 5. 

■ For the reasons stated in the preamble, 

part 52, chapter I, of 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 KK—Ohio 

■ 2. Section 52.1870 is amended by 

adding paragraph (c)(144) to read as 

follows: 

§ 52.1870 Identification of plan. 

* * * * * 

(c) * * * 

(144) The Ohio Environmental 

Protection Agency formally submitted 

revisions to Ohio’s Administrative Code 

on August 7, 2007. These revisions 

consists of Rule 3745–21–17 which 

impacts sale, use, and manufacture of 

Portable Fuel Containers in the State of 

Ohio. 

(i) Incorporation by reference. 

(A) Ohio Administrative Code Rule 

3745–21–17 ‘‘Portable fuel containers’’, 

adopted on June 11, 2007, effective on 

June 21, 2007. 

(B) June 11, 2007, ‘‘Director’s Final 

Findings and Orders’’, signed by Chris 

Korleski, Director, Ohio Environmental 

Protection Agency. 

* * * * * 

[FR Doc. E9–24610 Filed 10–13–09; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 6560–50–P 

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION 

AGENCY 

40 CFR Part 52 

[EPA–R09–OAR–2009–0339; FRL–8947–2] 

Revisions to the Arizona State 

Implementation Plan, Maricopa County 

Air Quality Department 

AGENCY: Environmental Protection 

Agency (EPA). 

ACTION: Direct final rule. 

SUMMARY: EPA is taking direct final 

action to approve revisions to the 

Maricopa County Air Quality 

Department (MCAQD) portion of the 

Arizona State Implementation Plan 

(SIP). These revisions concern 

particulate matter (PM) emissions and 

precursors from steam generating units, 

cogeneration units, stationary gas 

turbines, process heaters and internal 

combustion engines. We are approving 

local rules that regulate these emission 

sources under the Clean Air Act as 

amended in 1990 (CAA or the Act). 

DATES: This rule is effective on 

December 14, 2009 without further 


cprice-sewell on DSK2BSOYB1PROD with RULES
52694 Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 197 / Wednesday, October 14, 2009 / Rules and Regulations 

notice, unless EPA receives adverse 

comments by November 13, 2009. If we 

receive such comments, we will publish 

a timely withdrawal in the Federal 

Register to notify the public that this 

direct final rule will not take effect. 

ADDRESSES: Submit comments, 

identified by docket number [EPA–R09– 

OAR–2009–0339], by one of the 

following methods: 

1. Federal eRulemaking Portal: 

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

online instructions. 

2. E-mail: 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 e-mail. 

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 

e-mail directly to EPA, your e-mail 

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. Electronic files should avoid 

the use of special characters, any form 

of encryption, and be free of any defects 

or viruses. 

Docket: The index to the docket for 

this action is available electronically at 

http://www.regulations.gov and in hard 

copy at EPA Region IX, 75 Hawthorne 

Street, San Francisco, California. While 

all documents in the docket are listed in 

the index, some information may be 

publicly available only at the hard copy 

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

some may not be publicly available in 

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

hard copy materials, please schedule an 

appointment during normal business 

hours with the contact listed in the FOR

FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Idalia Perez, EPA Region IX, (415) 972– 

3248, perez.idalia@epa.gov. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

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

and ‘‘our’’ refer to EPA. 

Table of Contents 

I. The State’s Submittal 

A. What rules did the State submit? 

B. Are there other versions of these rules? 

C. What is the purpose of the submitted 

rules? 

II. EPA’s Evaluation and Action 

A. How is EPA evaluating the rules? 

B. Do the rules meet the evaluation 

criteria? 

C. EPA Recommendations to Further 

Improve the Rules 

D. Public Comment and Final Action 

III. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews 

I. The State’s Submittal 

A. What rules did the State submit? 

Table 1 lists the rules we are 

approving with the dates that they were 

adopted by the local air agency and 

submitted by the Arizona Department of 

Environmental Quality (ADEQ). 

TABLE 1—SUBMITTED RULES

Local agency Rule # Rule title Adopted Submitted 

MCAQD ............. 322 Power Plant Operations ............................................................................... 10/17/07 01/09/08 

MCAQD ............. 323 Fuel Burning Equipment from Industrial/Commercial/Institutional (ICI) 

Sources.

10/17/07 01/09/08 

MCAQD ............. 324 Stationary Internal Combustion (IC) Engines ............................................... 10/17/07 01/09/08 

On July 9, 2008, these rule submittals 

were found to meet the completeness 

criteria in 40 CFR Part 51, Appendix V 

by operation of law, which must be met 

before formal EPA review. 

B. Are there other versions of these 

rules? 

There are no previous versions of 

Rule 322, 323 and 324 in the SIP. 

C. What is the purpose of the submitted 

rules? 

NOX helps produce ground-level 

ozone, smog and particulate matter, 

which harm human health and the 

environment. PM contributes to effects 

that are harmful to human health and 

the environment, including premature 

mortality, aggravation of respiratory and 

cardiovascular disease, decreased lung 

function, visibility impairment, and 

damage to vegetation and ecosystems. 

Section 110(a) of the CAA requires 

States to submit regulations that control 

NOX and PM emissions. Rule 322 

regulates emissions of NOX, PM, oxides 

of sulfur (SOX) and carbon monoxide 

(CO) from fossil-fuel-fired equipment 

and cooling towers at power plants and 

cogeneration plants for which 

construction started before May 10, 

1996. This rule applies to steam 

generating units with heat input greater 

or equal than 100 MM Btu/hour (29 

MW), stationary gas turbines with a 

peak heat input equal to or greater than 

10 MM Btu/hour (2.9 MW) and cooling 

towers associated with these units. Rule 

323 regulates emissions of NOX, PM, 

SOX and CO from fuel burning 

combustion equipment at industrial, 

commercial and/or institutional sources. 

Rule 323 applies to steam generating 

units with heat input greater than 10 

MM Btu/hour, stationary gas turbines 

with a peak heat input equal to or 

greater than 2.9 MW and indirect-fired 

process heaters with a heat input greater 

than 10 MM Btu/hour. Rule 324 

regulates emissions of NOX, PM, SOX, 

CO and volatile organic compounds 

(VOCs) from stationary IC engines. This 

Rule applies to new or existing 

stationary spark or compression-ignited 

IC engines with a rating greater than 250 

brake horsepower (bhp). This rule also 

applies to a combination of engines 

rated more than 50 bhp used at a single 

source whose maximum aggregated 

rating is more than 250 bhp. All three 

rules limit PM emissions by ensuring 

good combustion practices, limiting 

sulfur in the fuel and controlling NOX, 

a PM–10 precursor. EPA’s technical 

support document (TSD) has more 

information about these rules. 

II. EPA’s Evaluation and Action 

A. How is EPA evaluating the rules? 

Generally, SIP rules must be 

enforceable (see section 110(a) of the 

Act) and must not relax existing 

requirements (see sections 110(l) and 

193). In addition, SIP rules must 

implement Reasonably Available 

Control Measures (RACM), including 

Reasonably Available Control 

Technology (RACT), in moderate PM 

nonattainment areas, and Best Available 

Control Measures (BACM), including 


cprice-sewell on DSK2BSOYB1PROD with RULES
Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 197 / Wednesday, October 14, 2009 / Rules and Regulations 52695 

Best Available Control Technology 

(BACT), in serious PM nonattainment 

areas (see CAA sections 189(a)(1) and 

189(b)(1)). The MCAQD regulates a PM 

nonattainment area classified as serious 

(see 40 CFR part 81), so Rules 322, 323 

and 324 must implement BACM/BACT. 

Guidance and policy documents that 

we use to help evaluate specific 

enforceability and RACM/RACT or 

BACM/BACT requirements consistently 

include the following: 

1. Portions of the proposed post-1987 

ozone and carbon monoxide policy that 

concern RACT, 52 FR 45044, November 

24, 1987. 

2. ‘‘Issues Relating to VOC Regulation 

Cutpoints, Deficiencies, and Deviations; 

Clarification to Appendix D of 

November 24, 1987 Federal Register 

Notice,’’ (Blue Book), notice of 

availability published in the May 25, 

1988 Federal Register. 

3. ‘‘Guidance Document for Correcting 

Common VOC & Other Rule 

Deficiencies,’’ EPA Region 9, August 21, 

2001 (the Little Bluebook). 

4. ‘‘State Implementation Plans; 

General Preamble for the 

Implementation of Title I of the Clean 

Air Act Amendments of 1990,’’ 57 FR 

13498 (April 16, 1992); 57 FR 18070 

(April 28, 1992). 

5. ‘‘State Implementation Plans for 

Serious PM–10 Nonattainment Areas, 

and Attainment Date Waivers for PM–10 

Nonattainment Areas Generally; 

Addendum to the General Preamble for 

the Implementation of Title I of the 

Clean Air Act Amendments of 1990,’’ 59 

FR 41998 (August 16, 1994). 

6. ‘‘PM–10 Guideline Document,’’ 

EPA 452/R–93–008, April 1993. 

7. ‘‘Determination of Reasonably 

Available Control Technology and Best 

Available Retrofit Control Technology 

for Industrial, Institutional, and 

Commercial Boilers, Steam Generators, 

and Process Heaters’’ California Air 

Resources Board (July 18, 1991). 

8. ‘‘Alternative Control Techniques 

Document—NOX Emissions from 

Industrial/Commercial/Institutional 

(ICI) Boilers’’ EPA 453/R–94–022 

(March 1994) 

9. ‘‘Alternative Control Techniques 

Document—NOX Emissions from Utility 

Boilers’’ EPA 452/R–93–008 (March 

1994). 

10. ‘‘Alternative Control Techniques 

Document—NOX Emissions from 

Stationary Gas Turbines’’ EPA 453/R– 

94–023 (January 1993). 

11. ‘‘Alternative Control Techniques 

Document—NOX Emissions from 

Stationary Reciprocating Internal 

Combustion Engines’’ EPA 453/R–93– 

032 (July 1993). 

12. ‘‘Determination of Reasonably 

Available Control Technology and Best 

Available Retrofit Control Technology 

for Stationary Spark-Ignited Internal 

Combustion Engines’’ California Air 

Resources Board (November 2001). 

B. Do the rules meet the evaluation 

criteria? 

We believe these rules are consistent 

with the relevant policy and guidance 

regarding enforceability, BACM, and SIP 

relaxations. The TSD has more 

information on our evaluation. 

C. EPA Recommendations to Further 

Improve the Rules 

The TSD describes additional rule 

revisions that do not affect EPA’s 

current action but are recommended for 

the next time the local agency modifies 

the rules. 

D. Public Comment and Final Action 

As authorized in section 110(k)(3) of 

the Act, EPA is fully approving the 

submitted rules because we believe they 

fulfill all relevant requirements. We do 

not think anyone will object to this 

approval, so we are finalizing it without 

proposing it in advance. However, in 

the Proposed Rules section of this 

Federal Register, we are simultaneously 

proposing approval of the same 

submitted rules. If we receive adverse 

comments by November 13, 2009, we 

will publish a timely withdrawal in the 

Federal Register to notify the public 

that the direct final approval will not 

take effect and we will address the 

comments in a subsequent final action 

based on the proposal. If we do not 

receive timely adverse comments, the 

direct final approval will be effective 

without further notice on December 14, 

2009. This will incorporate these rules 

into the federally enforceable SIP. 

Please note that if EPA receives 

adverse comment on an amendment, 

paragraph, or section of this rule and if 

that provision may be severed from the 

remainder of the rule, EPA may adopt 

as final those provisions of the rule that 

are not the subject of an adverse 

comment. 

III. 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 (Public Law 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. 

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 


cprice-sewell on DSK2BSOYB1PROD with RULES
52696 Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 197 / Wednesday, October 14, 2009 / Rules and Regulations 

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 December 14, 

2009. 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. Parties with objections to this 

direct final rule are encouraged to file a 

comment in response to the parallel 

notice of proposed rulemaking for this 

action published in the proposed rules 

section of today’s Federal Register, 

rather than file an immediate petition 

for judicial review of this direct final 

rule, so that EPA can withdraw this 

direct final rule and address the 

comment in the proposed rulemaking. 

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, Particulate matter, 

Reporting and recordkeeping 

requirements. 

Dated: July 10, 2009. 

Jane Diamond, 

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 and reserving paragraph (c)(141) 

and by adding paragraph (c)(142) to read 

as follows: 

§ 52.120 Identification of plan. 

* * * * * 

(c) * * * 

(141) [Reserved] 

(142) New and amended regulations 

were submitted on January 9, 2008, by 

the Governor’s designee. 

(i) Incorporation by reference. 

(A) Maricopa County Air Quality 

Department. 

(1) Rule 322, ‘‘Power Plant 

Operations,’’ adopted October 17, 2007. 

(2) Rule 323, ‘‘Fuel Burning 

Equipment from Industrial/Commercial/ 

Institutional (ICI) Sources,’’ adopted 

October 17, 2007. 

(3) Rule 324, ‘‘Stationary Internal 

Combustion (IC) Engines,’’ adopted 

October 17, 2007. 

* * * * * 

[FR Doc. E9–24549 Filed 10–13–09; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 6560–50–P 


cprice-sewell on DSK2BSOYB1PROD with RULES