# + 2

(,1 1/,1(

Citation: 67 Fed. Reg. 54957 2002

Content downloaded/printed from HeinOnline (http://heinonline.org) Mon Jun 18 17:22:44 2012

-- Your use of this HeinOnline PDF indicates your acceptance of HeinOnline's Terms and Conditions of the license agreement available at http://heinonline.org/HOL/License

-- The search text of this PDF is generated from uncorrected OCR text.Federal Register/Vol. 67, No. 166/Tuesday, August 27, 2002/Rules and Regulations

which the OT agreement becomes effective. Costs that were incurred for a prototype project bythe business units ofan awardee or subawardee after the beginning ofnegotiations, but prior to the date the OT agreement becomes effective, may be counted as nonFederal amounts ifandto the extent that the Agreements Officer determines in writing that: (1)The awardee or subawardee incurred the costs in anticipation of entering into the OT agreement; and

(2)Itwas appropriate for the awardee

orsubawardee to incur the costs before the OT agreement became effective in order to ensure the successful implementation ofthe OT agreement. (b)As a matter ofpolicy, these limitations on cost-sharing apply any time cost-sharing maybe recognized when using OT authority for prototype projects.

8. Newly redesignated § 3.7 is amendedby revising the section heading toread as follows: §3.7 Comptroller General access.

Dated: August 14, 2002. Patricia L.Toppings, AlternateOSDFederal Register Liaison Officer,Departmentof Defense. [FRDoc. 02-21267 Filed 8-26-02; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 5001-8-M ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION
AGENCY

40 CFR Part 52 [AZ 111-0050a; FRL-7261-7]

Revisionto the Arizona State Implementation Plan, Maricopa County Environmental Services Department
AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). ACTION: Direct final rule.

SUMMARY: EPA is taking direct final action to approve a revision to the Maricopa County Environmental Services Department (MCESD) portion ofthe Arizona State Implementation Plan (SIP). Under authority ofthe Clean Air Act as amended in 1990 (CAAor the Act), we are approving a local rule that regulates excess emissions from malfunctions, startups, and shutdowns. DATES: This rule is effective on October 28, 2002, without further notice, unless EPA receives adverse comments by September 26, 2002. Ifwe receive such comment, we will publish atimely withdrawal in the FederalRegister to notify the public thatthis rule will not take effect. ADDRESSES: Mail comments to Gerardo Rios, Permits Office Chief (AIR-3), U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Region IX, 75 Hawthorne Street, San Francisco, CA 94105.

You can inspect a copy ofthe submitted SIP revision and EPA's technical support document (TSD) at

our Region IX office during normal business hours. You may also see a copy ofthe submitted SIP revision at the following locations: Environmental Protection Agency, Air

Docket (6102), ArielRios Building, 1200 Pennsylvania Avenue, NW., Washington D.C. 20460. Arizona Department ofEnvironmental Quality, 1110 West Washington Street, Phoenix,AZ 85007. Maricopa CountyEnvironmental Services

Department, Air Quality Division, 1001 Northcentral Avenue, Suite 201, Phoenix, AZ 85004.

A courtesy copy ofthe rule may be available via the Internet athttp:// www.maricopa.gov/envsvc/air/ mledesc.asp.However, this version of the rule may be different than the version submitted to EPA for approval. Readers are cautioned to verify that the adoption date ofthe rule listed is the

same as the rule submitted to EPA for approval. The official submittal is only available at the agency addresses listed above. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Al Petersen, Rulemaking Office (AIR-4), U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Region IX; (415) 947-4118. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Throughout this document, "we," "us" and "our" refer to EPA.

Table ofContents
I.The State's Submittal

A.What Rule Did the State Submit? B. Are There Other Versions ofThis Rule? C. What Is the Purpose of the Submitted

Rule? II. EPA's Evaluation and Action

A. How Is EPA Evaluating the Rule? B. Does the Rule Meet theEvaluation

Criteria? C. Public Comment and Final Action III. Background Information

A.Why Was ThisRule Submitted? IV.Administrative Requirements

I. The State's Submittal

A. WhatRuleDidthe State Submit?

Table 1 lists the rule we are approving with the dates that it was adopted by the local air agency and submitted by the Arizona Department of Environmental Quality.

TABLE 1.- SUBMITTED RULES

Local agency Rule No. Rule title Revised Submitted

M

CESD

.................................... 140 Excess Emissions

..................................................................... 09/05/01 02/22/02

On April 12, 2002 this rule submittal C. WhatIs thePurposeofthe Submitted 140. Moreover, the affirmative defense

was found to meet the completeness criteria in 40 CFR Part 51 Appendix V, which mustbe metbefore formal EPA review.

B.Are There OtherVersions ofThis Rule?

There is no previous version ofRule 140 in the SIP. Rule?
The purpose ofRule 140 is to provide

an owner and/or operator of a source who has been charged with aviolation for excess emissions with an affirmative defense to a civil or administrative enforcement penalty. To qualify for the limited affirmative defense to a penalty action, the source must demonstrate compliance with listed criteria and reporting requirements set forth in Rule does not apply to a SIP provision required by federally promulgated performance standards or emission limits, such as new source performance standards (NSPS)and national emission standards for hazardous air pollutants (NESHAPS). The defense also does not apply to violations in areas where a single source has the potential to cause
an exceedence ofthe National Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS) or 

### 54957

HeinOnline -- 67 Fed. Reg. 54957 2002Federal Register/Vol. 67, No. 166/Tuesday, August 27, 2002/Rules and Regulations

Prevention ofSignificant Deterioration (PSD)increments. The TSD has more information about this rule.

II. EPA's Evaluation and Action

A. HowIs EPAEvaluatingtheRule?

This rule contains administrative provisions and standards that apply to emission controls found in other local agency requirements. In combination with those other requirements, this rule must be enforceable (see section 110(a) ofthe CAA) and must not relax existing requirements (see sections 110(1) and 193). EPA policy that we used to define specific enforceability requirements includes:

* StateImplementationPlans: Policy RegardingExcessEmissionsduring Malfunctions,Startup,andShutdown, EPA Memorandum from Steven Herman and Robert Perciasepe to Regional Administrators, Regions I-X (September 20, 1999).

* IssuesRelatingto VOCRegulation Cutpoints,Deficiencies,andDeviations; ClarificationtoAppendixD,November 24, 1987 FederalRegister Notice, (Blue Book), notice of availability published in the May 25, 1988 Federal Register.

B. Does theRuleMeet theEvaluation Criteria?

Rule 140 excludes injunctive relief, federally promulgated emission standards or limitations, and violations in areas with single sources have the potential to exceed the NAAQS from the rule's affirmative defense to enforcement penalties. Rule 140 excludes any violation of standards and limitations included in apermit to meet requirements for pollutant significance levels in adjacent nonattainment areas where primary or secondary ambient air quality standards are being violated. These exclusions assure that Rule 140 will not interfere withthe NAAQS and PSD increments, as required by sections 110(a) and (1)ofthe CAA.

We believe Rule 140 is consistent with therelevant policy and guidance regarding enforceability, SIP relaxations, andEPA's policy regarding excess emissions. The TSD has more information on our evaluation.
C.PublicComment andFinal Action
As authorized in section 110(k)(3) of the CAA, EPAis fully approving the submittedrule because we believe it fulfills all relevant requirements. We do not think anyone will object to this approval, so we are finalizing itwithout proposing it in advance. However, in the Proposed Rules section ofthis Federal Register, we are simultaneously proposing approval ofthe same submittedrule. Ifwe receive adverse comments by September 26, 2002, we will publish atimely withdrawal in the Federal Register to notify the public that the direct final approval will not take effect and we will address the comments in asubsequent final action based onthe proposal. Ifwe do not receive timely adverse comments, the direct final approval will be effective without further notice on October 28, 2002. This will incorporate this rule into the federally enforceable SIP.

III. Background Information

A. Why Was ThisRule Submitted?
Section 110(a) ofthe CAArequires
states to submit regulations that control volatile organic compounds, oxides of nitrogen, particulate matter, and other air pollutants which harm human health and the environment. This rule was developed as part ofthe local agency's program to control these pollutants.
IV. Administrative Requirements

Under Executive Order 12866 (58 FR 51735, October 4, 1993), this action is not a "significant regulatory action" and therefore isnot subject toreview bythe Office ofManagement and Budget. For this reason, this action is also not subject to Executive Order 13211, "Actions Concerning Regulations That Significantly Affect Energy Supply, Distribution, orUse" (66 FR 28355, May 22, 2001). This actionmerely approves state law asmeeting federal requirements andimposes no additional requirements beyond those imposed by state law. Accordingly, the Administrator certifies thatthis rule will not have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities under the Regulatory Flexibility Act (5U.S.C. 601 etseq.). Because this rule approves 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 oruniquely 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 itwill 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 andIndian 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 onthe States, on the relationship between the national government and the States, or on the distribution ofpower and responsibilities among the various levels ofgovernment, as specified in Executive Order 13132 (64 FR 43255, August 10, 1999). This action merely approves a state rule implementing a Federal standard, and does not alterthe relationship or the distribution ofpower and responsibilities established inthe CAA. Thisrule 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 itis not economically significant.

In reviewing SIP submissions, EPA's role is to approve state choices, provided that they meet the criteria of the CAA. In this context, in the absence ofa 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. Itwould thus be inconsistent with applicable law for EPA, when itreviews a SIP submission, to use VCS in place ofa SIP submission that otherwise satisfies the provisions of the CAA. Thus, the requirements of section 12(d) ofthe National Technology Transfer andAdvancement Act of1995 (15 U.S.C. 272 note) donot apply. This rule does not impose an information collection burden underthe provisions ofthe PaperworkReduction Act of1995 (44 U.S.C. 3501 etseq.).

The Congressional Review Act, 5 U.S.C. section 801 etseq., as addedby the Small Business Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act of1996, generally provides thatbefore 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 ofthe Congress and to the Comptroller General ofthe United States. EPA will submit areport containing this rule and other required information to the U.S. Senate, the U.S. House ofRepresentatives, and the Comptroller General ofthe United States prior to publication ofthe 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. section 804(2).

Under section 307(b)(1) ofthe CAA, petitions forjudicial review ofthis action must be filed in the United States Court ofAppeals for the appropriate circuit by October 28, 2002. Filing a petition for reconsideration by the Administrator ofthis final rule does not affect the finality ofthis rule for the purposes ofjudicial review nor does it extend the time within which a petition 

### 54958

HeinOnline -- 67 Fed. Reg. 54958 2002Federal Register/Vol. 67, No. 166/Tuesday, August 27, 2002/Rules and Regulations

forjudicial review may be filed, and shall not postpone the effectiveness of suchrule or action. This action may not be challenged later in proceedings to enforce its requirements. Section 307(b)(2).
List of Subjects in 40 CFRPart52

Environmental protection, Air pollution control, Incorporation by reference, Intergovernmental relations, Reporting andrecordkeeping requirements.

Dated: July 25, 2002. KeithTakata, ActingRegional Administrator, RegionIX. Part 52, chapter I, title 40 ofthe Code ofFederal 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 D-Arizona

2. Section 52.120 is amendedby addingparagraph (c)(106) to read as follows:
§52.120 Identification of plan.

(c) * * * (106) Amended rule for the following agency was submitted on February 22, 2002, by the governor's designee.

(i) Incorporation byreference. (A)Maricopa County Environmental Services Department.

(1)Rule 140, revised on September 5, 2001.

[FR Doc. 02-21663 Filed 8-26-02; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6560-50-P

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION

AGENCY

40 CFR Part 52 [MO 160-1160a; FRL-7267-6]
Approval and Promulgation of Implementation Plans; State of Missouri
AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). ACTION: Direct final rule.
SUMMARY: EPA is approving aState Implementation Plan (SIP) revision submittedby the state ofMissouri. This revision to the state's construction permits rule exempts incinerators used for the on-site noncommercial incineration ofdead animals from the construction permit requirements. We

are approving this revision to ensure consistency between the state and Federally-approved rules, andto ensure Federal enforceability ofthe state's revised rule. DATES: This direct final rule will be effective October 28, 2002, unless EPA receives adverse comments by September 26, 2002. Ifadverse
comments arereceived, EPA will publish atimely withdrawal ofthe direct final rule in the Federal Register informing the public that the rule will
not take effect. ADDRESSES: Comments may be mailed to Wayne Kaiser, Environmental Protection Agency, Air Planning and Development Branch, 901 North 5th Street, Kansas City, Kansas 66101.

Copies ofdocuments relative tothis action are available for public inspection duringnormal business hours atthe above-listed Region 7 location. The interested persons wanting to examine these documents shouldmake an appointment with the office at least 24 hours in advance. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Wayne Kaiser at (913) 551-7603. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Throughout this document whenever "we," "us," or "our" is used, we mean EPA. This sectionprovides additional information by addressing the following questions:
What Is a SIP? What Is theFederal Approval Process fora

SIP? What Does Federal Approval ofa State

Regulation Mean toMe? What Is Being Addressed in This Document? Have the Requirements forApproval ofa SIP

Revision Been Met? What Action Is EPA Taking?
What Is a SIP?
Section 110 ofthe Clean Air Act (CAA)requires states to develop air pollution regulations and control strategies to ensure that state air quality meets the national ambient air quality standards established byEPA. These ambient standards are established under section 109 ofthe CAA, and they currently address six criteria pollutants. These pollutants are: Carbon monoxide, nitrogen dioxide, ozone, lead, particulate matter, and sulfur dioxide.

Each state must submitthese regulations and control strategies to us for approval andincorporation into the Federally-enforceable SIP.

Each Federally-approved SIP protects air quality primarily by addressing air pollution atits point oforigin. These SIPs can be extensive, containing state regulations or other enforceable documents and supporting information such as emission inventories, monitoring networks, and modeling demonstrations.
What Isthe Federal Approval Process for a SIP?

In order for state regulations to be incorporated into the Federallyenforceable SIP, states must formally adopt theregulations and control strategies consistent with state and Federal requirements. This process generally includes a public notice, public hearing, public commentperiod, and a formal adoption by a stateauthorized rulemaking body.

Once a state rule, regulation, or control strategy is adopted, the state submits itto us for inclusion into the SIP. Wemust provide public notice and seek additional public comment regarding the proposed Federal action

on the state submission. Ifadverse comments are received, they must be addressed prior to any final Federal action by us.

All state regulations and supporting information approved by EPA under section 110 ofthe CAA are incorporated into the Federally-approved SIP. Records of such SIP actions are maintained in the Code ofFederal Regulations (CFR) atTitle 40, Part 52, entitled "Approval andPromulgation of Implementation Plans." The actual state regulations which are approved are not reproduced in their entirety in the CFR outright but are "incorporated by reference," which means that we have approved a given state regulation with

a specific effective date.
What Does FederalApproval of a State Regulation Meanto Me?

Enforcement ofthe state regulation before and after itis incorporated into the Federally-approved SIP is primarily

a state responsibility. However, after the regulation is Federally approved, we are authorized to take enforcement action against violators. Citizens are also offered legal recourse to address violations as described in section 304 of the CAA.
What IsBeing Addressed in This Document?

On May 30, 2002, we received a request from the Missouri Department of Natural Resources (MDNR)to amend the Missouri SIP. This request pertained to rule 10 C.S.R. 10-6.060, Construction Permits Required. This rule defines

sources which are required to obtain permitsto construct and establishes requirements to be met prior to 

### 54959

HeinOnline -- 67 Fed. Reg. 54959 2002