### 5706 Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 24 / Monday, February 6, 2012 / Rules and Regulations

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.

Authority: 42 U.S.C. 7401 et seq. Dated: January 27, 2012. 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 II—North Carolina**

■ 2. Section 52.1770(e), is amended by adding a new entry ‘‘North Carolina 110(a)(1) and (2) Infrastructure Requirements for the 1997 8-Hour Ozone National Ambient Air Quality Standards’’ at the end of the table to read as follows:

**§ 52.1770 Identification of plan.**
* * * * *

(e) * * *



### EPA-APPROVED 

### N ORTH 

### CAROLINA 

### N ON 

### -R EGULATORY 

### P ROVISIONS

Provision State effective date EPA approval date **Federal Register** citation

******* North Carolina 110(a)(1) and (2) Infrastructure Requirements for the 1997 8-Hour

Ozone National Ambient Air Quality Standards. 12/12/2007 2/6/2012 [Insert citation of publication].

■ 3. Section 52.1773 is added to read as follows:

**§ 52.1773 Conditional approval.**

Conditional Approval—Submittal from the State of North Carolina, through the Department of Environment and Natural Resources (NC DENR), Division of Air Quality, dated December 12, 2007, to address the Clean Air Act (CAA) infrastructure requirements for the 1997 ozone National Ambient Air Quality Standards. On January 11, 2012, NC DENR supplemented their December 12, 2007, submission with a commitment to address the requirements of CAA section 110(a)(2)(E)(ii) of the CAA which requires state compliance with section 128 of the CAA. EPA is conditionally approving North Carolina’s submittal with respect to CAA section 110(a)(2)(E)(ii).

[FR Doc. 2012–2602 Filed 2–3–12; 8:45 am]

**BILLING CODE 6560–50–P**

**ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY** 

**40 CFR Part 52**

**[EPA–R04–OAR–2011–0351–201203; FRL– 9627–7]** 

**Approval and Promulgation of Implementation Plans; Georgia;**  **110(a)(1) and (2) Infrastructure Requirements for the 1997 8-Hour**  **Ozone National Ambient Air Quality Standards** 

**AGENCY :**  Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

**ACTION :**  Final rule. **SUMMARY :**  EPA is taking final action to approve the State Implementation Plan (SIP) submission, submitted by the State of Georgia, through the Georgia Department of Natural Resources, Environmental Protection Division (EPD), as demonstrating that the State meets the state implementation plan (SIP) requirements of sections 110(a)(1) and (2) of the Clean Air Act (CAA or the Act) for the 1997 8-hour ozone national ambient air quality standards (NAAQS). Section 110(a) of the CAA requires that each state adopt and submit a SIP for the implementation, maintenance, and enforcement of each NAAQS promulgated by the EPA, which is commonly referred to as an ‘‘infrastructure’’ SIP. Georgia certified that the Georgia SIP contains provisions that ensure the 1997 8-hour ozone NAAQS is implemented, enforced, and maintained in Georgia (hereafter referred to as ‘‘infrastructure submission’’). Georgia’s infrastructure submission, provided to EPA on December 13, 2007, and clarified in a subsequent submission submitted on September 9, 2008, addresses all the required infrastructure elements for the 1997 8-hour ozone NAAQS.

**DATES :**  Effective Date: This rule will be effective March 7, 2012.

**ADDRESSES :**  EPA has established a docket for this action under Docket Identification No. EPA–R04–OAR– 2011–0351. 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 :**  Nacosta C. Ward, 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) 562–9140. Ms. Ward can be reached via electronic mail at ward.nacosta@epa.gov.

**SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION :** 
Table of Contents
I. Background II. This Action III. Final Action IV. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews I. Background

Upon promulgation of a new or revised NAAQS, sections 110(a)(1) and (2) of the CAA require states to address basic SIP requirements, including emissions inventories, monitoring, and


### 5707 Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 24 / Monday, February 6, 2012 / Rules and Regulations

1 Two elements identified in section 110(a)(2) are not governed by the three year submission deadline of section 110(a)(1) because SIPs incorporating necessary local nonattainment area controls are not due within three years after promulgation of a new or revised NAAQS, but rather are due at the time the nonattainment area plan requirements are due pursuant to section 172. These requirements are: (1) Submissions required by section 110(a)(2)(C) to the extent that subsection refers to a permit program as required in part D Title I of the CAA, and (2) submissions required by section 110(a)(2)(I) which pertain to the nonattainment planning requirements of part D, Title I of the CAA. Today’s final rulemaking does not address infrastructure elements related to section 110(a)(2)(I) but does provide detail on how Georgia’s SIP addresses 110(a)(2)(C).

2 This rulemaking only addresses requirements for this element as they relate to attainment areas.

3 Today’s final rule does not address element 110(a)(2)(D)(i) (Interstate Transport) for the 1997 8- hour ozone NAAQS. Interstate transport requirements were formerly addressed by Georgia consistent with the Clean Air Interstate Rule (CAIR). On December 23, 2008, CAIR was remanded by the DC Circuit Court of Appeals, without vacatur, back to EPA. See North Carolina v. EPA, 531 F.3d 896 (DC Cir. 2008). Prior to this remand, EPA took final action to approve Georgia’s SIP revision, which was submitted to comply with CAIR. See 72 FR 57202 (October 9, 2007). In response to the remand of CAIR, EPA has recently finalized a new rule to address the interstate transport of NOx and SOx in the eastern United States. See 76 Fed. Reg. 48208 (August 8, 2011) (‘‘the Transport Rule’’). This rule was recently stayed by the DC Circuit Court of Appeals. EPA’s action on element 110(a)(2)(D)(i) will be addressed in a separate action. 4 This requirement was inadvertently omitted from EPA’s October 2, 2007, memorandum entitled ‘‘Guidance on SIP Elements Required Under Section 110(a)(1) and (2) for the 1997 8-Hour Ozone and PM2.5 National Ambient Air Quality Standards,’’ but as mentioned above is not relevant to today’s final rulemaking. modeling to assure attainment and maintenance for that new NAAQS. On July 18, 1997, EPA promulgated a new NAAQS for ozone based on 8-hour average concentrations, thus states were required to provide submissions to address sections 110(a)(1) and (2) of the CAA for this new NAAQS. Georgia provided its infrastructure submission for the 1997 8-hour ozone NAAQS on December 13, 2007, and clarified it in a subsequent submission submitted on September 9, 2008. On March 27, 2008, Georgia was among other states that received a finding of failure to submit because its infrastructure submission was deemed incomplete for element 110(a)(2)(G) for the 1997 8-hour ozone NAAQS by March 1, 2008. See 73 FR 16205. The September 9, 2008, submission clarified that Georgia has the authority to implement emergency powers for the 8-hour ozone standard and that EPA has approved these provisions in the SIP. EPA hasdetermined that Georgia’s federallyapproved SIP includes provisions which provide the State with the authority to implement emergency powers for the 8- hour ozone standard and thus determined that Georgia has satisfied the requirements for 110(a)(2)(G). On December 5, 2011, EPA proposed to approve Georgia’s December 13, 2007, and September 9, 2008, infrastructure submission and supplement for the 1997 8-hour ozone NAAQS. See 76 FR 75849. A summary of the background for today’s final action is provided below. See EPA’s December 5, 2011, proposed rulemaking at 76 FR 75849 for more detail.

Section 110(a) of the CAA requires states to submit SIPs to provide for the implementation, maintenance, and enforcement of a new or revised NAAQS within three years following the promulgation of such NAAQS, or within such shorter period as EPA may prescribe. Section 110(a) imposes the obligation upon states to make a SIP submission to EPA for a new or revised NAAQS, but the contents of that submission may vary depending upon the facts and circumstances. In particular, the data and analytical tools available at the time the state develops and submits the SIP for a new or revised NAAQS affects the content of the submission. The contents of such SIP submissions may also vary depending upon what provisions the state’s existing SIP already contains. In the case of the 1997 8-hour ozone NAAQS, states typically have met the basic program elements required in section 110(a)(2) through earlier SIP submissions in connection with previous ozone NAAQS.

More specifically, section 110(a)(1) provides the procedural and timing requirements for SIPs. Section 110(a)(2) lists specific elements that states must meet for ‘‘infrastructure’’ SIP requirements related to a newly established or revised NAAQS. As already mentioned, these requirements include SIP infrastructure elements such as modeling, monitoring, and emissions inventories that are designed to assure attainment and maintenance of the NAAQS. The requirements that are the subject of this final rulemaking are listed below 1 and in EPA’s October 2, 2007, memorandum entitled ‘‘Guidance on SIP Elements Required Under Section 110(a)(1) and (2) for the 1997 8- Hour Ozone and PM2.5 National Ambient Air Quality Standards.’’

• 110(a)(2)(A): Emission limits and other control measures.

• 110(a)(2)(B): Ambient air quality monitoring/data system.

• 110(a)(2)(C): Program for enforcement of control measures. 2

• 110(a)(2)(D): Interstate transport. 3

• 110(a)(2)(E): Adequate resources.

• 110(a)(2)(F): Stationary source monitoring system.

• 110(a)(2)(G): Emergency power.

• 110(a)(2)(H): Future SIP revisions. • 110(a)(2)(I): Areas designated nonattainment and meet the applicable requirements of part D. 4

• 110(a)(2)(J): Consultation with government officials; public notification; and PSD and visibility protection.

• 110(a)(2)(K): Air quality modeling/ data.

• 110(a)(2)(L): Permitting fees.

• 110(a)(2)(M): Consultation/ participation by affected local entities.

II. This Action

EPA is taking final action to approve Georgia’s infrastructure submission as demonstrating that the State meets the applicable requirements of sections 110(a)(1) and (2) of the CAA for the 1997 8-hour ozone NAAQS. Section 110(a) of the CAA requires that each state adopt and submit a SIP for the implementation, maintenance, and enforcement of each NAAQS promulgated by the EPA, which is commonly referred to as an ‘‘infrastructure’’ SIP. Georgia, through EPD, certified that the Georgia SIP contains provisions that ensure the 1997 8-hour ozone NAAQS is implemented, enforced, and maintained in Georgia. Additionally, EPA received no adverse comments on its December 5, 2011, proposed approval of Georgia’s December 13, 2007, infrastructure submission.

Georgia’s infrastructure submission, provided to EPA on December 13, 2007, and clarified in a subsequent submission submitted on September 9, 2008, addressed all the required infrastructure elements for the 1997 8- hour ozone NAAQS. EPA has determined that Georgia’s December 13, 2007, and September 9, 2008 submissions are consistent with section 110 of the CAA.

III. Final Action

As already described, EPD has addressed the elements of the CAA 110(a)(1) and (2) SIP requirements pursuant to EPA’s October 2, 2007, guidance to ensure that the 1997 8-hour ozone NAAQS are implemented, enforced, and maintained in Georgia. EPA is taking final action to approve Georgia’s December 13, 2007, and September 9, 2008, submissions for the 1997 8-hour ozone NAAQS because these submissions are consistent with section 110 of the CAA.


### 5708 Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 24 / Monday, February 6, 2012 / Rules and Regulations

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 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 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, 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 6, 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.

Authority: 42 U.S.C. 7401 et seq. Dated: January 27, 2012. 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 L—Georgia**

■ 2. Section 52.570(e) is amended by adding and reserving entry 29, and adding a new entry 30, to read as follows:

**§ 52.570 Identification of plan.**
* * * * *

(e) EPA-Approved Georgia nonregulatory provisions

Name of nonregulatory SIP provision Applicable geographic or nonattainment area State submittal date/effective date EPA approval date

******* 30. 110(a)(1) and (2) Infrastructure Requirements for

the 1997 8-Hour Ozone National Ambient Air Quality Standards. Georgia ............................... 10/13/2007 2/6/2012 [Insert citation of publication].

[FR Doc. 2012–2605 Filed 2–3–12; 8:45 am]

**BILLING CODE 6560–50–P**


### 5709 Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 24 / Monday, February 6, 2012 / Rules and Regulations

**ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY** 

**40 CFR Part 52**

**[EPA–R09–OAR–2011–0733; FRL–9501–5]**

**Revisions to the California State Implementation Plan, San Joaquin**  **Valley Unified Air Pollution Control District** 

**AGENCY :**  Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

**ACTION :**  Final rule.

**SUMMARY :**  EPA is finalizing approval of revisions to the San Joaquin Valley Unified Air Pollution Control District (SJVUAPCD) portion of the California State Implementation Plan (SIP). These revisions were proposed in the Federal Register on September 12, 2011 and concern volatile organic compound (VOC) emissions from polyester resin operations. We are approving a local rule that regulates these emission sources under the Clean Air Act as amended in 1990 (CAA or the Act).

**DATES :**  Effective Date: This rule is effective on March 7, 2012.

**ADDRESSES :**  EPA has established docket number EPA–R09–OAR–2011–0733 for this action. Generally, documents in the docket for this action are available electronically at http:// www.regulations.gov or 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, multivolume reports), and some may not be available in either location (e.g., confidential business information (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 :**  Andrew Steckel, EPA Region IX, (415) 974–4115, steckel.andrew@epa.gov.

**SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION :**  Throughout this document, ‘‘we,’’ ‘‘us’’ and ‘‘our’’ refer to EPA.

Table of Contents
I. Proposed Action II. Public Comments and EPA Responses III. EPA Action IV. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews I. Proposed Action

On September 12, 2011 (76 FR 56132), EPA proposed to approve the following rule into the California SIP.

Local agency Rule No. Rule title Amended Submitted

SJVUAPCD ...................................... 4684 Polyester Resin Operations .......................................... 08/18/11 08/26/11

We proposed to approve this rule because we determined that it complied with the relevant CAA requirements. Our proposed action contains more information on the rule and our evaluation.

Our proposed approval of Rule 4684 responded to a July 22, 2011 request from the State to parallel process a version of the Rule proposed for local adoption on August 18, 2011. On August 26, 2011, CARB submitted to EPA the version of Rule 4684 that was adopted locally on August 18, 2011. We have reviewed this version, and it is unchanged from the version we proposed for approval on September 12,
2011.

II. Public Comments and EPA Responses

EPA’s proposed action provided a 30- day public comment period. During this period, we received no comments.

III. EPA Action

No comments were submitted that change our assessment that the submitted rule complies with the relevant CAA requirements. Therefore, as authorized in section 110(k)(3) of the Act, EPA is fully approving this rule into the California SIP. IV. 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,