Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 114 / Wednesday, June 13, 2012 / Rules and Regulations 35285 

it will not impose substantial direct 

costs on tribal governments or preempt 

tribal law. 

The Congressional Review Act, 5 

U.S.C. section 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. section 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 August 13, 2012. 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 Parts 52 

Environmental protection, Air 

pollution control, Incorporation by 

reference, Intergovernmental relations, 

Ozone, Reporting and recordkeeping 

requirements, Volatile organic 

compounds. 

Dated: April 11, 2012. 

Lisa P. Jackson, 

Administrator. 

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 D—Arizona 

■ 2. Section 52.120 is amended by 

revising paragraph (c)(69)(i)(A) and 

adding paragraph (c)(148) to read as 

follows: 

§ 52.120 Identification of plan. 

* * * * * 

(c) * * * 

(69) * * * 

(i) * * * 

(A) Arizona Department of Weights 

and Measures. (1) Letter from Grant 

Woods, Attorney General, State of 

Arizona, to John U. Hays, Director, 

Department of Weights and Measures, 

dated August 31, 1993, and enclosed 

Form R102 (‘‘Certification of Rules and 

Order of Rule Adoption’’). 

(2) Arizona Administrative Code, 

Article 9 (‘‘Gasoline Vapor Control’’), 

Rules R4–31–901 through R4–31–910, 

adopted August 27, 1993, effective (for 

state purposes) on August 31, 1993. 

* * * * * 

(148) The following plan revision was 

submitted on September 21, 2009 by the 

Governor’s designee. 

(i) Incorporation by reference. (A) 

Arizona Department of Weights and 

Measures. (1) Arizona Revised Statutes, 

title 41 (State Government), chapter 15 

(Department of Weights and Measures), 

as amended and supplemented by the 

general and permanent laws enacted 

through the First Special Session, and 

legislation effective January 11, 2011 of 

the First Regular Session of the Fiftieth 

Legislature (2011): 

(i) Article 1 (General Provisions), 

section 41–2051 (‘‘Definitions’’), 

subsections (6) (‘‘Certification’’), (10) 

(‘‘Department’’), (11) (‘‘Diesel fuel’’), 

(12) (‘‘Director’’), and (13) (‘‘E85’’), 

amended by Laws 2008, Ch. 254, § 2; 

(ii) Article 6 (Motor Fuel), section 41– 

2121 (‘‘Definitions’’), subsection (5) 

(‘‘Gasoline’’) amended by Laws 2007, 

Ch. 292, § 11; and 

(iii) Article 7 (Gasoline Vapor 

Control), section 41–2131 

(‘‘Definitions’’), added by Laws 1992, 

Ch. 299, § 6; section 41–2132 (‘‘Stage I 

and stage II vapor recovery systems’’), 

amended by Laws 2010, Ch. 181, § 2; 

and section 41–2133 (‘‘Compliance 

schedules’’), amended by Laws 1999, 

Ch. 295, § 17. 

(2) Arizona Administrative Code, title 

20, chapter 2, article 1 (Administration 

and Procedures), section R20–2–101 

(‘‘Definitions’’), effective (for state 

purposes) on June 5, 2004. 

(3) Arizona Administrative Code, title 

20, chapter 2, article 9 (Gasoline Vapor 

Control): 

(i) Sections R20–2–901 (‘‘Material 

Incorporated by Reference’’), R20–2–902 

(‘‘Exemptions’’), R20–2–903 

(‘‘Equipment and Installation’’), R20–2– 

904 (‘‘Application Requirements and 

Process for Authority to Construct Plan 

Approval’’), R20–2–905 (‘‘Initial 

Inspection and Testing’’), R20–2–910 

(‘‘Annual Inspection and Testing’’), 

R20–2–911 (‘‘Compliance Inspections’’), 

and R20–2–912 (‘‘Enforcement’’), 

effective (for state purposes) on June 5, 

2004. 

(ii) Sections R20–2–907 

(‘‘Operation’’), R20–2–908 (‘‘Training 

and Public Education’’), and R20–2–909 

(‘‘Recordkeeping and Reporting’’), 

effective (for state purposes) on October 

8, 1998. 

[FR Doc. 2012–14148 Filed 6–12–12; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 6560–50–P 

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION 

AGENCY 

40 CFR 52 

[EPA–R09–OAR–2012–0253; FRL–9682–5] 

Approval of Air Quality Implementation 

Plan; Arizona; Attainment Plan for 

1997 8-Hour Ozone Standard 

AGENCY: U.S. Environmental Protection 

Agency (EPA). 

ACTION: Final rule. 

SUMMARY: EPA is approving a state 

implementation plan (SIP) revision 

submitted by the State of Arizona on 

June 13, 2007, to demonstrate 

attainment of the 1997 8-hour ozone 

national ambient air quality standards 

(NAAQS) in the Phoenix-Mesa 

nonattainment area by June 15, 2009. 

This action was proposed in the Federal 

Register on April 11, 2012. EPA is 

approving the submitted SIP revision 

based on our determination that it 

contains all of the SIP elements required 

for ozone nonattainment areas under 

title I, part D, subpart 1 of the Clean Air 

Act (CAA) for the 1997 8-hour ozone 

NAAQS. 

DATES: This rule is effective on July 13, 

2012. 

ADDRESSES: EPA has established docket 

number EPA–R09–OAR–2012–0253 for 

this action. Generally, documents in the 

docket for this action are available 

electronically at http:// 

www.regulations.gov or in hard copy at 

EPA Region IX, 75 Hawthorne Street, 

San Francisco, California. While all 

documents in the docket are listed at 

http://www.regulations.gov, some 

information may be publicly available 

only at the hard copy location (e.g., 

copyrighted material, large maps, multivolume reports), and some may not be 

available in either location (e.g., 

confidential business information 

(CBI)). To inspect the hard copy 

materials, please schedule an 

appointment during normal business 


erowe on DSK2VPTVN1PROD with RULES
35286 Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 114 / Wednesday, June 13, 2012 / Rules and Regulations 

hours with the contact listed in the FOR

FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Anita Lee, Air Planning Office (AIR–2), 

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, 

Region IX, (415) 972–3958, 

lee.anita@epa.gov. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

Throughout this document, ‘‘we,’’ ‘‘us’’ 

and ‘‘our’’ refer to EPA. 

Table of Contents 

I. Proposed Action 

II. Public Comments and EPA Responses 

III. EPA Action 

IV. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews 

I. Proposed Action 

On April 11, 2012 (70 FR 21690), EPA 

proposed to approve the ‘‘Eight-Hour 

Ozone Plan for the Maricopa 

Nonattainment Area’’ (2007 Ozone Plan) 

submitted as a SIP revision by the 

Arizona Department of Environmental 

Quality (ADEQ) on June 13, 2007. We 

proposed to approve the 2007 Ozone 

Plan based on our determination that it 

contains all of the plan elements 

required for ozone nonattainment areas 

under title I, part D, subpart 1 of the 

CAA, including the demonstration of 

reasonably available control measures 

(RACM), reasonable further progress 

(RFP), emission inventories, 

transportation conformity motor vehicle 

emission budgets for 2008, and 

contingency measures to be 

implemented if the Phoenix-Mesa 

nonattainment area fails to attain by 

June 15, 2009. 

II. Public Comments and EPA 

Responses 

EPA provided a 30-day public 

comment period on our proposed 

action. This comment period ended on 

May 11, 2012. We received no 

comments. 

III. EPA Action 

Under CAA section 110(k)(3), EPA is 

fully approving the 2007 Ozone Plan for 

Phoenix-Mesa based on our 

determination that it meets all 

applicable requirements under subpart 1 

of part D, title I of the CAA for the 1997 

8-hour ozone NAAQS, as follows: 

1. The 2002 base year emission 

inventory as meeting the requirements 

of CAA section 172(c)(3) and 40 CFR 

51.915; 

2. The reasonably available control 

measures demonstration as meeting the 

requirements of CAA section 172(c)(1) 

and 40 CFR 51.912(d); 

3. The reasonable further progress 

demonstration as meeting the 

requirements of CAA section 172(c)(2) 

and 40 CFR 51.910; 

4. The attainment demonstration as 

meeting the requirements of CAA 

section 172(c)(1) and 40 CFR 51.908; 

5. The contingency measures for 

failure to make RFP or to attain as 

meeting the requirements of CAA 

section 172(c)(9); and 

6. The motor vehicle emission 

budgets for the attainment year of 2008, 

which are derived from the attainment 

demonstration, as meeting the 

requirements of CAA section 176(c) and 

40 CFR part 93, subpart A. 

IV. 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 August 13, 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, Ozone, Nitrogen dioxide, 

Volatile organic compounds. 

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

Dated: May 25, 2012. 

Jared Blumenfeld, 

Regional Administrator, EPA Region IX. 

Part 52, Chapter I, Title 40 of the Code 

of Federal Regulations is amended as 

follows: 


erowe on DSK2VPTVN1PROD with RULES
Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 114 / Wednesday, June 13, 2012 / Rules and Regulations 35287 

1The word ‘‘today’’ in the text refers to the date 

of the comment letter, February 24, 2012. 

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 amended by 

adding paragraph (c)(149) to read as 

follows: 

§ 52.120 Identification of plan. 

* * * * * 

(c) * * * 

(149) The following plan was 

submitted on June 13, 2007 by the 

Governor’s designee. 

(i) [Reserved] 

(ii) Additional Materials. (A) Arizona 

Department of Environmental Quality. 

(1) Letter dated June 13, 2007 from 

Stephen A. Owens, Director, ADEQ, to 

Wayne Nastri, Regional Administrator, 

United States Environmental Protection 

Agency, Region IX. 

(2) Eight-Hour Ozone Plan for the 

Maricopa Nonattainment Area, dated 

June 2007, including Appendices, 

Volumes One and Two. 

[FR Doc. 2012–13817 Filed 6–12–12; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 6560–50–P 

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION 

AGENCY 

40 CFR Part 52 

[EPA–R03–OAR–2011–0091, EPA–R03– 

OAR–2011–0584; FRL–9685–2] 

Approval and Promulgation of Air 

Quality Implementation Plans; Virginia; 

Regional Haze State Implementation 

Plan 

AGENCY: Environmental Protection 

Agency (EPA). 

ACTION: Final rule. 

SUMMARY: EPA is finalizing the limited 

approval of the Commonwealth of 

Virginia’s Regional Haze State 

Implementation Plan (SIP) revision. 

EPA is taking this action because 

Virginia’s SIP revision, as a whole, 

strengthens the Virginia SIP. This action 

is being taken in accordance with the 

requirements of the Clean Air Act (CAA) 

and EPA’s rules for states to prevent and 

remedy future and existing 

anthropogenic impairment of visibility 

in mandatory Class I areas through a 

regional haze program. EPA is also 

approving this revision as meeting the 

infrastructure requirements relating to 

visibility protection for the 1997 8-hour 

ozone National Ambient Air Quality 

Standard (NAAQS) and the 1997 and 

2006 fine particulate matter (PM2.5) 

NAAQS. 

DATES: This final rule is effective on July 

13, 2012. 

ADDRESSES: EPA has established a 

docket for this action under Docket ID 

Number EPA–R03–OAR–2011–0091, 

EPA–R03–OAR–2011–0584. All 

documents in the docket are listed in 

the www.regulations.gov Web site. 

Although listed in the electronic docket, 

some information is not publicly 

available, i.e., confidential business 

information (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 through 

www.regulations.gov or in hard copy for 

public inspection during normal 

business hours at the Air Protection 

Division, U.S. Environmental Protection 

Agency, Region III, 1650 Arch Street, 

Philadelphia, Pennsylvania 19103. 

Copies of the State submittal are 

available at the Virginia Department of 

Environmental Quality, 629 East Main 

Street, Richmond, Virginia 23219. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Melissa Linden, (215) 814–2096, or by 

email at linden.melissa@epa.gov. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

I. Background 

Throughout this document, whenever 

‘‘we,’’ ‘‘us,’’ or ‘‘our’’ is used, we mean 

EPA. On January 25, 2012 (77 FR 3691), 

EPA published a notice of proposed 

rulemaking (NPR) for the 

Commonwealth of Virginia. The NPR 

proposed limited approval and limited 

disapproval of Virginia’s Regional Haze 

SIP. The formal SIP revisions were 

submitted by the Virginia Department of 

Environmental Quality (VADEQ) on July 

17, 2008, March 6, 2009, January 14, 

2010, October 4, 2010, November 19, 

2010, and May 6, 2011. This revision 

also meets the requirements of CAA 

sections 110(a)(2)(D)(i)(II) and 110 

(a)(2)(J), relating to visibility protection 

for the 1997 8-hour ozone NAAQS and 

the 1997 and 2006 PM2.5 NAAQS. 

II. Summary of SIP Revision 

The SIP revision includes a long term 

strategy with enforceable measures 

ensuring reasonable progress towards 

meeting the reasonable progress goals 

for the first planning period through 

2018. Virginia’s Regional Haze Plan 

contains the emission reductions 

needed to achieve Virginia’s share of 

emission reductions and sets the 

reasonable progress goals for other states 

to achieve reasonable progress at the 

two Class I Areas within Virginia, 

Shenandoah National Park and James 

River Face Wilderness Area. The 

specific requirements of the CAA and 

EPA’s Regional Haze Rule (RH rule) (64 

FR 35732, July 1, 1999) and the 

rationale for EPA’s proposed action are 

explained in the NPR and will not be 

restated here. EPA received numerous 

adverse comments on the January 25, 

2012 NPR. A summary of the comments 

submitted and EPA’s responses are 

provided in section III of this document. 

III. Summary of Public Comments and 

EPA Responses 

Comment: The commenter argued that 

EPA’s proposed limited approval/ 

limited disapproval action based on 

Virginia’s reliance on clean air interstate 

rule (CAIR) is unwarranted and should 

be withdrawn. Instead, the commenter 

states that EPA should grant full and 

unconditional approval of the Virginia 

Regional Haze SIP. The commenter 

disagreed that CAIR renders the State’s 

SIP unable to satisfy all of the CAA’s 

regional haze SIP requirements. The 

commenter noted that Virginia’s SIP 

was submitted prior to the remand of 

CAIR and relied on the requirements 

under 40 CFR 51.308(e)(4), which 

remain in effect at this time. The 

commenter argued that as a result, the 

Virginia SIP is entirely consistent with 

the applicable law. The commenter also 

argued that if the D.C. Circuit 

invalidates the cross state air pollution 

rule (CSAPR), EPA’s limited 

disapprovals of regional haze SIPs due 

to their reliance on the CAIR equals best 

available retrofit technology (BART) 

provision of the regional haze rules will 

have created unnecessary complications 

for states that should properly be able to 

continue their reliance on CAIR. The 

commenter argued that EPA does not 

have a basis to propose or promulgate 

disapproval or limited disapproval of a 

Regional Haze SIP due to its reliance on 

CAIR and on 40 CFR 51.308(e)(4) 

because the SIP is fully compliant with 

the relevant regulations as they exist 

today.1 The commenter believes that the 

only proper course of action for EPA is 

to promptly promulgate a full and 

unconditional approval of the Virginia 

SIP. 

Response: EPA disagrees with the 

commenter and has determined the 

limited approval/limited disapproval is 

appropriate for this SIP. The 

requirements for a BART alternative 

program, specific to trading programs in 

40 CFR 51.308(e)(2) state that ‘‘such an 


erowe on DSK2VPTVN1PROD with RULES