# + 2

(,1 1/,1(

Citation: 68 Fed. Reg. 2912 2003

Content downloaded/printed from HeinOnline (http://heinonline.org) Tue Nov 6 14:05:41 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. 68, No. 14/Wednesday, January 22, 2003/Rules and Regulations

number ofsmall entities under the Regulatory Flexibility Act (5U.S.C. 601
etseq.). Because this rule proposes to approve pre-existing requirements under state lawand does not impose any additional enforceable dutybeyond that required by state law, it does not contain any unfunded mandate or significantly oruniquely affect small governments, as described in the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995 (PublicLaw 104-4). For the same reason, this proposed rule also does not significantly oruniquely affect the communities oftribal governments, as specified by Executive Order 13084 (63 FR 27655, May 10, 1998). This proposed rule will not have substantial direct effects on the States, on the relationship between the national government and the States, or onthe distribution of
power and responsibilities among the various levels ofgovernment, as specified in Executive Order 13132 (64 FR 43255, August 10, 1999), because it merely approves a state rule implementing a federal standard, and does not alter the relationship or the distribution ofpower and responsibilities established in the Clean Air Act. This proposed rule also is not subject to Executive Order 13045 (62 FR 19885, April 23, 1997), because itis not economically significant.

In reviewing SIP submissions, EPA's role is to approve State choices, provided that they meet the criteria of the Clean Air Act. In this context, in the absence ofa prior existing requirement for the State touse voluntary consensus standards (VCS), EPAhas no authority
to disapprove a SIP submission for failure touse VCS. Itwould thusbe inconsistent with applicable law for EPA, when itreviews a SIP submission,
to use VCS in place ofa SIP submission that otherwise satisfies the provisions of the Clean Air Act. Thus, the requirements of section 12(d) ofthe National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act of 1995 (15 U.S.C. 272 note) do not apply. As required by section 3ofExecutive Order 12988 (61 FR 4729, February 7, 1996), in issuing this proposed rule, EPAhas taken the
necessary steps to eliminate drafting

errors and ambiguity, minimize potential litigation, and provide a clear legal standard for affected conduct. EPA has complied with Executive Order 12630 (53 FR 8859, March 15, 1988)by examining the takings implications of the rule in accordance with the "Attorney General's Supplemental Guidelines for the Evaluation ofRisk andAvoidance ofUnanticipated Takings" issued under the executive order.This rule does not impose an information collection burden under the provisions ofthe Paperwork Reduction Act of1995 (44U.S.C. 3501 etseq.).

List ofSubjects in 40 CFRPart52

Environmental protection, Air pollution control, Carbon monoxide, Incorporation by reference, Intergovernmental relations, Lead, Nitrogen dioxide, Ozone, Particulate matter, Sulfur oxides, Volatile organic compounds.

Authority:42 U.S.C. 7401 etseq. Dated: December 13, 2002. BharatMathur, ActingRegional Administrator, Region 5.
For the reasons stated in the preamble, part 52, chapter I, oftitle 40 ofthe Code ofFederal Regulations is amended as follows:

PART 52-[AMENDED]

1.The authority citation for part 52 continues to read asfollows:

Authority:42 U.S.C. 7401 etseq. 2. Section 52.1870 is amended by addingparagraph (c)(127) to read as follows: 

### §52.1870 Identification of plan.

(c) * * * (127) On July 18, 2002, Ohio submittedrevisions to its Permit to Install rules as a revision to the State implementation plan. (i) Incorporation byreference. (A)Ohio Administrative Code Rules 3745-31-01, 3745-31-02, 3745-31-03, 3745-31-05, and 3745-31-07 effective November 30, 2001. [FR Doc. 03-1235 Filed 1-21-03; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6560-50-P

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION
AGENCY

40 CFR Part 52 [AZ 106-0064; FRL-7418-8]
Approval and Promulgation of Implementation Plans; Arizona; Motor Vehicle Inspection and Maintenance Programs

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). ACTION: Finalrule.

SUMMARY: EPA is approving two State Implementation Plan (SIP) revisions submittedby the Arizona Department of Environmental Quality (ADEQ). These revisions consist of several changes that have been made to Arizona's Basic and Enhanced Vehicle Emissions Inspection and Maintenance Programs after the programs were approved by EPAin 1995. Arizona's Basic Vehicle Emissions Inspection (VEI) Program is implemented in the TucsonAir Planning Area carbon monoxide (CO) nonattainment area (Area B). The Enhanced VEI Program is implemented in the Maricopa County ozone and CO nonattainment area (the Phoenix area or AreaA). EFFECTIVE DATE: February 21, 2003. ADDRESSES: Copies ofthe documents relevant to this action are available for public inspection duringnormal business hours at the EPA's Region 9 office at 75 Hawthorne Street, San Francisco, California 94105.

This document and the Technical Support Document (TSD) for this rulemaking are also available as electronic files on EPA's Region 9 Web page at http://www.epa.gov/regionO9/ air. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Sylvia Dugr6, Office ofAir Planning (AIR-2), U.S.Environmental Protection Agency, Region 9, 75 Hawthorne Street, San Francisco, CA 94105. Phone: (415) 947-4149; e-mail: dugre.sylvia@epa.gov. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

I. Background

On August 12, 2002 (67 FR 52433), EPApublished a notice ofproposed rulemaking for the State ofArizona. The noticeproposed approval ofrevisions to the SIP forArizona's Basic and Enhanced VEI programs.

ADEQ submitted the changes to its Basic and Enhanced VEIPrograms as a revision to its SIP on July 6, 2001. The July 6, 2001 SIP revision package includes, among various other program changes, ADEQ's revised rule which extends the exemption for newer model
year vehicles from the current model year tothe first five model year vehicles and the revised rules incorporating legislative changes to the provisions for issuing awaiver. Also included in the SIP revision is State legislation that discontinues the remote sensing
program thathad been implemented in AreaA and authorizes a study to determine the mosteffective on-road testing program forArizona.

A SIP revision supplementing the July 6, 2001 SIP revision was submitted by ADEQon April 10, 2002. This submittal contains the ADEQ rule revisions incorporating on-board diagnostics (OBD)testing and, in accordance with the State legislation, deleting the previously approved remote sensing
program from the ADEQ regulations. It also contains a modeling demonstration, with adjustments forthe IM147 

### 2912

HeinOnline -- 68 Fed. Reg. 2912 2003Federal Register/Vol. 68, No. 14/Wednesday, January 22, 2003/Rules and Regulations

transient loaded-mode emissions test, showing the I/M program implemented in Area A meets EPA's high enhanced performance standard.

A more complete description of Arizona's submittals and the rationale for EPA's approval were presented in the proposal and will not be restated here.

II. Public Comments onthe Proposed Action

No comments were submittedto the docket during the comment period for the proposed rulemaking published in the August 12, 2002 Federal Register.

III. FinalAction

Clean Air Act (CAA) sections 182(c)(3) and 187(a)(6) require serious

ozone and carbon monoxide areas, such

asthe Phoenix area, to implement enhanced I/Mprograms. EPA's requirements for these I/M programs are contained in 40 CFR part 51, subpart S. In order for EPA to approve the SIP revisions submitted by ADEQ, they
must be consistent with EPA's I/M requirements and they must meet CAA section 110(a)requirements for enforceability as well as CAA section 110(1) requirements regarding plan revisions.

In today's action, EPAis finding that the Arizona enhanced I/Mprogram implemented in Area A (Phoenix)meets CAA and EPArequirements for a high enhanced program. We are also finding that the VEI program implemented in Area B (Tucson) continues tomeet EPA's I/M requirements for basic programs.' The basis for these findings

are discussed in the proposal for today's action. See 67FR 52433.

In addition,under CAA section 110(1), EPA isfinding thatthese SIP revisions submitted by ADEQdo not interfere with the applicable requirements concerning CO maintenance in the Tucson area or any otherrequirements ofthe CAA applicable toTucson. We are also finding thatthese SIP revisions will not interfere with any applicable requirements for CO and ozone attainment and reasonable further
progress (RFP) or any other requirements ofthe CAA applicable to the Phoenix area. The basis for these findings are discussed in the proposal for today's action. See 67FR 52433.

Finally, EPAis approving various Arizona statutes amending the VEI

1 As an unclassified CO nonattainment area that has been redesignated to attainment, the Tucson

area does not have a statutory requirement to implement abasic I/M program. The area, however, has relied on the program to both attain and maintain the CO standard. programs andthe latest revisions to the basic and enhanced VEI program regulations. Specifically, we are approving the following Arizona
statutes:

Amendments to Arizona Revised Statutes (ARS) 49-541, 49-542.05, 49- 544, 49-545, 49-551 and therepeal of 49-542.01 submitted to EPA as aSIP revision onJuly 6, 2001.

Amendments to ARS 49-542, 49-543, andthe repeal of49-541.01 submitted
to EPA as a SIP revision on April 10, 2002.

We are also approving the following Arizona regulations:

Arizona Administrative Code (AAC), Title 18, Chapter 2,Article 10 (except for AAC R 18-2-1020) "Motor Vehicles; Inspection andMaintenance" as of December 31, 2000, submitted to EPA as

a SIP revision onJuly 6, 2001.

Amendments to AAC R 18-2-1006 and 18-2-1019, andthe repeal ofAAC R 18-2-1014 andR 18-2-1015 submittedto EPA as a SIP revision on April 10, 2002.

IV. Administrative Requirements

Under Executive Order 12866 (58 FR 51735, October 4, 1993), this action is
not a "significant regulatory action" and therefore isnot subject toreview bythe Office ofManagement and Budget. For this reason, this action is also not subject to Executive Order 13211, "Actions Concerning Regulations That Significantly Affect Energy Supply, Distribution, orUse" (66 FR 28355, May 22, 2001). This actionmerely approves state law asmeeting federal requirements andimposes no additional requirements beyond those imposed by
state law. Accordingly, the Administrator certifies thatthis rule will not have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities under the Regulatory Flexibility Act (5U.S.C. 601 etseq.). Because this rule approves pre-existing requirements under state law and does not impose any additional enforceable dutybeyond that required by state law, it does not contain any unfunded mandate or significantly oruniquely affect small governments, as described in the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995 (Pub.L. 104-4).

This rule also does not have tribal implications because itwill not have a substantial direct effect on one or more Indian tribes, on therelationship between the Federal Government and Indian tribes, or on the distribution of
power and responsibilities between the Federal Government andIndian tribes,

as specified by Executive Order 13175 (65 FR 67249, November 9, 2000). 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 ofpower and responsibilities among the various levels ofgovernment, 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 alterthe relationship or the distribution ofpower and responsibilities established inthe Clean Air Act. This rule also isnot subject to Executive Order 13045, "Protection ofChildren from Environmental HealthRisks and Safety Risks" (62FR 19885, April 23, 1997), because itis not economically significant.

In reviewing SIP submissions, EPA's role is to approve state choices, providedthat they meetthe criteria of the Clean Air Act. In this context, in the absence ofa prior existing requirement for the State touse voluntary consensus standards (VCS), EPA has no authority
to disapprove a SIP submission for failure to use VCS. Itwould thus be inconsistent with applicable lawfor EPA, when itreviews a SIP submission,
to use VCS in place ofa SIP submission that otherwise satisfies the provisions of the Clean Air Act. Thus, the requirements ofsection 12(d) ofthe National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act of1995 (15 U.S.C. 272 note) do not apply. This rule does
notimpose an information collection burden under the provisions ofthe Paperwork Reduction Act of1995 (44 U.S.C. 3501 etseq.).

The Congressional Review Act, 5 U.S.C. 801 etseq., as added by the Small Business Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act of1996, generally provides thatbefore a rule may take effect, the agency promulgating the rule must submit a rulereport, which includes a copy ofthe rule, to each House ofthe Congress and to the Comptroller General ofthe United States. EPAwill submit a report containing this rule 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 Federal Register. A major rule
cannot take effect until 60 days after it ispublished in the Federal Register. This action is not a "major rule" as defined by 5 U.S.C. 804(2).

Under section 307(b)(1) ofthe Clean AirAct, petitions forjudicial review of this action must be filed in the United States Court ofAppeals for the appropriate circuit by March 24, 2003. Filing apetition for reconsideration by the Administrator ofthis final rule does 

### 2913

HeinOnline -- 68 Fed. Reg. 2913 2003Federal Register/Vol. 68, No. 14/Wednesday, January 22, 2003/Rules and Regulations

not affect the finality ofthisrule for the purposes ofjudicial review nor does it extend the time within which a petition forjudicial review may be filed, and shall not postpone the effectiveness of suchrule or action. This action may not be challenged later in proceedings to enforce its requirements. (See section 307(b)(2).)

List ofSubjects in 40 CFRPart 52

Environmental protection, Air pollution control, Carbon monoxide, Incorporation by reference, Intergovernmental regulations, Ozone, Reporting andrecordkeeping requirements.

Dated: October 31, 2002. Alexis Strauss, ActingRegional Administrator, Region9.
Part 52 ofchapter I, title 40, Code of Federal Regulations, 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 etseq. Subpart D-Arizona

2. Section 52.120 is amendedby addingparagraphs (c)(108) and (c)(109)
to read as follows:
§52.120 Identification of plan.

(c) * * * (108) Revisions to the Arizona State Implementation Plan for the Motor Vehicle Inspection andMaintenance Programs, submitted onJuly 6, 2001. (i) Incorporation byreference. (A)Arizona Revised Statutes. (1) Section 49-551 as amended in Section 27 ofArizona Senate Bill 1427, 43rd Legislature, 2nd Regular Session (1998), approved bythe Governor on May 29, 1998. (2) Section 49-544 as amended in Section 15 ofArizona Senate Bill 1007, 43rd Legislature, 4th Special Session (1998), approved bythe Governor on May 20, 1998. (3) Section 49-541 as amended in Section 44 ofArizona House Bill 2189, 44th Legislature, 1st Regular Session (1999), approved bythe Governor on May 18, 1999. (4) Section 49-542.01 repealed in Section 3and Section 49-545 as amended in Section 5ofArizona House Bill 2104, 44th Legislature, 2nd Regular session (2000), approved by the Governor on April 28, 2000. (5) Section 49-542.05 as added in Section 23 ofArizona Senate Bill 1004, 44th Legislature, 7th Special Session (2000), approved bythe Governor on December 14, 2000. (B) Arizona Administrative Code. (1)Title 18, Chapter 2, Article 10 (except for AAC R 18-2-1020) "Motor Vehicles; Inspection and Maintenance"

as adopted onDecember 31, 2000.

(109) Revisions to the Arizona State Implementation Plan for the Motor Vehicle Inspection andMaintenance Programs, submitted on April 10, 2002 by the Governor's designee. (i) Incorporation byreference. (A)Arizona Revised Statutes. (1) Section 49-542 as amended in Section 9, Section 49-543 as amended in Section 11, and Section 49-541.01 repealed in Section 29 ofArizona House Bill 2538, 45th Legislature, 1st Regular Session (2001), approved bythe Governor onMay 7,2001. (B) Arizona Administrative Code. (1)Amendments toAAC R 18-2-1006 and 18-2-1019, andthe repeal ofAAC R 18-2-1014 andR 18-2-1015 effective January 1, 2002. 3. Section 52.123 is amendedby addingparagraph (k)toread as follows:
§52.123 Approval status.

(k)The Administrator approves the revised Enhanced Vehicle Inspection andMaintenance Program for the Maricopa County carbon monoxide and

ozone nonattainment area submitted by the Arizona Department of Environmental Quality on July 6, 2001 andApril 10, 2002 as meeting the requirements ofClean Air Act sections 182(c)(3) and 187(a)(6) andthe requirements for high enhanced inspection andmaintenance programs contained in 40 CFR part 51, subpart S.
[FR Doc. 03-1234 Filed 1-21-03; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6560-50-P

FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS

COMMIISSION

47 CFR Part 20 [CC Docket No. 94-102; FCC 02-318]
CompatibilityWith Enhanced 911 Emergency Calling Systems; PSAP E911 Service Readiness

AGENCY: Federal Communications Commission. ACTION: Finalrule; petitions for reconsideration.

SUMMARY: This document responds to petitions for reconsideration ofthe Commission's October 2001 decision which addressed a petition from the city ofRichardson, Texas by adopting rules that clarify what constitutes avalid Public SafetyAnwering Point (PSAP) to trigger a wireless carrier's obligation to provide E911 service to the PSAP within six months. The document modifies the Commission's rules to provide additional clarification regarding PSAP readiness. The action is taken to respond tothe petitions for reconsideration and to promote rapid E911 implementation. DATES: Effective February 21, 2003, except for §§20.18(j)(4) and (5), which contain information collection requirements that are not effective until approved by the Office ofManagement and Budget.The Commission is seeking emergency approval from the Office of Management and Budget for these collections. Public comment on the information collections onthese PRA burdens are dueMarch 24, 2003. The Commission will publish a document in the Federal Register announcing the effective date ofthese sections. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Jennifer Salhus, Attorney, 202-418- 1310. Forfurther information concerning the information collection contained in this Fourth Memorandum Opinion and Order, contact Judith Boley Herman, Federal Communications Commission, 202-418-0214, or via the Internet atjboley@fcc.gov. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: This is a summary ofthe Commission's Order on Reconsideration (Recon) in CC Docket No. 94-102; FCC 02-318, adopted November 21, 2002, and released November 26, 2002. The complete text ofthe Recon andthe Supplemental Final Regulatory Flexibility Analysis is available on the Commission's Internet site, at http://www.fcc.gov., and is also available for inspection and copying during normalbusiness hours in the FCC Reference Information Center, Courtyard Level, 445 12th Street, SW., Washington, DC. The text may also be purchased from the Commission's copy contractor, Qualex International, Portals II, 445 12th Street, SW., CY-134202, Washington, DC 20554 (telephone 202- 863-2893). Synopsis ofthe Orderon Reconsideration

1. The Recon responds to two petitions for reconsideration ofthe Commission's Order (60 FR 55618, November 2, 2001) in this proceeding. The Order, in further response to a petition filedbythe city ofRichardson, Texas, adopted rules clarifying what constitutes a valid PSAP request to trigger a wireless carrier's obligation to provide E911 service to thatPSAP within six months. The Recon modifies 

### 2914

HeinOnline -- 68 Fed. Reg. 2914 2003