### 62452 Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 199 / Monday, October 15, 2012 / Rules and Regulations

therefore, no sanctions will be triggered. This final action triggers the requirement under section 110(c) that EPA promulgate a Federal Implementation Plan (FIP) no later than 2 years from the date of the disapproval unless the State corrects the deficiency, and the Administrator approves the plan or plan revision before the Administrator promulgates such FIP. 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 final action disapproves state law because it does not meet federal requirements. For that reason, this action:

• Is not a ‘‘significant regulatory action’’ subject to review by the Office of Management and Budget under Executive Order 12866 (58 FR 51735, October 4, 1993);

• Does not impose an information collection burden under the provisions of the Paperwork Reduction Act (44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq. );

• Is certified as not having a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities under the Regulatory Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 601 et seq. );

• Does not contain any unfunded mandate or significantly or uniquely affect small governments, as described in the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995 (Pub. L. 104–4);

• Does not have Federalism implications as specified in Executive Order 13132 (64 FR 43255, August 10, 1999);

• Is not an economically significant regulatory action based on health or safety risks subject to Executive Order 13045 (62 FR 19885, April 23, 1997);

• Is not a significant regulatory action subject to Executive Order 13211 (66 FR 28355, May 22, 2001);

• Is not subject to requirements of Section 12(d) of the National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act of 1995 (15 U.S.C. 272 note) because application of those requirements would be inconsistent with the CAA; and

• Does not provide EPA with the discretionary authority to address, as appropriate, disproportionate human health or environmental effects, using practicable and legally permissible methods, under Executive Order 12898 (59 FR 7629, February 16, 1994). In addition, this rule does not have tribal implications as specified by Executive Order 13175 (65 FR 67249, November 9, 2000), because the SIP is not approved to apply in Indian country located in the state, and EPA notes that it will not impose substantial direct costs on tribal governments or preempt tribal law.

The Congressional Review Act, 5 U.S.C. 801 et seq., as added by the Small Business Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act of 1996, generally provides that before a rule may take effect, the agency promulgating the rule must submit a rule report, which includes a copy of the rule, to each House of the Congress and to the Comptroller General of the United States. EPA will submit a report containing this action and other required information to the U.S. Senate, the U.S. House of Representatives, and the Comptroller General of the United States prior to publication of the rule in the Federal Register. A major rule cannot take effect until 60 days after it is published in the Federal Register

. This action is not a ‘‘major rule’’ as defined by 5 U.S.C. 804(2).

Under section 307(b)(1) of the CAA, petitions for judicial review of this action must be filed in the United States Court of Appeals for the appropriate circuit by December 14, 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: September 27, 2012. A. Stanley Meiburg, Acting Regional Administrator, Region 4.

40 CFR part 52 is amended as follows:

**PART 52—APPROVAL AND PROMULGATION OF**  **IMPLEMENTATION PLANS**

■ 1. The authority citation for part 52 continues to read as follows:

Authority: 42 U.S.C. 7401 et seq. **Subpart B—Alabama**

■ 2. Section 52.62 is amended by adding paragraph (e), to read as follows:

**§ 52.62 Control strategy: Sulfur oxides and particulate matter.** 
* * * * *

(e) Disapproval. EPA is disapproving portions of Alabama’s Infrastructure SIP for the 1997 annual and 2006 24-hour PM2.5 NAAQS addressing section 110(a)(2)(E)(ii) that requires the State to comply with section 128 of the CAA.

[FR Doc. 2012–25149 Filed 10–12–12; 8:45 am]

**BILLING CODE 6560–50–P**

**ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY** 

**40 CFR part 52**

**[EPA–R09–OAR–2012–0244; FRL–9713–4]**

**Approval and Promulgation of Implementation Plans; State of**  **Arizona; Prevention of Air Pollution Emergency Episodes** 

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

**ACTION :**  Final rule.

**SUMMARY :**  EPA is approving a State Implementation Plan (SIP) revision submitted by the State of Arizona to address the requirements regarding air pollution emergency episodes in Clean Air Act (CAA or Act).

**DATES :**  This final rule is effective on November 14, 2012.

**ADDRESSES :**  EPA has established a docket for this action, identified by Docket ID Number EPA–R09–OAR– 2012–0244. 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 94105– 3901. 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., confidential business information). To inspect the hard copy materials, please schedule an appointment during normal business hours with the contact listed directly below.

**FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT :**  Jeffrey Buss, Air Planning Office (AIR– 2), U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Region IX, (415) 947–4152, buss.jeffrey@epa.gov.


### 62453 Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 199 / Monday, October 15, 2012 / Rules and Regulations

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

Table of Contents

I. Background II. Final Action III. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews

I. Background

On April 12, 2012 (77 FR 21911), EPA proposed to approve a SIP revision submitted by the State of Arizona to address the requirements regarding air pollution emergency episodes in CAA section 110(a)(2)(G). Section 110(a)(2)(G) requires that each SIP provide for authority comparable to that in section 303 of the Act (‘‘Emergency Powers’’) and adequate contingency plans to implement such authority. EPA proposed to approve Arizona’s SIP revision as meeting the authority and contingency plans for the 1997 8-hour ozone National Ambient Air Quality Standard (NAAQS).

The rationale supporting EPA’s action, including the scope of infrastructure SIPs in general, is explained in the Notice of Proposed Rulemaking (NPR) and in the technical support document (TSD) for that action and will not be restated here. The TSD is available online at http:// www.regulations.gov, Docket ID number EPA–R09–OAR–2012–0244. No public comments were received on the NPR.

II. Final Action

EPA is approving Arizona’s SIP revision as meeting the authority and contingency plans for the 1997 8-hour ozone National Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS or standards).

The Arizona Emergency Episode Plan is substantively identical to the CAA section 110(a)(2)(G) rule currently approved into Arizona’s SIP (R9–3–219, ‘‘Air pollution emergency episodes’’), which EPA approved in 1982 (47 FR 42572, September 28, 1982), with one exception which makes it more stringent than the SIP program. We determine that our approval of this submittal would comply with CAA section 110(l), because the SIP revision would not interfere with the ongoing process for ensuring that requirements for reasonable further progress (RFP) and attainment of the NAAQS are met, and the submitted SIP revision is more stringent than the rule previously approved into the SIP. We also determine that our approval of the submittal would comply with CAA section 193, to the extent it applies, because the SIP revision would ensure equivalent or greater emission reductions of ozone precursors compared to the SIP-approved rule. Therefore, EPA is removing the superseded Rule R9–3–219 from the SIP and approving Rule R18–2–220 and the ‘‘Procedures for Prevention of Emergency Episodes,’’ into the SIP. 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 (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 December 14, 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, Oxides of nitrogen, Ozone, Particulate matter, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements, Volatile organic compounds.

Dated: July 26, 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.


### 62454 Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 199 / Monday, October 15, 2012 / Rules and Regulations

**Subpart D—Arizona**

■ 2. Section 52.120 is amended by adding paragraphs (c)(54)(i)(F) and (c)(151) to read as follows:

**§ 52.120 Identification of plan.**
* * * * *

(c) * * * (54) * * * (i) * * *

* * * * *

(F) Previously approved on September 28, 1982, in paragraph (54)(i)(C), and now deleted without replacement: R9–
3–219.
* * * * *

(151) The following plan revisions were submitted on August 15, 1994 by the Governor’s designee.

(i) Incorporation by reference. (A) Arizona Department of Environmental Quality.

(1) Rule R18–2–220, Air pollution emergency episodes, Department of Environmental Quality-Air Pollution Control, amended effective September 26, 1990.

(2) A letter from Eric C. Massey, Director, Air Quality, Arizona Department of Environmental Quality, to Jared Blumenfeld, Regional Administrator, US EPA, dated August 30, 2012, certifying that the attached copy of a document titled ‘‘Procedures for Prevention of Emergency Episodes: 1988 Edition’’ is a true and correct copy of the original and is an official publication of the Arizona Department of Environmental Quality.

(3) ‘‘Procedures for Prevention of Emergency Episodes,’’ 1988 edition, Arizona Department of Environmental Quality.
[FR Doc. 2012–25022 Filed 10–12–12; 8:45 am]

**BILLING CODE 6560–50–P**

**ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY** 

**40 CFR Part 52**

**[EPA–R04–OAR–2008–0177; FRL–9740–9]**

**Approval and Promulgation of Implementation Plans; Portion of York**  **County, South Carolina Within Charlotte-Gastonia-Rock Hill, North**  **Carolina-South Carolina 1997 8-Hour Ozone Nonattainment Area;**  **Reasonable Further Progress Plan**

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

**ACTION :**  Direct final rule.

**SUMMARY :**  EPA is taking direct final action to approve two state implementation plan (SIP) revisions, submitted by the South Carolina Department of Health and Environmental Control (SC DHEC), on August 31, 2007, and April 29, 2010, to address the reasonable further progress (RFP) plan requirements for the 1997 8- hour ozone national ambient air quality standards (NAAQS) for the portion of York County, South Carolina that iswithin the bi-state Charlotte-GastoniaRock Hill 1997 8-hour ozonenonattainment area. The CharlotteGastonia-Rock Hill, North CarolinaSouth Carolina 1997 8-hour ozone nonattainment area (hereafter referred to as the ‘‘bi-state Charlotte Area’’) is comprised of Cabarrus, Gaston, Lincoln, Mecklenburg, Rowan, Union and a portion of Iredell (Davidson and Coddle Creek Townships) Counties in North Carolina; and a portion of York County in South Carolina (hereafter referred to as ‘‘the York County Area’’). EPA is also providing the status of its adequacy determination for the motor vehicle emissions budgets (MVEB) for volatile organic compounds (VOC) that were included in South Carolina’s RFP plan. Further, EPA is approving these MVEB. These actions are being taken pursuant to section 110 of the Clean Air Act (CAA or Act). EPA will take action on North Carolina’s RFP plan for its portion of the bi-state Charlotte Area, in a separate action.

**DATES :**  This direct final rule is effective December 14, 2012 without further notice, unless EPA receives adverse comment by November 14, 2012. If EPA receives such comments, it will publish a timely withdrawal of the direct final rule in the Federal Register and inform the public that the rule will not take effect.

**ADDRESSES :**  Submit your comments, identified by Docket ID Number, ‘‘EPA– R04–OAR–2008–0177,’’ by one of the following methods:

1. www.regulations.gov: Follow the on-line instructions for submitting
comments.

2. Email: R4-RDS@epa.gov.
3. Fax: 404–562–9019. 4. Mail: ‘‘EPA–R04–OAR–2008– 0177,’’ 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.

5. Hand Delivery or Courier: Ms. Lynorae Benjamin, Chief, 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. Such deliveries are only accepted during the Regional Office’s normal hours of operation. The Regional Office’s official hours of business are Monday through Friday, 8:30 a.m. to 4:30 p.m., excluding federal holidays.

Instructions: Direct your comments to Docket ID Number, ‘‘EPA–R04–OAR– 2008–0177.’’ EPA’s policy is that all comments received will be included in the public docket without change and may be made available online at www.regulations.gov, including any personal information provided, unless the comment includes information claimed to be Confidential Business Information (CBI) or other information whose disclosure is restricted by statute. Do not submit through www.regulations.gov or email, information that you consider to be CBI or otherwise protected. The www.regulations.gov Web site is an ‘‘anonymous access’’ system, which means EPA will not know your identity or contact information unless you provide it in the body of your comment. If you send an email comment directly to EPA without going through www.regulations.gov, your email address will be automatically captured and included as part of the comment that is placed in the public docket and made available on the Internet. If you submit an electronic comment, EPA recommends that you include your name and other contact information in the body of your comment and with any disk or CD–ROM you submit. 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. For additional information about EPA’s public docket visit the EPA Docket Center homepage at http:// www.epa.gov/epahome/dockets.htm.

Docket: All documents in the electronic docket are listed in the www.regulations.gov index. Although listed in the index, some information is not publicly available, i.e., CBI 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 in 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.,