# + 2

(,1 1/,1(

Citation: 77 Fed. Reg. 66398 2012

Content downloaded/printed from HeinOnline (http://heinonline.org) Thu Jul 31 18:16:43 2014

-- 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. 214/Monday, November 5, 2012/Rules and Regulations

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

40 CFR Part 52 [EPA-R09-OAR-2012-0470; FRL-9740-2]

Revisionsto the Arizona State Implementation Plan, Arizona Department of Environmental Quality and Maricopa CountyAirQuality Department

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).
ACTION: Final rule.

SUMMARY: EPA is finalizing approval of revisions to the Arizona Department of Environmental Quality (ADEQ) and Maricopa County Air Quality Department (MCAQD) portions ofthe Arizona State Implementation Plan (SIP). This action was proposed inthe Federal Register on June 27, 2012 and

concerns regulations that require monitoring and reporting ofvolatile organic compounds (VOC), oxides of nitrogen (NOx), and particulate matter (PM) emissions from stationary sources. We are approving local rules that regulate these emission sources under the Clean Air Act (CAA or the Act). We

are not acting on two PimaCounty Department ofEnvironmental Quality (PCDEQ)rules originally listed in our June 27, 2012 proposed actionbecause official copies ofthese rules withpublic process documentation were not submitted for SIP approval.
DATES: These rules will be effective on December 5, 2012.

ADDRESSES: EPA has established docket number EPA-R09-OAR-2012-0470 for this action. Generally, documents inthe docket for this action are available electronically athttp:// www.regulations.govor inhard 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 hardcopy location (e.g., copyrighted material, large maps, multivolume reports), and some may notbe available in either location (e.g., confidential business information (CBI)). To inspectthe hard copy materials, please schedule an appointment during normalbusiness 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 ofContents

I.Proposed Action II. Public Comments and EPA Responses II. EPA Action IV. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews
I. Proposed Action

EPA proposed to approve the following rules into the Arizona SIP in the FederalRegister at 77 FR 38246, June 27, 2012.

Local agency Rule No. Rule title

ADEQ

................................................................ 18-2-313

................................................... Existing Source Emission Monitoring. ADEQ

................................................................ 18-2-327

............................................... .... Annual Emissions Inventory Questionnaire. M

CAQD

............................................................ 100, Section 500

.............................................. Monitoring and Records. PCDEQ

............................................................. 17.12.040

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

............................................................. 17.24.040

.................................................. Reporting for Compliance Evaluations.

We proposed to approve theserules because we determined thatthey complied with the relevant CAA requirements. Ourproposed action contains more information on the rules and our evaluation. Our proposed approval ofthese rules responded to a June 1, 2012 request from the State to parallel process versions ofthese rules. Ourproposal explained thatthe above rules had not previously been submitted
to us or hadbeen adopted locally but had not been adopted specifically for purposes ofapproval into the federally enforceable SIP under CAA section 110.

On August 24, 2012, ADEQ submitted
to EPAthe versions ofADEQ 18-2-313 and 18-2-327 thatwere adopted locally

onFebruary 15, 2001 and December 7, 1995 respectively. OnJune 19, 2012, ADEQ submitted toEPA the version of Maricopa Rule 100, Section 500 that

was adopted locally on March 15, 2006. OnSeptember 5, 2012, EPA determined that the submittal for ADEQRules 18- 2-313 and 18-2-327, and MCAQD Rule 100, Section 500 met the completeness criteria in 40 CFRpart 51 Appendix V, which mustbe metbefore formal EPA review. We have reviewed these versions ofthe rules, andthey are unchanged from the versions we proposed for approval on June 27, 2012.
OnJune 27, 2012, we also proposed approval ofPCDEQRules 17.12.040 and 17.24.040 contingent upon EPA's receipt offully adopted rules that satisfy
state and local procedural requirements for SIP submittals. PCDEQ Rule 17.12.040 was not submitted to EPA and while PCDEQRule 17.24.040 was submitted on August 24, 2012, it did not include evidence ofpublic notice as required by 40 CFR part 51 Appendix V. As such, we are not finalizing our action

on these rules at this time. Ifthese rules

are subsequently submitted to EPA, we may finalize their approval in afuture rulemaking contingent upon the rules being substantially identical tothe rules in ourJune 27, 2012 proposed action, and that the adopted rules satisfy relevant requirements for SIP submittals.

II.Public Comments andEPA Responses

EPA's proposed actionprovided a 30- day public comment period. Duringthis period, we received no comments. III. EPAAction
No comments were submitted. Therefore, as authorized in section 110(k)(3) ofthe Act,EPA is fully approving Maricopa Rule 100, Section 500, ADEQ Rule 18-2-313 and ADEQ Rule 18-2-327 into the Arizona SIP.
IV. Statutory andExecutive Order Reviews

Under the Clean Air Act, the Administrator is required to approve a SIP submission that complies with the provisions ofthe Act and applicable Federal regulations. 42 U.S.C. 7410(k); 40 CFR 52.02(a). Thus, in reviewing SIP submissions, EPA's role isto approve State choices, provided thatthey meet the criteria ofthe CleanAir 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 ofManagement and Budget under Executive Order 12866 (58 FR 51735, October 4, 1993);

* Does not impose an information collection burden under the provisions 

### 66405

### 66406 Federal Register/Vol. 77, No. 214/Monday, November 5, 2012/Rules and Regulations

ofthe Paperwork Reduction Act (44 U.S.C. 3501 etseq.);

* 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 etseq.);

* Does not contain any unfunded mandate or significantly or uniquely affect small governments, as described in the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of1995 (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 actionbased onhealth 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 (66FR 28355, May 22, 2001);

* Is not subject to requirements of Section 12(d) ofthe National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act of 1995 (15 U.S.C. 272 note) because application ofthose 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 etseq., as added by the Small Business Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act of 1996, generally provides thatbefore a rule may take effect, the agency promulgating the rulemust submita rule report, which includes a copy ofthe rule, to each House ofthe Congress and to the Comptroller General ofthe United States. EPA will submit a report containing this action and other required information to the U.S. Senate, the U.S. House ofRepresentatives, and the Comptroller General ofthe United Statesprior to publication ofthe rule in the FederalRegister. A majorrule cannot take effectuntil 60 days after it is published in the Federal Register. This action is not a "major rule" as defined by 5U.S.C. 804(2).

Under section 307(b)(1) ofthe Clean Air Act, petitions forjudicial review of this action must be filed inthe United States Court ofAppeals for the appropriate circuit byJanuary 4, 2013. Filing a petition for reconsideration by the Administrator ofthis final rule does not affect the finality ofthis actionfor the purposes ofjudicial review nordoes it extend the time within which a petition forjudicial review maybe filed, and shall not postpone the effectiveness of such rule or action. This action may not be challenged laterin proceedings to enforce its requirements (see section 307(b)(2)).
List of Subjects in40 CFRPart52

Environmental protection, Air pollution control, Incorporation by reference, Intergovernmental relations, Nitrogen dioxide, Ozone, Particulate matter, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements, Volatile organic compounds.

Dated: September 14, 2012. JaredBlumenfeld, RegionalAdministrator, RegionIX. Therefore, 40 CFR chapter I is amended as follows:

PART 52-[AMENDED]

m 1. The authority citation for Part 52 continues to read as follows:

Authority:42 U.S.C. 7401 etseq. Subpart D-Arizona

* 2.Section 52.120 is amendedby adding paragraph (c)(152) to read as follows:
§52.120 Identificationof plan.

)* * * * * (c) (152) The following plan was submitted August 24, 2012, by the Governor's designee. (i) Incorporated by reference. (A)Arizona Department of Environmental Quality. (1)Arizona Administrative Code, title 18, chapter 2, article 3 (Permits and Permit Revisions): (i)Section R18-2-313 ("Existing Source Emission Monitoring"), effective

on February 15,2001. (ii) Section R18-2-327, ("Annual Emissions Inventory Questionnaire"), effective on December 7, 1995. (B) Maricopa County Air Quality Department. (1)Rule 100, Section 500, "Monitoring and Records," revised on March 15, 2006.

[FRDoe. 2012-26684 Filed 11-2-12; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR

Fishand WildlifeService

50 CFR Part 21 [FWS-HQ-MB-2012-0084; 91200-1231- 9BPP]
RIN 1018-AZ16
Migratory Bird Permits; Delegating Falconry Permitting Authorityto Seven States
AGENCY: Fish and Wildlife Service, Interior.
ACTION: Final rule.
SUMMARY: The StatesofAlaska, Arizona, Kansas, Kentucky, Massachusetts, New Hampshire, and North Dakota have requested thatwe delegate permitting for falconry to the State, as provided under our regulations. We have reviewed regulations and supporting materials provided bythese States, and have concluded that their regulations comply with the Federal regulations. We change the falconry regulations accordingly. DATES: This rule is effective January 1, 2013.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Dr. George T. Allen, 703-358-1825.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Background

We, the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, published a finalrule in the Federal Register on October 8, 2008 (73 FR 59448), to revise ourregulations governing falconry in the United States. These regulations are foundin title 50 ofthe Code ofFederal Regulations (CFR)
at §21.29. The regulations provide that when a State meets the requirements for operating under the regulations, falconry permitting mustbe delegated to the State.

The States ofAlaska, Arizona, Kansas, Kentucky, Massachusetts, New Hampshire, and North Dakota have submitted revised falconry regulations and supporting materials and have requested tobe allowed to operate under the revised Federal regulations. We have reviewed the regulations administered by these States and have determined that their regulations meet the requirements of50 CFR 21.29(b). According to the regulations at §21.29(b)(4), we must issue a rule to add a State to the list at §21.29(b)(10) ofapproved States with a falconry program. Therefore, we change the Federal regulations accordingly, and a Federal permit will no longer be required to practice falconry in the States ofAlaska, Arizona, Kansas,