Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 158 / Tuesday, August 17, 2010 / Rules and Regulations 50711 

Incorporation by reference, 

Intergovernmental relations, Nitrogen 

dioxide, Ozone, Particulate matter, 

Reporting and recordkeeping 

requirements, Sulfur oxides, Volatile 

organic compounds. 

Dated: August 5, 2010. 

Bharat Mathur, 

Acting Regional Administrator, Region 5. 

■ 40 CFR part 52 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 P—Indiana 

■ 2. Part 52 is amended by adding a new 

§ 52.799 to read as follows: 

§ 52.799 Transportation conformity. 

On June 4, 2010, Indiana submitted 

the Transportation Conformity 

Consultation SIP consisting of 

Metropolitan Planning Organization 

resolutions and Memorandums of 

Understanding to address interagency 

consultation and enforceability of 

certain transportation related control 

measures and mitigation measures. EPA 

is approving the Transportation 

Conformity SIP from Indiana. 

[FR Doc. 2010–20180 Filed 8–16–10; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 6560–50–P 

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION 

AGENCY 

40 CFR Part 52 

[EPA–R05–OAR–2005–OH–0003; FRL– 

9187–4] 

Approval and Promulgation of Air 

Quality Implementation Plans; Ohio; 

Final Approval and Promulgation of 

State Implementation Plans; Carbon 

Monoxide and Volatile Organic 

Compounds 

AGENCY: Environmental Protection 

Agency (EPA). 

ACTION: Final rule. 

SUMMARY: Under section 110(k)(3) of the 

Clean Air Act (CAA), EPA is 

disapproving an Ohio regulation 

revision pertaining to volatile organic 

compound (VOC) limits for high 

performance architectural coatings 

contained in Ohio Administrative Code 

(OAC) 3745–21–09(U)(1)(h). Under 

section 110(k)(4) of the CAA, we are 

also conditionally approving a revision 

of paragraph (BBB)(1) of OAC 3745–21– 

09, based on a State commitment to 

provide for enforceability of a pertinent 

limit no later than one year from the 

date of EPA’s conditional approval. 

DATES: This final rule is effective on 

September 16, 2010. 

ADDRESSES: EPA has established a 

docket for this action under Docket ID 

No. EPA–R05–OAR–2005–OH–0003. All 

documents in the docket are listed on 

the www.regulations.gov Web site. 

Although listed in the index, 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 at 

the Environmental Protection Agency, 

Region 5, Air and Radiation Division, 77 

West Jackson Boulevard, Chicago, 

Illinois 60604. This facility is open from 

8:30 a.m. to 4:30 p.m., Monday through 

Friday, excluding Federal holidays. We 

recommend that you telephone Anthony 

Maietta, Environmental Protection 

Specialist, at (312) 353–8777 before 

visiting the Region 5 office. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Anthony Maietta, Environmental 

Protection Specialist, Control Strategies 

Section, Air Programs Branch (AR–18J), 

Environmental Protection Agency, 

Region 5, 77 West Jackson Boulevard, 

Chicago, Illinois 60604, (312) 353–8777, 

maietta.anthony@epa.gov. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

Throughout this document whenever 

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

EPA. This supplementary information 

section is arranged as follows: 

I. What Were EPA’s Proposed Actions? 

II. Public Comments and EPA Responses 

III. What Actions is EPA Taking? 

IV. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews 

I. What Were EPA’s Proposed Actions? 

On January 22, 2010 (75 FR 3668), 

EPA proposed a variety of actions 

regarding revisions to OAC 3745–21, 

from submittals dated October 9, 2000, 

February 6, 2001, August 3, 2001, and 

June 24, 2003. We proposed to (1) 

approve into the State Implementation 

Plan (SIP) certain revisions in OAC 

3745–21 which have been adopted by 

the State; (2) disapprove a revision 

pertaining to high performance 

architectural coatings; (3) conditionally 

approve a revision of paragraph 

(BBB)(1) of OAC 3745–21–09, if the 

State gives EPA a letter that commits to 

provide for enforceability of the 1 ton 

per year limit no later than one year 

from the expected date of EPA’s 

conditional approval; (4) take no action 

on certain regulation revisions, and, (5) 

provide notice that EPA and Ohio have 

created a mechanism to incorporate into 

the Ohio SIP permits to facilities 

operating under previously issued 

alternate VOC limit and emission 

control exemptions for miscellaneous 

metal coating operations under OAC 

3745–21–09(U)(2)(f). For administrative 

convenience, in a separate rulemaking 

published June 21, 2010, at 75 FR 

34939, we approved certain submitted 

regulation revisions, took no action on 

others, and recognized various emission 

control exemptions that have been 

granted for miscellaneous metal coating 

operations under OAC 3745–21– 

09(U)(2)(f). Today’s action makes final 

our disapproval and conditional 

approval of portions of OAC rule 3745– 

21–09. You can learn more information 

about the rule revisions submitted and 

our evaluation of them in our proposed 

action. 

II. Public Comments and EPA 

Responses 

EPA’s proposed action provided a 

30-day public comment period. We did 

not receive any comments on the 

proposed action. On March 1, and July 

2, 2010, Ohio EPA committed to remedy 

deficiencies in OAC 3745–21– 

09(BBB)(1). 

III. What Actions is EPA Taking? 

EPA is disapproving the coating VOC 

content limit for high performance 

architectural aluminum coatings 

contained in paragraph (U)(1)(h) of OAC 

3745–21–09 because the State has not 

demonstrated that the relaxation of the 

VOC content limit for high performance 

architectural aluminum coatings would 

not interfere with attainment of the 

ozone standard and other requirements. 

EPA is conditionally approving a 

revision to OAC 3745–21–09(BBB)(1) 

provided that the State is able to, within 

one year of our final rulemaking, further 

revise the paragraph to include test 

procedures and recordkeeping 

requirements compatible with the 

paragraph’s revised emission limit. On 

March 1, and July 2, 2010, Ohio EPA 

committed to remedy the deficiencies in 

this revision. If the State fails to correct 

this rule and confirm this correction 

within the allowed one year period, this 

conditional approval will revert to 

disapproval. 


jdjones on DSK8KYBLC1PROD with RULES
50712 Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 158 / Tuesday, August 17, 2010 / Rules and Regulations 

IV. Statutory and Executive Order 

Reviews 

Executive Order 12866: Regulatory 

Planning and Review 

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. 

Executive Order 13211: Actions That 

Significantly Affect Energy Supply, 

Distribution, or Use 

Because it is not a ‘‘significant 

regulatory action’’ under Executive 

Order 12866 or a ‘‘significant energy 

action,’’ 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). 

Regulatory Flexibility Act 

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.). 

Unfunded Mandates Reform Act 

Because this rule approves preexisting 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). 

Executive Order 13175: Consultation 

and Coordination With Indian Tribal 

Governments 

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 

(59 FR 22951, November 9, 2000). 

Executive Order 13132: Federalism 

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 

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 (CAA). 

Executive Order 13045: Protection of 

Children From Environmental Health 

and Safety Risks 

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 approves a 

state rule implementing a Federal 

Standard. 

National Technology Transfer 

Advancement Act 

In reviewing state submissions, EPA’s 

role is to approve state choices, 

provided that they meet the criteria of 

the CAA. 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 state submission for 

failure to use VCS. It would thus be 

inconsistent with applicable law for 

EPA, when it reviews a state 

submission, to use VCS in place of a 

state submission that otherwise satisfies 

the provisions of the CAA. 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. 

Paperwork Reduction Act 

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.). 

Congressional Review Act 

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. 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 October 18, 2010. 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, Carbon monoxide, 

Incorporation by reference, 

Intergovernmental relations, Volatile 

organic compounds. 

Dated: August 3, 2010. 

Bharat Mathur, 

Acting Regional Administrator, Region 5. 

■ 40 CFR part 52 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 KK—Ohio 

■ 2. Section 52.1885 is amended by 

adding paragraph (kk) to read as 

follows: 

§ 52.1885 Control strategy: Ozone. 

* * * * * 

(kk) Disapproval. EPA is disapproving 

the coating VOC content limit for high 

performance architectural aluminum 

coatings contained in paragraph 

(U)(1)(h) of chapter 3745–21–09 of the 

Ohio Administrative Code. 

■ 3. Section 52.1919 is amended by 

adding paragraph (b) to read as follows: 

§ 52.1919 Identification of plan— 

conditional approval. 

* * * * * 

(b) On October 9, 2000, the Ohio 

Environmental Protection Agency 

submitted a revision to Ohio 

Administrative Code (OAC) 3745–21– 

09(BBB). The revision removed a 

requirement that for the agerite resin D 

process, the VOC emissions from the 

vapor recovery system vents and 

neutralization and distillation system 

vents (except wash kettle or still feed 

condenser vents, stills vacuum jet 

tailpipe vents, and process emergency 

safety relief devices) be vented to an 

emissions control device that is 

designed and operated to achieve an 


jdjones on DSK8KYBLC1PROD with RULES
Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 158 / Tuesday, August 17, 2010 / Rules and Regulations 50713 

emissions control efficiency of at least 

90 percent, by weight. In place of this 

deleted emissions control efficiency 

requirement, the revised paragraph now 

specifies a total annual VOC emissions 

limit of 1.0 ton from the recovery system 

and neutralization and distillation 

system vents. The revision lacked test 

procedures and record keeping 

requirements compatible with the 

revised emission limit. On March 1, 

2010, Ohio submitted a commitment to 

revise OAC 3745–21–09(BBB) to include 

the necessary test procedures and record 

keeping requirements by September 16, 

2011. When EPA determines the state 

has met its commitment, OAC 3745–21– 

09(BBB) will be incorporated by 

reference into the SIP. 

[FR Doc. 2010–19827 Filed 8–16–10; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 6560–50–P 

DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND 

SECURITY 

Federal Emergency Management 

Agency 

44 CFR Part 204 

[Docket ID FEMA–2010–0036] 

RIN–1660–AA72 

Procedural Changes to the Fire 

Management Assistance Declaration 

Process 

AGENCY: Federal Emergency 

Management Agency, DHS. 

ACTION: Final rule. 

SUMMARY: By this final rule, the Federal 

Emergency Management Agency 

(FEMA) is updating its Fire 

Management Assistance Grant Program 

regulations to reflect a change in the 

internal delegation of authority for fire 

management assistance declarations, 

and resulting internal procedural 

changes that are impacted by the change 

in authority. FEMA is also making 

nomenclature changes to update names 

and titles to reflect recent changes to 

FEMA’s organizational structure. 

DATES: This final rule is effective August 

17, 2010. 

ADDRESSES: A copy of this rule is 

available electronically on the Federal 

eRulemaking Portal at 

www.regulations.gov. (In the Keyword 

Search or ID box, type FEMA–2010– 

0036.) 

The rule is also available for 

inspection at the Office of Chief 

Counsel, DHS/FEMA, 500 C Street, SW., 

Room 835, Washington, DC 20472– 

3100. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

James A. Walke, Director, Public 

Assistance Division, Recovery 

Directorate, DHS/FEMA, 500 C Street, 

SW., Washington, DC 20472–3300. 

Phone: 202–646–2751. E-mail: 

James.Walke@dhs.gov. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

I. Background 

The Fire Management Assistance 

Grant (FMAG) Program assists State, 

local, and Tribal governments with the 

mitigation, management, and control of 

fires on publicly or privately owned 

forests or grasslands, which threaten 

such destruction as would constitute a 

major disaster. The FMAG declaration 

process may be initiated when a fire is 

burning uncontrolled and threatens 

such destruction as would constitute a 

major disaster. The FMAG declaration 

process is initiated by a State submitting 

a request for assistance to the Regional 

Administrator. The request addresses 

the threat to lives and improved 

property, the availability of State and 

local firefighting resources, high fire 

danger conditions, and the potential for 

major economic impact. Those criteria 

are supported with documentation that 

contains factual data and professional 

estimates. The Regional Administrator 

then coordinates with the Principal 

Advisor and forwards the request to the 

Assistant Administrator for the Disaster 

Assistance Directorate. The Assistant 

Administrator for the Disaster 

Assistance Directorate then makes a 

determination whether the fire or fire 

complex threatens such destruction as 

would constitute a major disaster. The 

entire process is accomplished on an 

expedited basis. 

II. Discussion of the Rule 

In December 2009, FEMA underwent 

a reorganization to streamline and 

improve FEMA’s programs and, 

consistent with the reorganization, is 

now revising the delegation of authority 

under the FMAG program regarding 

determinations that a fire or fire 

complex threatens such destruction as 

would constitute a major disaster. This 

final rule therefore updates title 44, part 

204 of the Code of Federal Regulations 

(CFR) to reflect those organizational and 

procedural changes. This final rule does 

not change the substantive eligibility 

requirements, contained in FEMA’s 

existing regulations. 

On March 3, 2004, the Secretary for 

Homeland Security delegated the 

authority to make FMAG determinations 

to the Administrator (then called the 

Under Secretary for Emergency 

Preparedness and Response) in 

Homeland Security Delegation Number 

9001. This delegation to the 

Administrator explicitly authorizes 

redelegation of this authority. This 

procedural rule removes the 

redelegation of authority to the 

Assistant Administrator for the Disaster 

Assistance Directorate (now the 

Assistant Administrator for Recovery 

per the 2009 internal reorganization) 

and reverts the authority to issue FMAG 

declarations and decide appeals back to 

the Administrator. 

Although the Administrator is 

rescinding his redelegation of this 

authority to the Assistant Administrator 

for the Disaster Assistance Directorate, 

at any time the Administrator may 

redelegate this authority at his 

discretion, in writing. Such delegations 

are not required to be made through 

regulation, or published in the Federal 

Register. Pursuant to the Federal 

Register Act (44 U.S.C. 1505), the only 

documents that are required to be 

published in the Federal Register are 

Presidential proclamations, Executive 

Orders, and those documents that either 

the President has determined to have 

general applicability and legal effect or 

are required to be published in the 

Federal Register by Act of Congress. 

The delegation of the FEMA 

Administrator’s authority to make 

determinations regarding the FMAG 

program does not trigger those criteria. 

States that seek a declaration under 

the FMAG program will continue to 

submit their requests for declarations to 

FEMA through the Regional 

Administrator. The Regional 

Administrator will forward the request 

to the Administrator for a determination 

on the declaration. This change in 

redelegation will affect the procedural 

requirements associated with applying 

for fire management assistance 

declarations by changing who reviews 

requests for FMAG declarations. This 

rule only changes the internal 

processing procedures that occur after a 

State submits a request. The application 

requirements remain the same, as do the 

requirements for eligibility. 

III. Regulatory Information 

A. Administrative Procedure Act 

FEMA did not publish a notice of 

proposed rulemaking (NPRM) for this 

regulation. FEMA finds that this rule is 

exempt from the Administrative 

Procedure Act’s (5 U.S.C. 553(b)) notice 

and comment rulemaking requirements 

because it is purely procedural in 

nature. See 5 U.S.C. 553(b)(3)(A). This 

rule updates FEMA’s regulations to 

reflect a change in the internal 

delegation of authority for fire 


jdjones on DSK8KYBLC1PROD with RULES