+(,121/,1(

Citation: 77 Fed. Reg. 21911 2012 

Content downloaded/printed from 

HeinOnline (http://heinonline.org)

Mon Jun 18 16:07:53 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. 77, No. 71/Thursday, April 12, 2012/Proposed Rules

exception, the proposed revisions to 25

Pa. Code 127, Subchapter B meet or

exceed Federal requirements. EPA is

proposing to grant limited approval to

the Pennsylvania SIP revision, which

was submitted on April 14, 2009. EPA

is soliciting public comments on the

issues discussed in this document.

These comments will be considered

before taking final action.

IV. Statutory and Executive Order

Reviews

Under the CAA, the Administrator is

required to approve a SIP submission

that complies with the provisions of the

CAA 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 CAA. Accordingly, this 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 CAA; and

* Does not provide EPA with the

discretionary authority to address, as

appropriate, disproportionate human

health or environmental effects, using

practicable and legally permissible

methods, under Executive Order 12898

(59 FR 7629, February 16, 1994).

In addition, this proposed action

regarding streamlining amendments to

Pennsylvania's plan approval process

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, Carbon monoxide,

Incorporation by reference,

Intergovernmental relations, Lead,

Nitrogen dioxide, Ozone, Particulate

matter, Reporting and recordkeeping

requirements, Sulfur oxides, Volatile

organic compounds.

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

Dated: March 28, 2012.

W.C. Early,

Acting Regional Administrator, Region IlL

[FR Doe. 2012-8852 Filed 4-11-12; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6560-50-P

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION

AGENCY

40 CFR Part 52

[EPA-R09-OAR-2012-0244; FRL-9657-9]

Approval and Promulgation of

Implementation Plans; State of

Arizona; Prevention of Air Pollution

Emergency Episodes

AGENCY: Environmental Protection

Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Proposed rule.

SUMMARY: EPA is proposing to approve

the State Implementation Plan (SIP)

revision submitted by the State of

Arizona to address the requirements

regarding air pollution emergency

episodes in Clean Air Act (CAA or Act)

section 110(a)(2)(G). Section

110(a)(2)(G) of the Act requires that each

SIP provide for authority comparable to

that in section 303 of the Act and

adequate contingency plans to

implement such authority. EPA is

proposing to approve Arizona's SIP

revision as meeting the authority and

contingency plans for the 1997 8-hour

ozone National Ambient Air Quality

Standards (NAAQS or standards).

DATES: Written comments must be

received on or before May 14, 2012.

ADDRESSES: Submit your comments,

identified by Docket ID Number EPAR09-OAR-2012-0244, by one of the

following methods:

1. http://www.regulations.gov: Follow

the on-line instructions for submitting

comments.

2. Email: buss.jeffrey@epa.gov.

3.Fax:415-947-3579.

4. Mail or deliver: Jeffrey Buss (AIR2), U.S. Environmental Protection

Agency, Region IX, 75 Hawthorne

Street, San Francisco, CA 94105-3901.

Deliveries are only accepted during the

Regional Office's normal hours of

operation.

Instructions: All comments will be

included in the public docket without

change and may be made available

online at http://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

http://www.regulations.gov or email.

http://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:

Jeffrey Buss, Air Planning Office (AIR2), U.S. Environmental Protection

Agency, Region IX, (415) 947-4152,

buss.jeffrey@epa.gov.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Throughout this document, the terms

"we," us," and "our" refer to EPA.

Table of Contents

I. Background

21911

HeinOnline -- 77 Fed. Reg. 21911 2012
Federal Register/Vol. 77, No. 71/Thursday, April 12, 2012/Proposed Rules

II. EPA's Evaluation of the SIP Revision

A. SIP Procedural Requirements

B. Substantive Emergency Episode Plan

Requirements

C. Sections 110(1) and 193 of the Act

II. EPA's Proposed Action

IV. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews

I. Background

On July 18, 1997, EPA promulgated

revised primary and secondary NAAQS

for ozone which set the acceptable level

of ozone in the ambient air at 0.08 parts

per million (ppm), averaged over an 8-

hour period. 62 FR 38856; 40 CFR 50.10.

This proposed action is in response to

the promulgation of these ozone

standards.

Section 110(a)(1) of the CAA requires

states to submit SIPs to address a new

or revised NAAQS within three years

after promulgation of such standards, or

within such shorter period as EPA may

prescribe. Section 110(a)(2) lists the

elements that these SIPs must address,

as applicable, including section

110(a)(2)(G) regarding authority to

address air pollution emergency

episodes and adequate contingency

plans to implement such authority

(Emergency Episode Plans). EPA last

approved an Emergency Episode Plan

requirement into the Arizona SIP on

September 28, 1982 (47 FR 42572).

On October 2, 2007, EPA issued a

guidance memorandum that provides

recommendations to states for making

submissions to meet, among other

things, the requirements of section

110(a)(2)(G) for the 1997 8-Hour ozone

standards. See Memorandum from

William T. Harnett, EPA Air Quality

Policy Division, to Air Division

Directors, Regions I-X, "Guidance on

SIP Elements Required Under Sections

110(a)(1) and (2) for the 1997 8-hour

Ozone and PM 2.

5 National Ambient Air

Quality Standards," October 2, 2007

(2007 Guidance).

This proposed action addresses only

Arizona's submittal to satisfy the

Emergency Episode Plan requirements

of CAA section 110(a)(2)(G) and does

not apply to the remaining

"infrastructure" SIP elements of CAA

section 110(a)(2) for the 1997 8-hour

ozone NAAQS. We intend to evaluate

and act upon Arizona's SIP submittal

addressing these additional

requirements of CAA section 110(a)(2)

for the 1997 8-hour ozone NAAQS in

separate actions.

II. EPA's Evaluation of the SIP Revision

A. SIP Procedural Requirements

CAA sections 110(a)(1) and (2) and

section 110(1) require that each revision

to a SIP be adopted by the state after

reasonable notice and public hearing.

EPA has promulgated specific

procedural requirements for SIP

revisions in 40 CFR part 51, subpart F.

These requirements include publication

of notices, by prominent advertisement

in the relevant geographic area, of a

public hearing on the proposed

revisions, a public comment period of at

least 30 days, and an opportunity for a

public hearing.

On August 15, 1994, the Arizona

Department of Environmental Quality

(ADEQ) submitted section 220 of

Chapter 2, Title 18 of the Arizona

Administrative Code (R18-2-220), "Air

pollution emergency episodes"

(hereafter referred to as "Arizona

Emergency Episode Plan") to EPA for

approval as part of the Arizona SIP.1

ADEQ's August 15, 1994 submittal

includes public process documentation

for the Arizona Emergency Episode

Plan, among other regulations. In

addition, the SIP revision includes

documentation of a duly noticed public

hearing held on August 9, 1994 on the

proposed version of the Arizona

Emergency Episode Plan. We find that

the process followed by ADEQ in

adopting the Arizona Emergency

Episode Plan complies with the

procedural requirements for SIP

revisions under CAA section 110 and

EPA's implementing regulations.

B. Substantive Emergency Episode Plan

Requirements

Section 110(a)(2)(G) of the CAA

requires that each SIP provide for

authority comparable to that in CAA

section 303 ("Emergency Powers") and

adequate contingency plans to

implement such authority. EPA's

implementing regulations in 40 CFR

part 51, subpart H ("Prevention of Air

Pollution Emergency Episodes"),

establish a "priority" classification

system under which each region in a

state is classified separately for each of

the following criteria pollutants, based

on ambient concentrations of the

pollutant: sulfur dioxide (SO),

particulate matter of 10 microns or less

(PM1 o), carbon monoxide (CO), nitrogen

dioxide (NO2), and ozone. Subpart H

specifies the requirements that each

contingency plan must meet, based on

the priority classification of the area in

1 See transmittal letter dated August 15, 1994,

from Edward Z. Fox, Director, ADEQ, to Felicia

Marcus, Regional Administrator, U.S. EPA Region

IX, with attachments. We note that although the

subject line of the transmittal letter identifies this

SIP submittal as related to "New Source Review

and Prevention of Significant Deterioration (NSR/

PSD) Program for Major Sources and Major

Modifications and New Source Review (NSR) for

Minor Sources," Attachment 6 of this submittal

includes the Arizona Emergency Episode Plan,

which is not related to NSR or PSD.

which it applies. See 40 CFR 51.152.

Subpart H also requires that each

contingency plan for a "priority I" area

provide, at a minimum, for taking action

necessary to prevent ambient pollutant

concentrations at any location in such

region from reaching specified "significant harm levels" (SHL). 40 CFR

51.151. The SHL for ozone is 1,200

micrograms per cubic meter (gg/m 3 ) or

0.6 ppm over a 2-hour average. Id.

EPA's 2007 Guidance addressed,

among other things, the CAA section

110(a)(2)(G) requirements for the 1997

8-hour ozone NAAQS. The 2007

Guidance stated that the SHL for the

1997 8-hour ozone NAAQS would

remain unchanged as 0.60 ppm over a

2-hour average, as indicated in 40 CFR

section 51.151, and that the existing

ozone-related provisions of 40 CFR part

51, subpart H remained appropriate for

purposes of implementing the 1997 8-

hour ozone standard. See 2007

Guidance at 5. We have evaluated the

Arizona Emergency Episode Plan in

accordance with the requirements of 40

CFR part 51, subpart H, as applicable for

ozone purposes, consistent with EPA's

recommendations in the 2007 Guidance.

Based on this evaluation, we propose to

fully approve the Arizona Emergency

Episode Plan as satisfying the

requirements of CAA section

110(a)(2)(G) and 40 CFR part 51, subpart

H, for the 1997 8-hour ozone NAAQS.

Our technical support document (TSD),

which is available in the docket for

today's proposed rule, contains a more

detailed discussion of our evaluation.

C. Sections 110() and 193 of the Act

Section 110(1) of the Act prohibits

EPA from approving any SIP revision

that would interfere with any applicable

requirement concerning attainment and

reasonable further progress (RFP) or any

other applicable requirement of the Act.

Section 193 of the Act prohibits the

modification, in a nonattainment area,

of any SIP-approved control

requirement in effect before November

15, 1990, unless the modification

"insures equivalent or greater emissions

reductions of such air pollutant."

The Arizona Emergency Episode Plan

is substantively identical to the CAA

section 110(a)(2)(G) rule currently

approved into Arizona's SIP (R9-3-219,

"Air pollution emergency episodes"),

which EPA approved in 1982 (47 FR

42572, September 28, 1982), with one

exception which makes it more

stringent than the SIP program. We

propose to determine that our approval

of this submittal would comply with

CAA section 110(1), because the

proposed SIP revision would not

interfere with the ongoing process for

21912

HeinOnline -- 77 Fed. Reg. 21912 2012
Federal Register/Vol. 77, No. 71/Thursday, April 12, 2012/Proposed Rules

ensuring that requirements for RFP and

attainment of the NAAQS are met, and

the submitted SIP revision is more

stringent than the rule previously

approved into the SIP. We also propose

to determine that our approval of the

submittal would comply with CAA

section 193, to the extent it applies,

because the SIP revision would insure

equivalent or greater emission

reductions of ozone precursors

compared to the SIP-approved rule. Our

TSD contains a more detailed

discussion of our evaluation.

III. EPA's Proposed Action

Under section 110(k) of the Clean Air

Act, EPA is proposing to approve the

SIP revision submitted by ADEQ on

August 15, 1994, as meeting all

applicable requirements of the CAA and

EPA's regulations for the 1997 8-hour

ozone NAAQS.

EPA is soliciting public comments on

this proposal and will accept comments

until the date noted in the DATES section

above.

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

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, as

appropriate, disproportionate human

health or environmental effects, using

practicable and legally permissible

methods, under Executive Order 12898

(59 FR 7629, February 16, 1994).

In addition, this proposed 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.

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: March 29, 2012.

Keith Takata,

Acting Regional Administrator, Region IX.

[FR Doe. 2012-8837 Filed 4-11-12; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6560-50-P

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION

AGENCY

40 CFR Part 52

[EPA-R09-OAR-2012-0228; FRL-9657-5]

Approval and Promulgation of State

Implementation Plans; Hawaii;

Infrastructure Requirements for the

1997 8-Hour Ozone and the 1997 and

2006 Fine Particulate Matter National

Ambient Air Quality Standards

AGENCY: Environmental Protection

Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Proposed rule.

SUMMARY: EPA proposes to partially

approve and partially disapprove a State

Implementation Plan (SIP) revision

submitted by the State of Hawaii

pursuant to the requirements of Section

110(a)(1) and (2) of the Clean Air Act

(CAA) for the 1997 8-hour ozone

national ambient air quality standards

(NAAQS) and the 1997 and 2006

NAAQS for fine particulate matter

(PM2.

5). Section 110(a) of the CAA

requires that each State adopt and

submit a SIP for the implementation,

maintenance, and enforcement of each

NAAQS promulgated by the EPA. On

December 14, 2011, the Hawaii

Department of Health (HDOH)

submitted a revision to Hawaii's SIP,

which describes the State's provisions

for implementing, maintaining, and

enforcing standards listed above. We are

taking comments on this proposal and

plan to follow with a final action.

DATES: Written comments must be

received on or before May 14, 2012.

ADDRESSES: Submit your comments,

identified by Docket ID Number EPAR09-OAR-2012-0228, by one of the

following methods:

1. http://www.regulations.gov: Follow

the on-line instructions for submitting

comments.

2. Email: richmond.dawn@epa.gov.

3.Fax:415-947-3579.

4. Mail or deliver: Dawn Richmond,

Air Planning Office (AIR-2), U.S.

Environmental Protection Agency,

Region IX, 75 Hawthorne Street, San

Francisco, CA 94105-3901. Deliveries

are only accepted during the Regional

Office's normal hours of operation.

Instructions: All comments will be

included in the public docket without

change and may be made available

online at http://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

http://www.regulations.gov or email.

http://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: The index to the docket for

this action is available electronically at

http://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 in

the index, some information may be

21913

HeinOnline -- 77 Fed. Reg. 21913 2012