Federal Register / Vol. 62, No. 68 / Wednesday, April 9, 1997 / Rules and Regulations 17093

1The Clean Air Act is codified, as amended, in

the U.S. Code at 42 U.S.C. 7401, et seq.

2Mandatory class I Federal areas include

international parks, national wilderness areas, and

national memorial parks greater than five thousand

acres in size, and national parks greater than six

thousand acres in size, as described in section

162(a) of the Act (42 U.S.C. 7472(a)). Each

mandatory Class I Federal area is the responsibility

of a ‘‘Federal land manager’’ (FLM), the Secretary

of the department with authority over such lands.

See section 302(i) of the Act, 42 U.S.C. 7602(i).

TABLE 52.1525—EPA—APPROVED RULES AND REGULATIONS—NEW HAMPSHIRE—Continued

Title/subject State citation

chapter

Date adopted by StateDate approved by

EPA

Federal Register

citation 52.1520 Comments

Source specific

order.

Order ARD–95–

002.

9/12/95 April 9, 1997 ....... 62 FR 17093 ...... (c)(50) ................. Source specific NOX

RACT order for Plymouth Cogeneration Limited Partnership, in

Plymouth, NH.

Source specific

order.

Order ARD–95–

003.

9/19/95 April 9, 1997 ....... 62 FR 17093 ...... (c)(50) ................. Source specific NOX

RACT order for

Waterville Valley Ski

Area Limited, in

Waterville Valley, NH.

* * * * * * *

[FR Doc. 97–9109 Filed 4–8–97; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6560–50–P

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION

AGENCY

40 CFR Part 52

[UT–001–0001a; FRL–5802–2]

Clean Air Act Approval and

Promulgation of Air Quality

Implementation Plan Revision for Utah;

Visibility Protection

AGENCY: Environmental Protection

Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Direct final rule.

SUMMARY: EPA approves a revision to

Utah’s State Implementation Plan (SIP)

for Visibility Protection, as submitted by

the Governor with a letter dated July 25,

1996. The revision was adopted by the

State in 1993 to address comments

received from the 1992 Utah

Legislature’s Administrative Rules

Review Committee regarding the need to

remove a visibility policy statement

from a regulation format (since it was

not a rule). The State responded by

deleting the policy statement from the

Utah Air Conservation Regulations and

adding the text into the Visibility

Protection SIP. This submittal was a

necessary ‘‘housekeeping’’ step to bring

the federally approved SIP up-to-date

with administrative revisions that took

place at the State in 1993.

DATES: This action will become effective

on June 9, 1997 unless adverse

comments are received by May 9, 1997.

If the effective date is delayed, timely

notice will be published in the Federal

Register.

ADDRESSES: Comments should be

addressed to: Richard R. Long, Director,

Air Program, EPA Region VIII at the

address listed below. Copies of the

State’s submittal and other information

are available for inspection during

normal business hours at the following

locations: Air Program, Environmental

Protection Agency, Region VIII, 999

18th Street, suite 500, Denver, Colorado

80202–2405; and Utah Department of

Environmental Quality, Division of Air

Quality, 150 North 1950 West, P.O. Box

144820, Salt Lake City, Utah 84114–

4820.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Amy Platt, 8P2–A, Environmental

Protection Agency, Region VIII, (303)

312–6449.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

I. Background

Section 169A of the Clean Air Act

(CAA or Act),1 42 U.S.C. 7491,

establishes as a National goal the

prevention of any future, and the

remedying of any existing,

anthropogenic visibility impairment in

mandatory Class I Federal areas 2

(referred to herein as the ‘‘National

goal’’ or ‘‘National visibility goal’’).

Section 169A calls for EPA to, among

other things, issue regulations to assure

reasonable progress toward meeting the

National visibility goal, including

requiring each State with a mandatory

Class I Federal area to revise its SIP to

contain such emission limits, schedules

of compliance and other measures as

may be necessary to make reasonable

progress toward meeting the National

goal. CAA section 169A(b)(2). Section

110(a)(2)(J) of the CAA, 42 U.S.C.

7410(a)(2)(J), similarly requires SIPs to

meet the visibility protection

requirements of the CAA.

EPA promulgated regulations that

require affected States to, among other

things, (1) coordinate development of

SIPs with appropriate Federal Land

Managers (FLMs); (2) develop a program

to assess and remedy visibility

impairment from new and existing

sources; and (3) develop a long-term

(10–15 years) strategy to assure

reasonable progress toward the National

visibility goal. See 45 FR 80084,

December 2, 1980 (codified at 40 CFR

51.300–51.307). The regulations provide

for the remedying of visibility

impairment that is reasonably

attributable to a single existing

stationary facility or small group of

existing stationary facilities. These

regulations require that the SIPs provide

for periodic review, and revision as

appropriate, of the long-term strategy

not less frequently than every three

years, that the review process include

consultation with the appropriate FLMs,

and that the State provide a report to the

public and EPA that includes an

assessment of the State’s progress

toward the National visibility goal. See

40 CFR 51.306(c).

The Utah Governor submitted a SIP

revision for Visibility Protection with a

letter dated April 26, 1985. The

submittal met the requirements for

visibility monitoring (40 CFR 51.305)

and visibility New Source Review (40

CFR 51.307). EPA approved the

submittal on May 30, 1986 (51 FR

19550).

On November 24, 1987 (52 FR 45132),

EPA disapproved the SIPs of states,

including Utah, that failed to comply

with the requirements of the provisions

of 40 CFR 51.302 (visibility general plan

requirements) and 51.306 (visibility

long-term strategy). EPA also

incorporated corresponding Federal

plans and regulations into the SIPs of

these states pursuant to section 110(c)(1)

of the CAA, 42 U.S.C. 7410(c)(1).
17094 Federal Register / Vol. 62, No. 68 / Wednesday, April 9, 1997 / Rules and Regulations

3Please note that Utah has renumbered its SIP

since the State adoption of these revisions.

Visibility protection is now in Section XVII of the

SIP. However, the revision for the renumbering has

not been acted on yet by EPA.

The Governor of Utah submitted a SIP

revision for visibility protection with a

letter dated December 11, 1987. The

submittal satisfied requirements for

visibility general plan requirements (40

CFR 51.302) and visibility long-term

strategy (40 CFR 51.306). EPA approved

this SIP revision on January 17, 1989 (54

FR 1694), and this revision replaced the

Federal plans and regulations in the

Utah Visibility Protection SIP.

The April 26, 1985 submittal and

December 11, 1987 submittal discussed

above currently constitute the Utah

Visibility Protection SIP.

II. This Action

With a letter dated July 25, 1996, the

Governor of Utah submitted a revision

to the Utah Visibility Protection SIP.

This submittal was a necessary

‘‘housekeeping’’ step to bring the

federally approved SIP up-to-date with

administrative revisions that took place

at the State in 1993.

In 1992, the Utah Legislature

reviewed the State’s air quality rules

and requested that the Utah Air Quality

Board’s policy on scenic views be

removed from the rules, since it was a

policy statement and not a rule. The

Board responded by deleting the

pertinent section of the rules and adding

the text to the Visibility Protection SIP.

The changes became effective on March

29, 1993.

A. Analysis of State Submission

1. Procedural Background

The CAA requires States to observe

certain procedural requirements in

developing implementation plans and

plan revisions for submission to EPA.

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

that each implementation plan

submitted by a State must be adopted

after reasonable notice and public

hearing. Section 110(l) of the CAA

similarly provides that each revision to

an implementation plan submitted by a

State under the CAA must be adopted

by such State after reasonable notice

and public hearing.

To entertain public comment, the

Utah Air Quality Board (UAQB), after

providing adequate notice, held a public

hearing on January 28, 1993 to consider

the proposed revisions to the Utah

Visibility Protection SIP and Utah Air

Conservation Regulations. Subsequent

to the public hearing, the UAQB

adopted the revisions on March 26,

1993, and the revisions became effective

on March 29, 1993. The Governor of

Utah submitted the revisions to EPA

with a letter dated July 25, 1996.

2. Content of SIP Revision

a. Utah Air Conservation Regulation

R307–5 Deleted and Text Added to

Visibility Protection SIP

The Utah Legislature’s Administrative

Rules Review Committee reviewed

R307–5 and found it to be a policy

statement of the UAQB rather than a

rule. In fact, the title of the rule was

‘‘Policy of the Air Conservation

Committee Concerning the Protection of

Scenic Views Associated with the

Mandatory Class I Areas from

Significant Impairment for Visibility.’’

This rule was deleted and the bulk of it

was added to the text of the Utah SIP,

Section 15,3 Visibility Protection, in a

new subsection 15.10. This policy

statement, which had already been

approved in rule format, is simply being

transferred to the SIP text as follows.

The State recognizes that visibility and the

ability to see the great scenic views in

Southern Utah is a rare and unique treasure

and should be preserved, both for the benefit

and pleasure of Utah residents, and to

support our large tourist industry. In addition

to the distance one can see, the clarity, color,

and detail of the visible features are also

important.

The [Air Conservation] Committee

recommends that the Governor of Utah seek

the cooperation of the Western Governors’

Association to establish a task force on

regional haze. The task force should be

composed of state air program directors and

would provide a recommendation to the

Governor on the management of regional

haze. The task force would be expected to

hold hearings, create work groups, involve

local area governments and federal agencies

(EPA and National Park Service) in

developing information and formulating

recommendations. Based on the

recommendations of the task force, the

governors would develop a policy on

controlling regional haze for the protection of

visibility in the western United States where

visibility is an important ‘‘treasure’’ and

resource.

EPA agrees that the above statement

represents policy, not regulation, and

therefore, the administrative

‘‘housekeeping’’ action of deleting the

language from the Air Conservation

Regulations and adding it to the text of

the Visibility Protection SIP was

appropriate. The revision is approvable.

b. Utah Air Conservation Regulation

R307–2 Amended

As a result of revising the Visibility

Protection section of the SIP to create a

new subsection 15.10 that contains the

policy regarding scenic views, R307–2

also was amended. This rule, R307–2,

incorporates the entire Utah SIP by

reference and was amended to reflect

the revised adoption date by the UAQB

for subsection 15.10. EPA is not acting

on this amendment to R307–2 because

EPA’s action in this document is

specific to the Visibility Protection

section of the SIP and not the entire

Utah SIP.

III. Final Action

EPA is approving a revision to the

Utah Visibility Protection SIP as

submitted to EPA with a letter dated

July 25, 1996. This revision deletes

R307–5, which contained the Utah Air

Quality Board’s policy statement on

scenic views, and transfers the policy

statement to the text of the Visibility

Protection SIP in a new subsection

15.10. EPA is not acting on the amended

R307–2.

EPA is publishing this action without

prior proposal because the Agency

views this as a noncontroversial

amendment and anticipates no adverse

comments. However, in a separate

document in this Federal Register

publication, EPA is proposing to

approve the SIP revision should adverse

or critical comments be filed. This

action will be effective June 9, 1997

unless, by May 9, 1997, adverse or

critical comments are received.

If EPA receives such comments, this

action will be withdrawn before the

effective date by publishing a

subsequent document that will

withdraw the final action. All public

comments received will be addressed in

a subsequent final rule based on this

action serving as a proposed rule. EPA

will not institute a second comment

period on this action. Any parties

interested in commenting on this action

should do so at this time. If no such

comments are received, the public is

advised that this action will be effective

on June 9, 1997.

Nothing in this action should be

construed as permitting or allowing or

establishing a precedent for any future

request for revision to any SIP. Each

request for revision to a SIP shall be

considered separately in light of specific

technical, economic, and environmental

factors and in relation to relevant

statutory and regulatory requirements.

IV. Administrative Requirements

A. Executive Order 12866

This action has been classified as a

Table 3 action for signature by the

Regional Administrator under the

procedures published in the Federal

Register on January 19, 1989 (54 FR

2214–2225), as revised by a July 10,
Federal Register / Vol. 62, No. 68 / Wednesday, April 9, 1997 / Rules and Regulations 17095

1995 memorandum from Mary Nichols,

Assistant Administrator for Air and

Radiation. The Office of Management

and Budget (OMB) has exempted this

regulatory action from E.O. 12866

review.

B. Regulatory Flexibility Act

Under the Regulatory Flexibility Act,

5 U.S.C. 600, et seq., EPA must prepare

a regulatory flexibility analysis

assessing the impact of any proposed or

final rule on small entities. 5 U.S.C. 603

and 604. Alternatively, EPA may certify

that the rule will not have a significant

economic impact on a substantial

number of small entities. Small entities

include small businesses, small not-forprofit enterprises, and government

entities with jurisdiction over

populations of less than 50,000.

SIP approvals under section 110 and

subchapter I, part D of the Clean Air Act

do not create any new requirements, but

simply approve requirements that the

State is already imposing. Therefore,

because the Federal SIP approval does

not impose any new requirements, I

certify that it does not have a significant

impact on any small entities affected.

Moreover, due to the nature of the

Federal-state relationship under the Act,

preparation of a regulatory flexibility

analysis would constitute Federal

inquiry into the economic

reasonableness of state action. The Act

forbids EPA to base its actions

concerning SIPs on such grounds.

Union Electric Co. v. U.S. E.P.A., 427

U.S. 246, 256–66 (1976); 42 U.S.C.

7410(a)(2).

C. Unfunded Mandates

Under Section 202 of the Unfunded

Mandates Reform Act of 1995

(‘‘Unfunded Mandates Act’’), signed

into law on March 22, 1995, EPA must

prepare a budgetary impact statement to

accompany any proposed or final rule

that includes a Federal mandate that

may result in estimated costs to State,

local, or tribal governments in the

aggregate; or to the private sector, of

$100 million or more. Under Section

205, EPA must select the most costeffective and least burdensome

alternative that achieves the objectives

of the rule and is consistent with

statutory requirements. Section 203

requires EPA to establish a plan for

informing and advising any small

governments that may be significantly

or uniquely impacted by the rule.

EPA has determined that the approval

action promulgated does not include a

Federal mandate that may result in

estimated costs of $100 million or more

to either State, local, or tribal

governments in the aggregate, or to the

private sector. This Federal action

proposes to approve pre-existing

requirements under State or local law,

and imposes no new Federal

requirements. Accordingly, no

additional costs to State, local, or tribal

governments, or to the private sector,

result from this action.

D. Submission to Congress and the

General Accounting Office

Under 5 U.S.C. 801(a)(1)(A) as added

by the Small Business Regulatory

Enforcement Fairness Act of 1996, EPA

submitted 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 General Accounting

Office prior to publication of this rule in

today’s Federal Register. This rule is

not a ‘‘major rule’’ as defined by 5

U.S.C. 804(2).

E. Petitions for Judicial Review

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 June 9, 1997.

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, Incorporation by

reference, Intergovernmental relations,

Nitrogen dioxide, Particulate matter,

Reporting and recordkeeping

requirements, Sulfur oxides.

Dated: March 14, 1997.

Max H. Dodson,

Acting Regional Administrator.

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. 7401–7671q.

2. Section 52.2320 is amended by

adding paragraph (c)(36) to read as

follows:

§ 52.2320 Identification of plan.

* * * * *

(c) * * *

(36) The Governor of Utah submitted

a revision to Utah’s State

Implementation Plan (SIP) for Visibility

Protection with a letter dated July 25,

1996. The revision was made to add a

new subsection 15.10 to the SIP to

include a policy statement regarding

scenic views which was deleted from

the Utah Air Conservation Regulations.

(i) Incorporation by reference.

(A) Utah State Implementation Plan,

Subsection 15.10, Policy of the Air

Conservation Committee Concerning the

Protection of Scenic Views Associated

with Mandatory Class I Areas from

Significant Impairment for Visibility,

adopted on March 26, 1993, and

effective on March 29, 1993.

(ii) Additional material.

(A) A July 25, 1996 letter from

Michael O. Leavitt, Utah Governor, to

Jack McGraw, EPA Region VIII Acting

Regional Administrator, in which it was

communicated, among other things, that

the Utah Air Quality Board deleted

R307–5 from the Utah Air Conservation

Regulations. The deletion was effective

March 29, 1993.

[FR Doc. 97–9108 Filed 4–8–97; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6560–50–P

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION

AGENCY

40 CFR Part 52

[IN68–2; FRL–5807–8]

Approval and Promulgation of

Implementation Plans; Indiana

AGENCY: Environmental Protection

Agency.

ACTION: Direct final rule; withdrawal.

SUMMARY: On February 18, 1997 (62 FR

7157), the United States Environmental

Protection Agency (USEPA) approved

Indiana’s October 25, 1994, request to

revise the Indiana State Implementation

Plan (SIP) to add or revise definitions in

the SIP’s general provisions, the

applicability criteria of the rule for

malfunctions and, the applicability

criteria for State construction and

operating permits. Also approved were

revisions to Indiana’s construction

permit program including its ‘‘Permit no

defense’’ provision. The USEPA is

withdrawing this final rule because in a

letter dated March 18, 1997, Indiana

informed USEPA that a portion of the

State’s submittal—326 Indiana

Administrative Code (IAC) 2–1–

1(b)(1)(h)—is being considered for

removal from the IAC. Further, adverse

comments have been received on

USEPA’s rulemaking action.

EFFECTIVE DATE: April 9, 1997.

ADDRESSES: Copies of the documents

relevant to this action are available for