38246 Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 124 / Wednesday, June 27, 2012 / Proposed Rules 

1Under EPA’s ‘‘parallel processing’’ procedure, 

EPA proposes rulemaking action concurrently with 

the State’s proposed rulemaking. If the State’s 

104–113, 12(d) (15 U.S.C. 272 note) 

directs EPA to use voluntary consensus 

standards in its regulatory activities 

unless to do so would be inconsistent 

with applicable law or otherwise 

impractical. Voluntary consensus 

standards are technical standards (e.g., 

materials specifications, test methods, 

sampling procedures, and business 

practices) that are developed or adopted 

by voluntary consensus standards 

bodies. NTTAA directs EPA to provide 

Congress, through OMB, explanations 

when the Agency decides not to use 

available and applicable voluntary 

consensus standards. 

The EPA believes that this action is 

not subject to requirements of Section 

12(d) of NTTAA because application of 

those requirements would be 

inconsistent with the Clean Air Act. 

J. Executive Order 12898: Federal 

Actions To Address Environmental 

Justice in Minority Populations and 

Low-Income Population 

Executive Order (EO) 12898 (59 FR 

7629 (Feb. 16, 1994)) establishes federal 

executive policy on environmental 

justice. Its main provision directs 

federal agencies, to the greatest extent 

practicable and permitted by law, to 

make environmental justice part of their 

mission by identifying and addressing, 

as appropriate, disproportionately high 

and adverse human health or 

environmental effects of their programs, 

policies, and activities on minority 

populations and low-income 

populations in the United States. 

EPA lacks the discretionary authority 

to address environmental justice in this 

rulemaking. 

List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52 

Air pollution control, Environmental 

protection, Intergovernmental relations, 

Nitrogen dioxide, Ozone, Reporting and 

recordkeeping requirements, Volatile 

organic compounds. 

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

Dated: June 15, 2012. 

Jared Blumenfeld, 

Regional Administrator, Region IX. 

[FR Doc. 2012–15732 Filed 6–26–12; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 6560–50–P 

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION 

AGENCY 

40 CFR Part 52 

[EPA–R09–OAR–2012–0470; FRL–9692–4] 

Revisions to the Arizona State 

Implementation Plan, Arizona 

Department of Environmental Quality, 

Maricopa County Air Quality 

Department, and Pima County 

Department of Environmental Quality 

AGENCY: Environmental Protection 

Agency (EPA). 

ACTION: Proposed rule. 

SUMMARY: EPA is proposing to approve 

revisions to the Arizona Department of 

Environmental Quality (ADEQ), 

Maricopa County Air Quality 

Department (MCAQD), and Pima 

County Department of Environmental 

Quality (PCDEQ) portions of the 

Arizona State Implementation Plan (SIP) 

that EPA expects to be submitted by 

ADEQ. These revisions concern 

regulations that require monitoring and 

reporting of volatile organic compounds 

(VOC), oxides of nitrogen (NOX), and 

particulate matter (PM) emissions from 

stationary sources. This proposed 

approval is based upon proposed 

regulations submitted by ADEQ and an 

accompanying request that EPA proceed 

with SIP review while the State and 

local agencies complete their public 

review and agency adoption processes. 

EPA will not take final action on these 

regulations until ADEQ submits the 

final adopted versions to EPA as a 

revision to the Arizona SIP. Final EPA 

approval of the regulations and 

incorporation of them into the Arizona 

SIP would make them federally 

enforceable under the Clean Air Act 

(CAA). We are taking comments on this 

proposal and plan to follow with a final 

action. 

DATES: Any comments must arrive by 

July 27, 2012. 

ADDRESSES: Submit comments, 

identified by docket number EPA–R09– 

OAR–2012–0470, by one of the 

following methods: 

1. Federal eRulemaking Portal: 

www.regulations.gov. Follow the on-line 

instructions. 

2. Email: steckel.andrew@epa.gov. 

3. Mail or deliver: Andrew Steckel 

(Air-4), U.S. Environmental Protection 

Agency Region IX, 75 Hawthorne Street, 

San Francisco, CA 94105–3901. 

Instructions: All comments 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 

Confidential Business Information (CBI) 

or other information whose disclosure is 

restricted by statute. Information that 

you consider CBI or otherwise protected 

should be clearly identified as such and 

should not be submitted through 

www.regulations.gov or email. 

www.regulations.gov is an ‘‘anonymous 

access’’ system, and EPA will not know 

your identity or contact information 

unless you provide it in the body of 

your comment. If you send email 

directly to EPA, your email address will 

be automatically captured and included 

as part of the public comment. 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. 

Docket: Generally, documents in the 

docket for this action are available 

electronically at www.regulations.gov 

and in hard copy at EPA Region IX, 75 

Hawthorne Street, San Francisco, 

California. While all documents in the 

docket are listed at 

www.regulations.gov, some information 

may be publicly available only at the 

hard copy location (e.g., copyrighted 

material, large maps), and some may not 

be publicly available in either location 

(e.g., CBI). To inspect the hard copy 

materials, please schedule an 

appointment during normal business 

hours with the contact listed in the FOR

FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Rynda Kay, EPA Region IX, (415) 947– 

4118, Kay.Rynda@epa.gov. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

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

and ‘‘our’’ refer to EPA. 

Table of Contents 

I. The State’s Submittal 

A. What rules did the State submit? 

B. Are there other versions of these rules? 

C. What is the purpose of the submitted 

rules? 

II. EPA’s Evaluation and Proposed Action 

A. How is EPA evaluating the rules? 

B. Do the rules meet the evaluation 

criteria? 

C. Public Comment and Proposed Action 

III. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews 

I. The State’s Submittal 

A. What rules did the State submit? 

By letter dated June 1, 2012, ADEQ 

submitted to EPA on behalf of ADEQ, 

MCAQD, and PCDEQ, unofficial copies 

of several rules and statutes, with a 

request for approval of these provisions 

into the SIP by parallel processing.1 See 


emcdonald on DSK67QTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 124 / Wednesday, June 27, 2012 / Proposed Rules 38247 

proposed rule is changed, EPA will evaluate that 

subsequent change and may publish another notice 

of proposed rulemaking. If no significant change is 

made, EPA will publish a final rulemaking on the 

rule after responding to any submitted comments. 

Final rulemaking action by EPA will occur only 

after the rule has been fully adopted by Arizona and 

submitted formally to EPA for incorporation into 

the SIP. See 40 CFR part 51, appendix V. 

June 1, 2012 letter to Jared Blumenfeld, 

Regional Administrator, EPA Region 9, 

from Eric Massey, Director, Air Quality, 

ADEQ. Table 1 lists the five rules 

addressed by this proposal. 

TABLE 1—RULES SUBMITTED BY ARIZONA FOR PARALLEL PROCESSING

Local agency Rule No. Rule title 

ADEQ ................................................................. 18–2–313 ........................................................... Existing Source Emission Monitoring. 

ADEQ ................................................................. 18–2–327 ........................................................... Annual Emissions Inventory Questionnaire. 

MCAQD .............................................................. 100, Section 500 ............................................... Monitoring and Records. 

PCDEQ .............................................................. 17.12.040 ........................................................... Reporting Requirements. 

PCDEQ .............................................................. 17.24.040 ........................................................... Reporting for Compliance Evaluations. 

The above rules have been adopted 

locally but have not been adopted 

specifically for purposes of approval 

into the federally enforceable SIP under 

CAA section 110. ADEQ has requested 

that MCAQD and PCDEQ adopt these 

regulations following public process for 

purposes of SIP approval and thereafter 

submit the rules to ADEQ for transmittal 

to EPA as SIP revisions. Concurrent 

with these county processes, ADEQ 

anticipates that it will schedule a public 

hearing in July 2012 on its proposal to 

submit these rules to EPA for 

incorporation into the SIP, and intends 

to submit the final SIP revision to EPA 

by late August 2012. We note that 

because the state and county rulemaking 

processes here are solely for purposes of 

adopting these regulations as SIP 

revisions under CAA section 110 and 

not for purposes of revising any of the 

regulations, we do not expect any 

substantive changes between the 

proposed and final submittals. Final 

approval of these rules, however, is 

contingent upon EPA’s receipt of fully 

adopted rules that satisfy state and local 

procedural requirements for SIP 

submittals. 

B. Are there other versions of these 

rules? 

There are no SIP-approved versions of 

ADEQ Rule 18–2–327 or PCDEQ Rule 

17.24.040. We approved an earlier 

version of ADEQ Rule 9–3–313 into the 

SIP on April 23, 1982 (47 FR 17483). 

The submitted rule ADEQ Rule 18–2– 

313 will replace the SIP rule ADEQ Rule 

9–3–313. We approved an earlier 

version of MCAQD Rule 100, Section 

504 into the SIP on February 10, 2005 

(70 FR 7038). The submitted rule 

MCAQD Rule 100, Section 500 will 

replace SIP rule MCAQD Rule 100, 

Section 504. We approved an earlier 

version of PCDEQ Rule 622 into the SIP 

on April 16, 1982 (47 FR 16328). The 

submitted rule PCDEQ Rule 17.12.040 

will replace the SIP rule PCDEQ Rule 

622. 

C. What is the purpose of the submitted 

rules? 

VOCs help produce ground-level 

ozone and smog, which harm human 

health and the environment. NOX helps 

produce ground-level ozone, smog and 

particulate matter, which harm human 

health and the environment. PM 

contributes to effects that are harmful to 

human health and the environment, 

including premature mortality, 

aggravation of respiratory and 

cardiovascular disease, decreased lung 

function, visibility impairment, and 

damage to vegetation and ecosystems. 

Section 110(a) of the CAA requires 

States to submit regulations that control 

VOC, NOX, and PM emissions. 

ADEQ Rule 18–2–313 establishes 

requirements for continuous emissions 

monitoring systems at certain fossil-fuel 

fired steam generators, sulfuric acid 

plants, nitric acid plants, and fluid bed 

catalytic cracking unit catalysts 

regenerators at petroleum refineries, if 

subject to an emission standard. ADEQ 

Rule 18–2–327 requires that every 

source subject to a permit complete and 

submit an annual emissions inventory 

questionnaire. PCDEQ Rule 17.12.040 

establishes reporting requirements for 

emissions that exceed levels allowed 

under applicable regulations. PCDEQ 

Rule 17.24.040 requires a source to 

provide to the Control Officer all 

records and documentation needed to 

determine compliance or 

noncompliance with a regulation. The 

purpose of revising MCAQD Rule 100, 

Section 500 was to add recordkeeping 

and add/revise emission reporting 

requirements. EPA’s technical support 

documents (TSDs) have more 

information about these rules. 

II. EPA’s Evaluation and Proposed 

Action 

A. How is EPA evaluating the rules? 

Generally, SIP rules must be 

enforceable (see section 110(a) of the 

Act) and must not relax existing 

requirements (see sections 110(l) and 

193). Guidance and policy documents 

that we use to evaluate enforceability 

requirements consistently include the 

following: 

1. ‘‘Issues Relating to VOC Regulation 

Cutpoints, Deficiencies, and 

Deviations,’’ EPA, May 25, 1988 

(the Bluebook). 

2. ‘‘Guidance Document for Correcting 

Common VOC & Other Rule 

Deficiencies,’’ EPA Region 9, 

August 21, 2001 (the Little 

Bluebook). 

3. ‘‘Requirements for Preparation, 

Adoption, and Submittal of 

Implementation Plans’’, U.S. EPA, 

40 CFR part 51. 

4. State Implementation Plans; General 

Preamble for the Implementation of 

Title I of the Clean Air Act 

Amendments of 1990, 57 FR 13498, 

(April 16, 1992) (‘‘General 

Preamble’’). 

B. Do the rules meet the evaluation 

criteria? 

We believe these rules are consistent 

with the applicable requirements and 

guidance regarding enforceability and 

SIP relaxations. The TSDs have more 

information on our evaluation. 

C. Public Comment and Proposed 

Action 

Because EPA believes the submitted 

rules fulfill all applicable CAA 

requirements, we are proposing to fully 

approve them under section 110(k)(3) of 

the Act. We will accept comments from 

the public on this proposal for the next 

30 days. Unless we receive convincing 

new information during the comment 

period or ADEQ does not submit the 


emcdonald on DSK67QTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
38248 Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 124 / Wednesday, June 27, 2012 / Proposed Rules 

adopted SIP revisions as expected, we 

intend to publish a final approval action 

that will incorporate these rules into the 

federally enforceable 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 proposed action 

merely proposes to approve State law as 

meeting Federal requirements and does 

not impose additional requirements 

beyond those imposed by State law. For 

that reason, this proposed 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 proposed action 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. 

List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52 

Environmental protection, Air 

pollution control, Intergovernmental 

relations, Nitrogen dioxide, Ozone, 

Particulate matter, Reporting and 

recordkeeping requirements, Volatile 

organic compounds. 

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

Dated: June 15, 2012. 

Jared Blumenfeld, 

Regional Administrator, Region IX. 

[FR Doc. 2012–15731 Filed 6–26–12; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 6560–50–P 

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION 

Federal Railroad Administration 

49 CFR Part 239 

[Docket No. FRA–2011–0062, Notice No. 1; 

2130–AC33] 

Passenger Train Emergency 

Preparedness 

AGENCY: Federal Railroad 

Administration (FRA), Department of 

Transportation (DOT). 

ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking 

(NPRM). 

SUMMARY: FRA is proposing to revise its 

regulations for passenger train 

emergency preparedness. These 

proposed revisions would: ensure that 

railroad personnel who communicate 

and coordinate with first responders 

during emergency situations receive 

initial and periodic training and are 

subject to operational (efficiency) tests 

and inspections; clarify that railroads 

must develop procedures in their 

emergency preparedness plans (e-prep 

plans) addressing the safe evacuation of 

passengers with disabilities during 

emergency situations; limit the need for 

FRA to formally approve purely 

administrative changes to approved eprep plans; specify new operational 

(efficiency) testing and inspection 

requirements for both operating and 

non-operating employees; and remove 

as unnecessary the section on the 

preemptive effect of the regulations. 

DATES: Comments: Written comments 

must be received by August 27, 2012. 

Comments received after that date will 

be considered to the extent possible 

without incurring additional expense or 

delay. 

Hearing: FRA anticipates being able to 

resolve this rulemaking without a 

public, oral hearing. However, if FRA 

receives a specific request for a public, 

oral hearing prior to July 27, 2012, one 

will be scheduled and FRA will publish 

a supplemental notice in the Federal 

Register to inform interested parties of 

the date, time, and location of any such 

hearing. 

ADDRESSES: Comments: Comments 

related to Docket No. FRA–2011–0062, 

Notice No. 1, may be submitted by any 

of the following methods: 

• Web site: The Federal eRulemaking 

Portal, www.regulations.gov. Follow the 

Web site’s online instructions for 

submitting comments. 

• Fax: 202–493–2251. 

• Mail: Docket Management Facility, 

U.S. Department of Transportation, 1200 

New Jersey Avenue SE., Room W12– 

140, Washington, DC 20590. 

• Hand Delivery: Docket Management 

Facility, U.S. Department of 

Transportation, 1200 New Jersey 

Avenue SE., Room W12–140 on the 

Ground level of the West Building, 

between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday 

through Friday, except Federal holidays. 

Instructions: All submissions must 

include the agency name, docket name 

and docket number or Regulatory 

Identification Number (RIN) for this 

rulemaking (2130–AC33). Note that all 

comments received will be posted 

without change to http:// 

www.regulations.gov, including any 

personal information provided. Please 

see the Privacy Act heading in the 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION section of 

this document for Privacy Act 

information related to any submitted 

comments or materials. 

Docket: For access to the docket to 

read background documents or 

comments received, go to http:// 

www.regulations.gov at any time or visit 

the Docket Management Facility, U.S. 

Department of Transportation, 1200 

New Jersey Avenue SE., Room W12–140 

on the Ground level of the West 

Building, between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m., 

Monday through Friday, except Federal 

holidays. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Daniel Knote, Staff Director, Passenger 

Rail Division, U.S. Department of 

Transportation, Federal Railroad 

Administration, Office of Railroad 

Safety, Mail Stop 25, West Building 3rd 

Floor, 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE., 

Washington, DC 20590 (telephone: 202– 

493–6350); or Brian Roberts, Trial 

Attorney, U.S. Department of 

Transportation, Federal Railroad 

Administration, Office of Chief Counsel, 

Mail Stop 10, West Building 3rd Floor, 


emcdonald on DSK67QTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS