51790 Federal Register / Vol. 71, No. 169 / Thursday, August 31, 2006 / Proposed Rules 

A preliminary ‘‘Environmental 

Analysis Check List’’ is available in the 

docket where indicated under 

ADDRESSES. Comments on this section 

will be considered before we make the 

final decision on whether the rule 

should be categorically excluded from 

further environmental review. 

List of Subjects in 33 CFR Part 165 

Harbors, Marine safety, Navigation 

(water), Reporting and recordkeeping 

requirements, Security measures, and 

Waterways. 

For the reasons discussed in the 

preamble, the Coast Guard proposes to 

amend 33 CFR part 165 as follows: 

PART 165—REGULATED NAVIGATION 

AREAS AND LIMITED ACCESS AREAS 

1. The authority citation for part 165 

continues to read as follows: 

Authority : 33 U.S.C. 1226, 1231; 46 U.S.C. 

Chapter 701; 50 U.S.C. 191, 195; 33 CFR 

1.05–1(g), 6.04–1, 6.04–6, and 160.5; Pub. L. 

107–295, 116 Stat. 2064; Department of 

Homeland Security Delegation No. 0170.1.2. 

2. A new temporary § 165.T11–113 is 

added to read as follows: 

§ 165.T11–113 Safety Zone; Lake 

Moovalya, Colorado River, Parker, AZ. 

(a) Location. The Coast Guard 

proposes to establish a temporary safety 

zone for the Bluewater Resort and 

Casino 60th Thanksgiving Regatta. The 

limits of this proposed temporary safety 

zone would include that portion of the 

Colorado River from Headgate Dam to 

0.5 nautical miles north of Bluewater 

Marina, Parker, Arizona. 

(b) Effective Period. This section is 

effective from 6 a.m. to 6 p.m. from 

November 24, 2006 through November 

26, 2006. 

(c) Definitions. The following 

definitions apply to this section: 

Designated on-scene representative 

means Coast Guard Patrol Commanders 

including Coast Guard coxswains, petty 

officers, and other officers operating 

Coast Guard vessels, and Federal, State, 

and local officers designated by or 

assisting the Captain of the Port (COTP), 

San Diego, CA, in the enforcement of 

regulated navigation areas and safety 

and security zones. 

(d) Regulations. Entry into, transit 

through or anchoring within this safety 

zone is prohibited unless authorized by 

the Captain of the Port San Diego or his 

designated on-scene representative. 

Mariners requesting permission to 

transit through the safety zone may 

request authorization to do so from the 

Patrol Commander (PATCOM). The 

Patrol Commander may be contacted on 

VHF–FM Channel 16. 

Dated: August 15, 2006. 

R.E. Walker, 

Commander, U.S. Coast Guard, Captain of 

the Port, Acting. 

[FR Doc. E6–14498 Filed 8–30–06; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 4910–15–P 

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION 

AGENCY 

40 CFR Part 62 

[Docket No. EPA–R02–OAR–2006–0615, 

FRL–8215–7] 

Approval and Promulgation of Plans 

for Designated Facilities; New Jersey; 

Delegation of Authority 

AGENCY: Environmental Protection 

Agency. 

ACTION: Proposed rule. 

SUMMARY: The Environmental Protection 

Agency (EPA) proposes approval of a 

request from the New Jersey Department 

of Environmental Protection (NJDEP) for 

delegation of authority to implement 

and enforce the following three Federal 

plans: Hospital/Medical/Infectious 

Waste Incinerators (HMIWI); Municipal 

Solid Waste Landfills (MSW Landfills); 

and Small Municipal Waste Combustion 

Units (Small MWC). On August 15, 

2000, November 8, 1999, and January 

31, 2003 respectively, EPA promulgated 

the Federal plans for HMIWI, MSW 

Landfills and Small MWCs to fulfill the 

requirements of sections 111(d)/129 of 

the Clean Air Act. The Federal plans 

impose emission limits and control 

requirements for existing affected 

facilities located in areas not covered by 

an approved and currently effective 

State plan. 

On May 15, 2006, NJDEP signed 

Memorandum of Agreements (MOAs) 

which act as the mechanism for the 

transfer of EPA authority to NJDEP. The 

intended effect is to approve MOAs that 

define the policies, responsibilities, and 

procedures by which the Federal plans 

for HMIWI, MSW Landfills and Small 

MWCs will be administered on behalf of 

EPA by NJDEP. 

DATES: Comments must be received on 

or before October 2, 2006. 

ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, 

identified by Docket ID No. EPA–R02–

OAR–2006–0615, by one of the 

following methods: 

• http://www.regulations.gov: Follow 

the on-line instructions for submitting 

comments. 

• E-mail: Werner.Raymond@epa.gov. 

• Fax: 212–637–3901. 

• Mail: Raymond Werner, Chief, Air 

Programs Branch, Environmental 

Protection Agency, Region 2 Office, 290 

Broadway, 25th Floor, New York, New 

York 10007–1866. 

• Hand Delivery: Raymond Werner, 

Chief, Air Programs Branch, 

Environmental Protection Agency, 

Region 2 Office, 290 Broadway, 25th 

Floor, New York, New York 10007–

1866. 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 to 4:30 

excluding Federal holidays. 

Instructions: Direct your comments to 

Docket ID No. EPA–R02–OAR–2006–

0615. 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 information that you 

consider to be CBI or otherwise 

protected through www.regulations.gov 

or e-mail. 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 e-mail 

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. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Anthony (Ted) Gardella, Air Programs 

Branch, Environmental Protection 

Agency, 290 Broadway, 25th Floor, New 

York, New York 10007–1866, (212) 637–

3892. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The 

Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) 

proposes to approve the New Jersey 

Department of Environmental 

Protection’s (NJDEP’s) request for 


erjones on PROD1PC72 with PROPOSALS
Federal Register / Vol. 71, No. 169 / Thursday, August 31, 2006 / Proposed Rules 51791 

delegation of authority of three Federal 

plans. The following table of contents 

describes the format for this 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION section. 

I. EPA’s Proposed Action 

A. What Action Is EPA Proposing Today? 

B. Why Is EPA Proposing This Action? 

C. What Was Submitted by NJDEP and 

How Did EPA Respond? 

D. What Are the Clean Air Act 

Requirements? 

E. What Guidance Did EPA Use To 

Evaluate NJDEP’s Delegation Request? 

II. What Is EPA’s Conclusion? 

III. Statutory and Executive Order Revisions 

I. EPA’s Proposed Action 

A. What Action Is EPA Proposing 

Today? 

EPA is proposing to approve NJDEP’s 

request for delegation of authority to 

implement and enforce three Federal 

plans and to adhere to the terms and 

conditions prescribed in the 

Memorandum of Agreements (MOAs) 

signed between EPA and NJDEP, as 

further explained below. NJDEP 

requested delegation of authority of the 

following three Federal plans: Hospital/ 

Medical/Infectious Waste Incinerators 

(HMIWI); Municipal Solid Waste 

Landfills (MSW Landfills); and Small 

Municipal Waste Combustion Units 

(Small MWC). The Federal plans were 

promulgated by EPA to implement 

emission guidelines pursuant to 

sections 111(d) and 129 of the Clean Air 

Act (the Act). The purpose of this 

delegation is to acknowledge NJDEP’s 

ability to implement a program and to 

transfer primary implementation and 

enforcement responsibility from EPA to 

NJDEP for existing sources of HMIWI, 

MSW Landfills and Small MWC. While 

NJDEP is delegated the authority to 

implement and enforce the three 

Federal plans, nothing in the delegation 

agreement shall prohibit EPA from 

enforcing the Federal plans for HMIWI, 

MSW Landfills and Small MWC. 

B. Why Is EPA Proposing This Action? 

EPA is proposing this action to: 

• Give the public the opportunity to 

submit comments on EPA’s proposed 

action, as discussed in the ADDRESSES

section; 

• Fulfill a goal of the Act to place 

State governments in positions of 

leadership for air pollution prevention 

and control; and 

• Allow NJDEP to implement and 

enforce Federal plans promulgated by 

EPA that implement emission 

guidelines pursuant to sections 111(d) 

and 129 of the Act. 

C. What Was Submitted by NJDEP and 

How Did EPA Respond? 

On May 13, 2005, NJDEP submitted to 

EPA a request for delegation of authority 

from EPA to implement and enforce the 

Federal plans for existing HMIWI, MSW 

Landfills and Small MWC. EPA 

prepared the MOAs that define the 

policies, responsibilities, and 

procedures by which the Federal plans 

will be administered by both NJDEP and 

EPA, pursuant to the following: 40 CFR 

part 62, subpart HHH for HMIWI; 40 

CFR part 62, subpart GGG for MSW 

Landfills; and 40 CFR part 62, subpart 

JJJ for Small MWC. The MOAs are the 

mechanism for the transfer of 

responsibility between EPA and NJDEP. 

On April 24, 2006, Alan J. Steinberg, 

EPA Region 2 Administrator, signed the 

three MOAs and forwarded them to 

NJDEP for signature. On May 15, 2006, 

Lisa P. Jackson, NJDEP Commissioner, 

signed the MOAs, thereby agreeing to 

the terms and conditions of the MOAs 

and accepting responsibility to 

implement and enforce the policies, 

responsibilities and procedures of the 

Federal plans for HMIWI, MSW 

Landfills and Small MWC. The transfer 

of authority to NJDEP became effective 

on May 15, 2006. 

D. What Are the Clean Air Act 

Requirements? 

Sections 111(d) and 129 of the Act 

require states to submit plans to control 

certain pollutants (designated 

pollutants) at existing solid waste 

combustor facilities and MSW Landfills 

(designated facilities) whenever 

standards of performance have been 

established under section 111(b) for new 

sources of the same type and EPA has 

established emission guidelines (EG) for 

such existing sources. A designated 

pollutant is any pollutant for which no 

air quality criteria has been issued and 

which is not included on a list 

published under section 108(a) (national 

ambient air quality standards) or section 

112 (hazardous air pollutants) of the 

Act, but emissions of which are subject 

to a standard of performance for new 

stationary sources (NSPS). In addition, 

section 129 of the Act also requires EPA 

to promulgate EG for solid waste 

combustion units that emit a mixture of 

air pollutants. These pollutants include 

organics (dioxins and dibenzo furans), 

carbon monoxide, metals (cadmium, 

lead and mercury), acid gases (hydrogen 

chloride, sulfur dioxide and oxides of 

nitrogen), particulate matter and 

opacity. 

On September 15, 1997 (62 FR 48348), 

EPA promulgated NSPS and EG for 

HMIWI units, 40 CFR part 60, subparts 

Ec and Ce, respectively. The designated 

facility to which the EG apply is for 

each existing HMIWI unit, as stipulated 

in subpart Ce, that commenced 

construction on or before June 20, 1996. 

See 40 CFR section 60.32e for details. 

On December 6, 2000 (65 FR 76350 and 

76378), EPA promulgated NSPS and EG 

for Small MWC units, 40 CFR part 60, 

subparts AAAA and BBBB, respectively. 

The designated facility to which the EG 

apply is for each existing Small MWC 

unit, as stipulated in subpart BBBB, that 

(1) commenced construction on or 

before August 30, 1999, and (2) has the 

capacity to combust at least 35 tons per 

day of municipal solid waste but no 

more than 250 tons per day municipal 

solid waste or refuse derived fuel. See 

40 CFR sections 60.1550, 60.1555 and 

60.1940 for details. 

On March 12, 1996 (61 FR 9905), EPA 

promulgated NSPS and EG for MSW 

Landfills, 40 CFR part 60, subparts 

WWW and Cc, respectively. That action 

also added the source category 

‘‘municipal solid waste landfills’’ to the 

priority list in 40 CFR 60.16, for 

regulation under section 111 of the Act. 

The NSPS and EG implement section 

111 of the Act and are based on the EPA 

Administrator’s determination that 

MSW Landfills cause, or contribute 

significantly to, air pollution that may 

be reasonably anticipated to endanger 

public health or welfare. The emissions 

of concern are non-methane organic 

compounds (NMOC) and methane. 

NMOC include volatile organic 

compounds (VOC), hazardous air 

pollutants (HAPs), and odorous 

compounds. The designated facility to 

which the EG apply are as follows: (1) 

Each existing MSW Landfill for which 

construction, reconstruction or 

modification was commenced before 

May 30, 1991; and (2) each MSW 

Landfill that has accepted waste at any 

time since November 8, 1987 or the 

landfill has additional capacity for 

future waste capacity. See 40 CFR 

60.32c for details. 

Pursuant to section 129 of the Act, 

State plan requirements must be ‘‘at 

least as protective’’ as the EG and 

become federally enforceable upon 

approval by EPA. The procedures for 

adoption and submittal of State plans 

are codified in 40 CFR part 60, subpart 

B. For states that fail to submit a plan, 

EPA is required to develop and 

implement a Federal plan within two 

years following promulgation of the EG. 

EPA implementation and enforcement 

of the Federal plan is viewed as an 

interim measure until states assume 

their role as the preferred implementers 

of the EG requirements stipulated in the 

Federal plan. Accordingly, EPA 


erjones on PROD1PC72 with PROPOSALS
51792 Federal Register / Vol. 71, No. 169 / Thursday, August 31, 2006 / Proposed Rules 

encourages states to develop their own 

plan, or to request delegation of the 

Federal plan, as NJDEP has done. 

E. What Guidance Did EPA Use To 

Evaluate NJDEP’s Delegation Request? 

EPA evaluated NJDEP’s request for 

delegation of the three Federal plans 

pursuant to EPA’s Delegation Manual. 

Under EPA’s Delegation Manual, item 

7–139, the Regional Administrator is 

authorized to delegate implementation 

and enforcement of sections 111(d)/129 

Federal plans to state environmental 

agencies. The requirements and 

limitations of a delegation agreement are 

defined in item 7–139. The Regional 

Administrator may consider delegating 

authority to implement and enforce 

Federal plans to a state provided all of 

the following conditions are met by the 

state: (1) The state does not already have 

an EPA approved State plan; (2) the 

state has submitted a written request for 

delegation authority and has 

demonstrated that it has satisfied EPA’s 

criteria for delegation including, at a 

minimum, a demonstration of adequate 

resources and legal and enforcement 

authority to administer and enforce the 

Federal plan at issue; and (3) the state 

has entered into a MOA with the 

Regional Administrator that sets forth 

the terms, conditions and effective date 

of the delegation, and that serves as the 

mechanism for the transfer of authority. 

New Jersey met all of EPA’s delegation 

requirements. The reader may view New 

Jersey’s letter to EPA requesting 

delegation and the MOAs signed by 

both parties at the following Web site: 

www.regulations.gov. 

II. What Is EPA’s Conclusion? 

EPA has evaluated New Jersey’s 

submittal for consistency with the Act, 

EPA regulations, and EPA policy. New 

Jersey has met all the requirements of 

EPA’s guidance for obtaining delegation 

of authority to implement and enforce 

the three Federal plans. New Jersey 

entered into a MOA with EPA and it 

became effective on May 15, 2006. 

Accordingly, EPA is proposing to 

approve New Jersey’s request dated May 

13, 2005 for delegation of authority of 

the three Federal plans for existing 

sources of HMIWI, Small MWC and 

MSW Landfills. EPA will continue to 

retain enforcement authority along with 

NJDEP and EPA will continue to retain 

certain specific authorities reserved to 

EPA in individual Federal plans and as 

indicated in each MOA (e.g., authority 

to approve major alternatives to test 

methods or monitoring, etc). 

III. Statutory and Executive Order 

Reviews 

Under Executive Order 12866 (58 FR 

51735, October 4, 1993), this proposed 

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 proposed action merely 

proposes to approve state law as 

meeting Federal requirements and 

imposes no additional requirements 

beyond those imposed by state law. 

Accordingly, the Administrator certifies 

that this proposed 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 

proposes to approve pre-existing 

requirements under state law and does 

not impose 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 proposed 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). This action merely 

proposes to approve a state rule 

implementing a Federal standard, and 

does not alter the relationship or the 

distribution of power and 

responsibilities established in the Act. 

This proposed 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 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 plan submission for 

failure to use VCS. It would thus be 

inconsistent with applicable law for 

EPA, when it reviews a plan 

submission, to use VCS in place of a 

plan submission that otherwise satisfies 

the provisions of the 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 proposed 

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.). 

List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 62 

Environmental protection, 

Administrative practice and procedure, 

Air pollution control, Intergovernmental 

relations, Reporting and recordkeeping 

requirements, Waste treatment and 

disposal. 

Authority: 42 U.S.C. 7401–7671q. 

Dated: August 21, 2006. 

Alan J. Steinberg, 

Regional Administrator, Region 2. 

[FR Doc. 06–7317 Filed 8–30–06; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 6560–50–P 

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION 

AGENCY 

40 CFR Part 52 

[EPA–R01–OAR–2005–CT–0001; A–1–FRL–

8209–5] 

Approval and Promulgation of Air 

Quality Implementation Plans; 

Connecticut; VOC Regulations and 

One-Hour Ozone Attainment 

Demonstration Shortfall 

AGENCY: Environmental Protection 

Agency (EPA). 

ACTION: Proposed rule. 

SUMMARY: The EPA is proposing to 

approve a State Implementation Plan 

(SIP) revision submitted by the State of 

Connecticut. This revision establishes 

requirements to reduce volatile organic 

compound (VOC) emissions from 

portable fuel containers, automotive 

refinishing operations, and gasoline 

dispensing facilities. The intended 

effect of this action is to propose 

approval of these requirements into the 

Connecticut SIP. This action also 

proposes approval of these control 

measures, along with a previously 

approved control measure, as fulfilling 

the shortfall in emission reductions 

identified in Connecticut’s one-hour 

ozone attainment demonstration SIP. 


erjones on PROD1PC72 with PROPOSALS