Federal Register / Vol. 71, No. 16 / Wednesday, January 25, 2006 / Rules and Regulations 4045 

of this part, no person or vessel may 

enter or remain in this zone unless 

authorized by the Captain of the Port or 

his designated representative. 

Dated: January 17, 2006. 

Patrick G. Gerrity, 

Captain, U.S. Coast Guard, Captain of the 

Port, Portland, OR. 

[FR Doc. 06–677 Filed 1–24–06; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 4910–15–P 

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION 

AGENCY 

40 CFR Part 52 

[Region 2 Docket No. EPA–R02–OAR–2004–

NJ–0004, FRL–8020–6] 

Approval and Promulgation of 

Implementation Plans; New Jersey 

Consumer Products Rule 

AGENCY: Environmental Protection 

Agency (EPA). 

ACTION: Final rule. 

SUMMARY: The Environmental Protection 

Agency (EPA) is approving a revision to 

the New Jersey State Implementation 

Plan (SIP) for ozone concerning the 

control of volatile organic compounds. 

The SIP revision consists of 

amendments to Subchapter 24 

‘‘Prevention of Air Pollution From 

Consumer Products’’ of 7:27 of the New 

Jersey Administrative Codes, which are 

needed to meet the shortfall in 

emissions reduction identified by EPA 

in New Jersey’s 1-hour ozone attainment 

demonstration SIP. The intended effect 

of this action is to approve a control 

strategy required by the Clean Air Act, 

which will result in emission reductions 

that will help achieve attainment of the 

national ambient air quality standard for 

ozone. 

DATES: Effective Date: This rule will be 

effective February 24, 2006. 

ADDRESSES: EPA has established a 

docket for this action under the Federal 

Docket Management System (FDMS) 

which replaces the Regional Materials 

in EDOCKET (RME) docket system. The 

new FDMS is located at http:// 

www.regulations.gov and the docket ID 

for this action is EPA–R02–OAR–2004–

NJ–0004. All documents in the docket 

are listed in the FDMS index. Publicly 

available docket materials are available 

either electronically in FDMS or in hard 

copy at the Environmental Protection 

Agency, Region II Office, Air Programs 

Branch, 290 Broadway, 25th Floor, New 

York, New York 10007–1866. Copies of 

the documents relevant to this action 

are also available for public inspection 

during normal business hours, by 

appointment at the Air and Radiation 

Docket and Information Center, 

Environmental Protection Agency, 

Room B–108, 1301 Constitution 

Avenue, NW., Washington, DC; and the 

New Jersey Department of 

Environmental Protection, Office of Air 

Quality Management, Bureau of Air 

Pollution Control, 401 East State Street, 

CN027, Trenton, New Jersey 08625. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Paul 

Truchan, Air Programs Branch, 

Environmental Protection Agency, 290 

Broadway, 25th Floor, New York, New 

York 10278, (212) 637–3711. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

I. What Action Is EPA Taking Today? 

EPA is approving a revision to New 

Jersey’s ozone State Implementation 

Plan (SIP) submitted on June 22, 2004. 

This SIP incorporates adopted rule 

amendments to Title 7, Chapter 27, 

Subchapter 24 ‘‘Prevention of Air 

Pollution from Consumer Products’’

which was adopted on April 7, 2004. 

Subchapter 24 contains two control 

programs, consumer products and 

portable fuel container spillage control. 

This adoption was published in the 

New Jersey Register on May 3, 2004 and 

became effective on June 6, 2004. The 

Subchapter 24 amendments are 

applicable to the entire State of New 

Jersey. The reader is referred to the 

proposed rulemaking (December 10, 

2004, 69 FR 71764) for additional 

details. 

Subchapter 24 contains provisions for 

accepting innovative products 

exemptions (IPEs), alternative 

compliance plans (ACPs), and variances 

that have been approved by the 

California Air Resources Board (CARB) 

or other states with adopted consumer 

product regulations based on the Ozone 

Transport Commission (OTC) ‘‘Model 

Rule for Consumer Products’’ dated 

November 29, 2001. While the 

provisions related to IPEs, ACP, and 

variances pursuant to subchapter 24 are 

acceptable, each specific application of 

those provisions cannot be recognized 

as meeting Federal requirements until it 

is approved by EPA as a SIP revision. 

II. What Comments Were Received and 

How Has EPA Responded to Them? 

EPA received one comment pertaining 

to the proposal for this action which 

supported this rulemaking. 

III. What Role Does This Rule Play in 

the Ozone SIP? 

When EPA evaluated New Jersey’s 1- 

hour ozone attainment demonstrations, 

EPA determined that additional 

emission reductions were needed for the 

State’s two severe nonattainment areas 

in order for the State to attain the 1-hour 

ozone standard with sufficient surety 

(December 16, 1999, 64 FR 70380). EPA 

provided that the states in the Ozone 

Transport Region could achieve these 

emission reductions through local or 

regional control programs. New Jersey 

decided to participate with the other 

states in the Northeast in an Ozone 

Transport Commission (OTC) regulatory 

development effort which developed six 

model control measures. This 

rulemaking incorporates two of the OTC 

model control measures into the New 

Jersey ozone SIP: Consumer products 

and portable fuel containers. The 

emission reductions from these control 

measures will provide a portion of the 

additional emission reductions needed 

to attain the 1-hour ozone standard. The 

emission reductions from these 

measures will also help to attain the 8- 

hour ozone standard. 

IV. What Are EPA’s Conclusions? 

EPA has evaluated the submitted 

Subchapter 24 submission for 

consistency with EPA regulations, 

policy and guidance. Consistent with 

EPA policy and guidance, EPA is 

approving the rule submitted as part of 

the New Jersey SIP with the exception 

that any specific application of 

provisions associated with IPEs, ACP, 

and variances, must be submitted as SIP 

revisions for EPA approval. This rule 

will strengthen the SIP by providing for 

additional VOC reductions. 

Accordingly, EPA is approving the 

Subchapter 24 revisions as adopted on 

April 7, 2004 and effective on June 6, 

2004 with the limitation identified 

above. 

V. Statutory and Executive Order 

Reviews 

Statutory and Executive Order 

Reviews Under Executive Order 12866 

(58 FR 51735, October 4, 1993), this 

action is not a ‘‘significant regulatory 

action’’ and therefore is not subject to 

review by the Office of Management and 

Budget. For this reason, this action is 

also not subject to Executive Order 

13211, ‘‘Actions Concerning Regulations 

That Significantly Affect Energy Supply, 

Distribution, or Use’’ (66 FR 28355, May 

22, 2001). This action merely approves 

state law as meeting Federal 

requirements and imposes no additional 

requirements beyond those imposed by 

state law. Accordingly, the 

Administrator certifies that this rule 

will not have a significant economic 

impact on a substantial number of small 

entities under the Regulatory Flexibility 

Act (5 U.S.C. 601 et seq.). Because this 

rule approves pre-existing requirements 

under state law and does not impose 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC66 with RULES
4046 Federal Register / Vol. 71, No. 16 / Wednesday, January 25, 2006 / Rules and Regulations 

any additional enforceable duty beyond 

that required by state law, it 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). This rule also does not 

have tribal implications because it will 

not have a substantial direct effect on 

one or more Indian tribes, on the 

relationship between the Federal 

Government and Indian tribes, or on the 

distribution of power and 

responsibilities between the Federal 

Government and Indian tribes, as 

specified by Executive Order 13175 (65 

FR 67249, November 9, 2000). This 

action also does not have federalism 

implications because it does 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 (64 FR 43255, 

August 10, 1999), 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. This rule also is not 

subject to Executive Order 13045 

‘‘Protection of Children from 

Environmental Health Risks and Safety 

Risks’’ (62 FR 19885, April 23, 1997), 

because it is not economically 

significant. In reviewing SIP 

submissions, 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 

voluntary consensus standards (VCS), 

EPA has no authority to disapprove a 

SIP submission for failure to use VCS. 

It would thus be inconsistent with 

applicable law for EPA, when it reviews 

a SIP submission, to use VCS in place 

of a SIP submission that otherwise 

satisfies the provisions of the Clean Air 

Act. Thus, the requirements of section 

12(d) of the National Technology 

Transfer and Advancement Act of 1995 

(15 U.S.C. 272 note) do not apply. 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.) 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). 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 March 27, 2006. 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).) 

List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52 

Environmental protection, Air 

pollution control, Incorporation by 

reference, Intergovernmental relations, 

Ozone, Reporting and recordkeeping 

requirements, Volatile organic 

compounds. 

Dated: December 28, 2005. 

Alan J. Steinberg, 

Regional Administrator, Region 2. 

■ 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 FF—New Jersey 

■ 2. Section 52.1570 is amended by 

adding new paragraph (c)(79) to read as 

follows: 

§ 52.1570 Identification of plan. 

* * * * * 

(c) * * * 

(79) Revisions to the State 

Implementation Plan submitted on June 

22, 2004 by the State of New Jersey 

Department of Environmental Protection 

that establishes an expanded control 

program for consumer products 

including portable fuel containers. 

(i) Incorporation by reference: 

(A) Regulation Subchapter 24 of Title 

7, Chapter 27 of the New Jersey 

Administrative Code, entitled 

‘‘Prevention of Air Pollution From 

Consumer Products,’’ adopted on April 

7, 2004 and effective on June 6, 2004. 

(ii) Additional material: 

(A) Letter from State of New Jersey 

Department of Environmental Protection 

dated June 22, 2004, requesting EPA 

approval of a revision to the Ozone SIP 

which contains amendments to the 

Subchapter 24 ‘‘Prevention of Air 

Pollution From Consumer Products.’’

* * * * * 

■ 3. Section 52.1605 is amended by 

revising the entry under Title 7, Chapter 

27 for Subchapter 24 in the table to read 

as follows: 

§ 52.1605 EPA-approved New Jersey 

regulations. 

State regulation State effective date EPA approved date Comments 

* * * * * * * 

Title 7, Chapter 27 

* * * * * * * 

Subchapter 24, ‘‘Prevention of Air Pollution 

From Consumer Products’’.

June 6, 2004 .............. January 25, 2006 [Insert FR page citation.].The specific application of provisions associated with innovative products exemptions, 

alternative compliance plans, and 

variances must be submitted to EPA as 

SIP revisions. 

* * * * * * * 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC66 with RULES
Federal Register / Vol. 71, No. 16 / Wednesday, January 25, 2006 / Rules and Regulations 4047 

[FR Doc. 06–703 Filed 1–24–06; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 6560–50–P 

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION 

AGENCY 

40 CFR Parts 52 and 81 

[EPA–R04–OAR–2005–KY–0001–200521(f); 

FRL–8023–8] 

Approval and Promulgation of 

Implementation Plans and Designation 

of Areas for Air Quality Planning 

Purposes; Kentucky; Redesignation of 

the Christian County, KY, Portion of 

the Clarksville-Hopkinsville 8-Hour 

Ozone Nonattainment Area to 

Attainment for Ozone 

AGENCY: Environmental Protection 

Agency (EPA). 

ACTION: Final rule. 

SUMMARY: EPA is approving a May 20, 

2005, final request to redesignate the 

Christian County, Kentucky, portion of 

the Clarksville-Hopkinsville 8-hour 

ozone nonattainment area to attainment 

for the 8-hour ozone National Ambient 

Air Quality Standard (NAAQS), and a 

Kentucky State Implementation Plan 

(SIP) revision containing a 12-year 

maintenance plan for Christian County, 

Kentucky. EPA is also providing 

information on the status of the 

Agency’s transportation conformity 

adequacy determination for the new 

motor vehicle emissions budgets 

(MVEBs) for the years 2004 and 2016 

that are contained in the 12-year 8-hour 

ozone maintenance plan for Christian 

County, Kentucky. EPA is approving 

such MVEBs in this action. This final 

rule addresses comments made on 

EPA’s proposed rulemaking previously 

published for this action. 

DATES: This rule will be effective 

February 24, 2006. 

ADDRESSES: EPA has established a 

docket for this action under Docket 

Identification No. EPA–R04–OAR–

2005–KY–0001. 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 in Regional Material in EDocket 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: 

James Hou, Regulatory Development 

Section, Air Planning Branch, Air, 

Pesticides and Toxics Management 

Division, Region 4, U.S. Environmental 

Protection Agency, 61 Forsyth Street, 

SW., Atlanta, Georgia 30303–8960. Mr. 

Hou can be reached via telephone 

number at (404) 562–8965 or electronic 

mail at hou.james@epa.gov. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

Table of Contents 

I. What Actions Is EPA Taking? 

II. What Is the Background for the Actions? 

III. Response to Comment 

IV. Final Action 

V. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews 

I. What Actions Is EPA Taking? 

EPA is taking final action to change 

the legal designation of the Christian 

County, Kentucky, portion of the 

Clarksville-Hopkinsville 8-hour ozone 

nonattainment area from nonattainment 

to attainment for the 8-hour ozone 

NAAQS. The interstate ClarksvilleHopkinsville 8-hour ozone 

nonattainment area is composed of two 

counties (i.e., Christian County, 

Kentucky, and Montgomery County, 

Tennessee). EPA is also approving 

Kentucky’s 8-hour ozone maintenance 

plan for Christian County (such 

approval being one of the Clean Air Act 

(CAA) criteria for redesignation to 

attainment status). The maintenance 

plan is designed to help keep the 

Clarksville-Hopkinsville area (of which 

Christian County is a part) in attainment 

for the 8-hour ozone NAAQS for the 

next 12 years. These approval actions 

are based on EPA’s determination that 

the Commonwealth of Kentucky has 

demonstrated that Christian County, 

Kentucky, has met the criteria for 

redesignation to attainment specified in 

the CAA, and that the entire ClarksvilleHopkinsville 8-hour ozone 

nonattainment area has attained the 8- 

hour ozone standard. EPA’s analyses for 

Christian County, Kentucky, and 

Montgomery County, Tennessee, are 

described in detail in the direct final 

rules published September 22, 2005, at 

70 FR 55550 and 70 FR 55559, 

respectively. 

EPA is also providing information on 

the status of the Agency’s transportation 

conformity adequacy determination for 

the new MVEBs for the years 2004 and 

2016 that are contained in the 

maintenance plan for Christian County, 

Kentucky. The maintenance plan 

establishes MVEBs for the years 2004 

and 2016, respectively, of 3.83 tons per 

day (tpd) and 2.08 tpd for volatile 

organic compound (VOC) emissions, 

and 9.53 tpd and 3.83 tpd for nitrogen 

oxides (NOX). Through this action, EPA 

is announcing that these MVEBs are 

adequate for the purposes of 

transportation conformity. During EPA’s 

Adequacy public comment period 

which began on March 29, 2005, and 

closed on April 28, 2005, EPA did not 

receive any adverse comments related to 

the MVEBs. EPA is also approving these 

MVEBs in this action. Upon the 

publication of this final rulemaking in 

the Federal Register, these MVEBs must 

be used by the transportation partners in 

this area for future conformity 

determinations. Additionally, 

conformity to these new MVEBs must be 

demonstrated within 24 months of the 

effective date of this action, pursuant to 

section 6011(a) of the Safe, Accountable, 

Flexible, Efficient Transportation Equity 

Act—A Legacy for Users, which was 

signed into law on August 10, 2005. 

Additionally, in this action, EPA is 

responding to the adverse comment 

received on the September 22, 2005, 

rulemaking proposing to approve the 

aforementioned revisions (70 FR 55613). 

II. What Is the Background for the 

Actions? 

In two separate actions published on 

September 22, 2005, EPA proposed to 

approve the redesignation of the 

Kentucky (70 FR 55613) and Tennessee 

(70 FR 55613) portions of the 

Clarksville-Hopkinsville 8-Hour Ozone 

Nonattainment Area to attainment. Also 

on that date, EPA published two 

companion direct final rules approving 

the redesignation to attainment of the 

Kentucky (70 FR 55550) and Tennessee 

(70 FR 55559) portions of the 

nonattainment area. The proposed and 

direct final rules stated that if EPA 

received adverse comment by October 

24, 2005, the direct final rule would be 

withdrawn and would not take effect. 

EPA subsequently received an adverse 

comment regarding the redesignation of 

the Kentucky portion of the 

nonattainment area (i.e., Christian 

County). In this action, EPA is 

addressing the comment and taking 

final action as described in section I and 

section IV. 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC66 with RULES