36362 Federal Register / Vol. 65, No. 111 / Thursday, June 8, 2000 / Rules and Regulations

otherwise satisfies the provisions of the

Clean Air Act. Thus, the requirements of

section 12(d) of NTTAA do not apply.

List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 70

Environmental protection,

Administrative practice and procedure,

Air pollution control, Intergovernmental

relations, Operating permits, Reporting

and recordkeeping requirements.

Dated: May 15, 2000.

A. Stanley Meiburg,

Acting Regional Administrator, Region 4.

For reasons set out in the preamble,

Appendix A of part 70 of title 40,

chapter I, of the Code of Federal

Regulations is amended as follows:

PART 70—[AMENDED]

1. The authority citation for part 70

continues to read as follows:

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

2. Appendix A to part 70 is amended

by revising paragraph (b) in the entry for

Georgia to read as follows:

Appendix A to Part 70—Approval Status of

State and Local Operating Permits Programs

* * * * *

Georgia

(b) The Georgia Department of Natural

Resources submitted program revisions on

March 10, 1997, February 11, 1998,

September 30, 1999, November 15, 1999, and

January 11, 2000. The rule revisions

contained in the February 11, 1998 submittal

adequately addressed the conditions of the

interim approval effective on December 22,

1995, and which would expire on June 1,

2000. The State is hereby granted final full

approval effective on August 7, 2000.

[FR Doc. 00–14166 Filed 6–7–00; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6560–50–M

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION

AGENCY

40 CFR Part 70

[TN–NASH–T5–2000–01a; FRL–6710–9]

Clean Air Act Final Approval of

Operating Permit Program Revisions;

Metropolitan Government of NashvilleDavidson County, TN

AGENCY: Environmental Protection

Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Direct final rule.

SUMMARY: EPA is taking final action to

approve revisions to the operating

permit program of the Metropolitan

Government of Nashville-Davidson

County (TN). The County’s operating

permit program was submitted in

response to the directive in the 1990

Clean Air Act (CAA) Amendments that

states develop, and submit to EPA,

programs for issuing operating permits

to all major stationary sources and to

certain other sources within the states’

jurisdiction. EPA granted full approval

to the County’s operating permit

program on February 14, 1996. The

County has revised its program since it

received full approval and this action

approves those revisions.

DATES: This direct final rule is effective

on August 7, 2000 without further

notice unless EPA receives adverse

comments in writing by July 10, 2000.

If adverse comment is received, EPA

will publish a timely withdrawal of this

direct final rule in the Federal Register

and inform the public that the rule will

not take effect. The public comments

will be addressed in a subsequent final

rule based on the proposed rule

published in this Federal Register.

ADDRESSES: Written comments on this

action should be addressed to Kim

Pierce, Regional Title V Program

Manager, Operating Source Section, Air

& Radiation Technology Branch, EPA,

61 Forsyth Street, SW, Atlanta, Georgia

30303. Copies of the County’s

submittals and other supporting

documentation relevant to this action

are available for inspection during

normal business hours at EPA, Air &

Radiation Technology Branch, 61

Forsyth Street, SW, Atlanta, Georgia

30303.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Kim

Pierce, EPA, Region 4, at (404) 562–

9124.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: This

section provides additional information

by addressing the following questions:

What is the operating permit program?

What is being addressed in this

document?

What are the program changes that EPA

is approving?

What is involved in this final action?

What Is the Operating Permit Program?

The CAA Amendments of 1990

required all states to develop operating

permit programs that met certain

Federal criteria. In implementing the

operating permit programs, the states

require certain sources of air pollution

to obtain permits that contain all

applicable requirements under the CAA.

The focus of the operating permit

program is to improve enforcement by

issuing each source a permit that

consolidates all of the applicable CAA

requirements into a Federally

enforceable document. By consolidating

all of the applicable requirements for a

facility, the source, the public, and the

permitting authorities can more easily

determine what CAA requirements

apply and how compliance with those

requirements is determined.

Sources required to obtain an

operating permit under this program

include ‘‘major’’ sources of air pollution

and certain other sources specified in

the CAA or in EPA’s implementing

regulations. For example, all sources

regulated under the acid rain program,

regardless of size, must obtain operating

permits. Examples of major sources

include those that have the potential to

emit 100 tons per year or more of

volatile organic compounds, carbon

monoxide, lead, sulfur dioxide, nitrogen

oxides, or particulate matter (PM10);

those that emit 10 tons per year of any

single hazardous air pollutant

(specifically listed under the CAA); or

those that emit 25 tons per year or more

of a combination of hazardous air

pollutants (HAPs). In areas that are not

meeting the National Ambient Air

Quality Standards for ozone, carbon

monoxide, or particulate matter, major

sources are defined by the gravity of the

nonattainment classification. For

example, in ozone nonattainment areas

classified as serious, major sources

include those with the potential of

emitting 50 tons per year or more of

volatile organic compounds or nitrogen

oxides.

What Is Being Addressed in This

Document?

Nashville-Davidson County made two

changes to its approved title V program

since EPA granted full approval on

February 14, 1996 (see 61 FR 5705).

This document describes the changes.

What Are the Program Changes That

EPA Is Approving?

Nashville-Davidson County revised its

title V permit application form to

address the Title VI requirements for

protection of the stratospheric ozone

layer. The County’s application form

now contains Form APC V.34 for

information regarding air conditioning

units that use chlorofluorocarbons,

hydrochlorofluorocarbons, or other

ozone depleting substances. The new

form was submitted to EPA on

December 10, 1996 and is available for

review on the Internet at http://

healthweb.nashville.org/

pollution_downloads.html.

The other programmatic change made

by Nashville-Davidson County involves

the mechanism for determining the

annual title V fee amount. The County’s

operating permit program received full

approval based on use of the

‘‘presumptive minimum’’ described in

40 CFR 70.9(b)(2)(i). But, since the

Federal Register / Vol. 65, No. 111 / Thursday, June 8, 2000 / Rules and Regulations 36363

spring of 1997, the County has been

using a mechanism based on 40 CFR

70.9(b)(1) which involves establishing a

fee schedule that results in the

collection and retention of revenues

sufficient to cover the costs of the

operating permit program. To

accomplish this each year, the County

prepares a projection of the title V

expenses for the coming year based on

the actual title V expenses during the

previous year. The anticipated expenses

are then compared with the revenue that

would be generated based on section

10.56.080, ‘‘Permit and Annual

Emission Fees,’’ of Chapter 10.56, ‘‘Air

Pollution Control,’’ of the Metropolitan

Code of Laws. If the fee schedule

contained in section 10.56.080 would

result in a surplus, then the County

adopts a lesser fee schedule utilizing the

variance procedures in section

10.56.130. The County described this

policy in a letter to EPA dated December

6, 1999. The County also submitted a fee

program update on August 27, 1999

demonstrating that its part 70 program

is adequately funded by operating

permit fee revenue.

What Is Involved in This Final Action?

The Metropolitan Government of

Nashville-Davidson County made two

changes to its approved title V program

after it received full approval on

February 14, 1996 and EPA is taking

action by this notice to approve the

changes. EPA is publishing this action

without prior proposal because the

Agency views this as a noncontroversial

amendment and anticipates no adverse

comments. However, in the proposed

rules section of this Federal Register

publication, EPA is publishing a

separate document that will serve as the

proposal to grant final full approval

should adverse comments be filed. This

action will be effective August 7, 2000

unless the Agency receives adverse

comments by July 10, 2000.

If EPA receives such comments, then

EPA will withdraw the final rule and

inform the public that the rule will not

take effect. All public comments

received will then be addressed in a

subsequent final rule based on the

proposed rule. EPA will not institute a

second comment period. Parties

interested in commenting should do so

at this time. If no such comments are

received, the public is advised that this

rule will be effective on August 7, 2000

and no further action will be taken on

the proposed rule.

Administrative Requirements

A. Executive Order 12866

The Office of Management and Budget

has exempted this regulatory action

from Executive Order 12866, entitled

‘‘Regulatory Planning and Review.’’

B. Executive Order 12988

As required by section 3 of Executive

Order 12988 (61 FR 4729, February 7,

1996), in issuing this rule, EPA has

taken the necessary steps to eliminate

drafting errors and ambiguity, minimize

potential litigation, and provide a clear

legal standard for affected conduct. EPA

has complied with Executive Order

12630 (53 FR 8859, March 15, 1988) by

examining the takings implications of

the rule in accordance with the

‘‘Attorney General’s Supplemental

Guidelines for the Evaluation of Risk

and Avoidance of Unanticipated

Takings’’ issued under the Executive

Order. This rule does not impose an

information collection burden under the

provisions of the Paperwork Reduction

Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.).

C. Executive Order 13045

Protection of Children from

Environmental Health Risks and Safety

Risks (62 FR 19885, April 23, 1997)

applies to any rule that: (1) Is

determined to be ‘‘economically

significant’’ as defined under Executive

Order 12866, and (2) concerns an

environmental health or safety risk that

EPA has reason to believe may have a

disproportionate effect on children. If

the regulatory action meets both criteria,

the Agency must evaluate the

environmental health or safety effects of

the planned rule on children, and

explain why the planned regulation is

preferable to other potentially effective

and reasonably feasible alternatives

considered by the Agency.

This rule is not subject to Executive

Order 13045 because it is not an

economically significant regulatory

action as defined in Executive Order

12866, and it does not involve decisions

intended to mitigate environmental

health or safety risks.

D. Executive Order 13084

Under Executive Order 13084,

Consultation and Coordination with

Indian Tribal Governments, EPA may

not issue a regulation that is not

required by statute, that significantly

affects or uniquely affects the

communities of Indian tribal

governments, and that imposes

substantial direct compliance costs on

those communities, unless the Federal

government provides the funds

necessary to pay the direct compliance

costs incurred by the tribal

governments, or EPA consults with

those governments. If EPA complies by

consulting, Executive Order 13084

requires EPA to provide to the Office of

Management and Budget, in a separately

identified section of the preamble to the

rule, a description of the extent of EPA’s

prior consultation with representatives

of affected tribal governments, a

summary of the nature of their concerns,

and a statement supporting the need to

issue the regulation. In addition,

Executive Order 13084 requires EPA to

develop an effective process permitting

elected officials and other

representatives of Indian tribal

governments ‘‘to provide meaningful

and timely input in the development of

regulatory policies on matters that

significantly or uniquely affect their

communities.’’

Today’s rule does not significantly or

uniquely affect the communities of

Indian tribal governments. This action

does not involve or impose any

requirements that affect Indian Tribes.

Accordingly, the requirements of

section 3(b) of Executive Order 13084

do not apply to this rule.

E. Executive Order 13132

Federalism (64 FR 43255, August 10,

1999) revokes and replaces Executive

Orders 12612 (Federalism) and 12875

(Enhancing the Intergovernmental

Partnership). Executive Order 13132

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.’’ Under

Executive Order 13132, EPA may not

issue a regulation that has federalism

implications, that imposes substantial

direct compliance costs, and that is not

required by statute, unless the Federal

government provides the funds

necessary to pay the direct compliance

costs incurred by State and local

governments, or EPA consults with

State and local officials early in the

process of developing the proposed

regulation. EPA also may not issue a

regulation that has federalism

implications and that preempts State

law unless the Agency consults with

State and local officials early in the

process of developing the proposed

regulation.

36364 Federal Register / Vol. 65, No. 111 / Thursday, June 8, 2000 / Rules and Regulations

This final rule 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 approves a state rule

implementing a Federal standard, and

does not alter the relationship or the

distribution of power and

responsibilities established in the Clean

Air Act. Thus, the requirements of

section 6 of the Executive Order do not

apply to this rule.

F. Regulatory Flexibility Act (RFA)

The Regulatory Flexibility Act

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.

This rule will not have a significant

impact on a substantial number of small

entities because part 70 approvals under

section 502 of the Act do not create any

new requirements but simply approve

requirements that the State is already

imposing. Therefore, because this

approval does not create any new

requirements, I certify that this action

will not have a significant economic

impact on a substantial number of small

entities.

Moreover, due to the nature of the

Federal-State relationship under the

Clean Air Act, preparation of a

flexibility analysis would constitute

Federal inquiry into the economic

reasonableness of state action. The

Clean Air Act forbids EPA to base its

actions concerning SIPs on such

grounds. Union Electric Co., v. U.S.

EPA, 427 U.S. 246, 255–66 (1976); 42

U.S.C. 7410(a)(2).

G. Unfunded Mandates

Under sections 202 of the Unfunded

Mandates Reform Act of 1995

(‘‘Unfunded Mandates Act’’), signed

into law on March 22, 1995, EPA must

prepare a budgetary impact statement to

accompany any proposed or final rule

that includes a Federal mandate that

may result in estimated costs to State,

local, or tribal governments in the

aggregate; or to the private sector, of

$100 million or more. Under section

205, EPA must select the most costeffective and least burdensome

alternative that achieves the objectives

of the rule and is consistent with

statutory requirements. Section 203

requires EPA to establish a plan for

informing and advising any small

governments that may be significantly

or uniquely impacted by the rule.

EPA has determined that the approval

action promulgated 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 Federal action

approves pre-existing 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.

H. Submission to Congress and the

Comptroller General

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 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).

I. Petitions for 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 August 7, 2000.

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 section

307(b)(2).)

J. National Technology Transfer and

Advancement Act

Section 12 of the National Technology

Transfer and Advancement Act

(NTTAA) of 1995 requires Federal

agencies to evaluate existing technical

standards when developing a new

regulation. To comply with NTTAA,

EPA must consider and use ‘‘voluntary

consensus standards’’ (VCS) if available

and applicable when developing

programs and policies unless doing so

would be inconsistent with applicable

law or otherwise impractical.

In reviewing operating permit

programs, EPA’s role is to approve state

choices, provided that they meet the

criteria of the Clean Air Act. In this

context, in the absence of a prior

existing requirement for the State to use

VCS, EPA has no authority to

disapprove an operating permit program

for failure to use VCS. It would thus be

inconsistent with applicable law for

EPA, when it reviews an operating

permit program, to use VCS in place of

an operating permit program that

otherwise satisfies the provisions of the

Clean Air Act. Thus, the requirements of

section 12(d) of NTTAA do not apply.

List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 70

Environmental protection,

Administrative practice and procedure,

Air pollution control, Intergovernmental

relations, Operating permits, Reporting

and recordkeeping requirements.

Dated: May 19, 2000.

A. Stanley Meiburg,

Acting Regional Administrator, Region 4.

For reasons set out in the preamble,

Appendix A of part 70 of title 40,

chapter I, of the Code of Federal

Regulations is amended as follows:

PART 70—[AMENDED]

1. The authority citation for part 70

continues to read as follows:

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

2. Appendix A to part 70 is amended

by adding paragraph (i) and adding and

reserving paragraphs (f), (g), (h) and (j)

to the entry for Tennessee to read as

follows:

Appendix A to Part 70—Approval

Status of State and Local Operating

Permits Programs

* * * * *

Tennessee

(f) [Reserved]

(g) [Reserved]

(h) [Reserved]

(i) The Metropolitan Government of

Nashville-Davidson County submitted

program revisions on December 10, 1996,

August 27, 1999, and December 6, 1999. The

County is hereby granted revised approval

effective on August 7, 2000.

(j) [Reserved]

* * * * *

[FR Doc. 00–14169 Filed 6–7–00; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6710–09–U