57762 Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 191 / Tuesday, October 4, 2005 / Rules and Regulations 

* * * * * 

[FR Doc. 05–19875 Filed 10–3–05; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 6560–50–P 

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION 

AGENCY 

40 CFR Part 62 

[R06–OAR–2004–NM–0002; FRL–7979–3] 

Approval and Promulgation of State 

Plans for Designated Facilities and 

Pollutants: Bernalillo County, NM; 

Negative Declaration 

AGENCY: Environmental Protection 

Agency (EPA). 

ACTION: Direct final rule. 

SUMMARY: EPA is approving three 

negative declarations submitted by the 

City of Albuquerque (Bernalillo County) 

certifying that there are no existing 

sources subject to the requirement of 

sections 111(d) and 129 of the Clean Air 

Act under their jurisdiction. These three 

negative declarations are for Sulfuric 

Acid Mist Emissions from Sulfuric Acid 

Plants, Fluoride Emissions from 

Phosphate Fertilizer Plants, and Total 

Reduced Sulfur Emissions from Kraft 

Pulp Mills. This is a direct final rule 

action without prior notice and 

comment because this action is deemed 

noncontroversial. 

DATES: This direct final rule is effective 

on December 5, 2005 without further 

notice, unless EPA receives adverse 

comment by November 3, 2005. If EPA 

receives such comment, EPA will 

publish a timely withdrawal in the 

Federal Register informing the public 

that this rule will not take effect. 

ADDRESSES: EPA has established a 

docket for this action under Regional 

Material in EDocket (RME) Docket ID 

No. R06-OAR–2004-NM–0002. All 

documents in the docket are listed in 

the Regional Material in EDocket (RME) 

index at http://docket.epa.gov/rmepub/, 

once in the system, select ‘‘quick 

search,’’ then key in the appropriate 

RME Docket identification number. 

Although listed in the index, some 

information is not publicly available, 

i.e., 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 in RME or 

in hard copy at the Air Planning Section 

(6PD-L), Environmental Protection 

Agency, 1445 Ross Avenue, Suite 700, 

Dallas, Texas 75202–2733. The file will 

be made available by appointment for 

public inspection in the Region 6 FOIA 

Review Room between the hours of 8:30 

a.m. and 4:30 p.m. weekdays except for 

legal holidays. Contact the person listed 

in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION

CONTACT paragraph below or Mr. Bill 

Deese at (214) 665–7253 to make an 

appointment. If possible, please make 

the appointment at least two working 

days in advance of your visit. There will 

be a 15 cent per page fee for making 

photocopies of documents. On the day 

of the visit, please check in at the EPA 

Region 6 reception area at 1445 Ross 

Avenue, Suite 700, Dallas, Texas 75202. 

The State submittal is also available 

for public inspection at the State Air 

Agency listed below during official 

business hours by appointment: 

Albuquerque Environmental Health 

Department, Air Pollution Control 

Division, One Civic Plaza, Albuquerque, 

New Mexico 87103. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Mr. 

Kenneth W. Boyce, Air Planning Section 

(6PD–L), Multimedia Planning and 

Permitting Division, U.S. EPA, Region 6, 

1445 Ross Avenue, Dallas, Texas 75202, 

(214) 665–7259, e-mail address 

boyce.kenneth@epa.gov. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

Throughout this document wherever 

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

the EPA. 

I. What Is the Background for This 

Action? 

Section 129 of the CAA requires us to 

develop new source performance 

standards (NSPS) and emission 

guidelines (EG) for the control of certain 

designated pollutants which includes 

these categories addressed in today’s 

action: sulfuric acid mist emissions 

from sulfuric acid plants, fluoride 

emissions from phosphate fertilizer 

plants and total reduced sulfur 

emissions from kraft pulp mills. Such 

standards shall include emissions 

limitations and other requirements 

applicable to new units and guidelines 

required by section 111(d) of the CAA. 

Section 111(d) of the CAA requires 

states to submit plans to control certain 

pollutants (designated pollutants) at 

existing facilities (designated facilities) 

whenever standards of performance 

have been established under section 

111(b) for new sources of the same type, 

and EPA has established emission 

guidelines for such existing sources. A 

designated pollutant is ‘‘any air 

pollutant, emissions of which are 

subject to a standard of performance for 

new stationary sources but for which air 

quality criteria have not been issued, 

and which is not included on a list 

published under section 108(a) or 

section 112(b)(1)(A) of the CAA.’’ 40 

CFR 60.21(a). 

Section 129(b) of the CAA also 

requires us to develop an EG for the 

control of certain designated pollutants. 

Under section 129 of the CAA, the EG 

is not federally enforceable. Section 

129(b)(2) requires states to submit State 

Plans to EPA for approval. State Plans 

must be at least as protective as the EG, 

and they become federally enforceable 

upon EPA approval. 

The status of our approvals of State 

plans for designated facilities (often 

referred to as ‘‘111(d) plans’’ or ‘‘111(d)/ 

129 plans’’) is given in separate subparts 

in 40 CFR part 62, ‘‘Approval and 

Promulgation of State Plans for 

Designated Facilities and Pollutants.’’

The Federal plan requirements for the 

control of certain designated pollutants 

are also codified in separate subparts at 

the end of part 62. 

Procedures and requirements for 

development and submission of state 

plans for controlling designated 

pollutants are given in 40 CFR part 60, 

‘‘Standards of Performance for New 

Stationary Sources,’’ subpart B, 

‘‘Adoption and Submittal of State Plans 

for Designated Facilities’’ and in 40 CFR 

part 62, subpart A, ‘‘General 

Provisions.’’ If a State does not have any 

existing sources of a designated 

pollutant located within its boundaries, 

40 CFR 62.06 provides that the State 

may submit a letter of certification to 

that effect, or negative declaration, in 

lieu of a plan. The negative declaration 

exempts the State from the requirements 

of 40 CFR part 60, subpart B, for that 

designated facility. In the event that a 

designated facility is located in a State 

after a negative declaration has been 

approved by EPA, 40 CFR 62.13 requires 

that the Federal plan for the designated 

facility, as required by section 129 of the 

CAA and 40 CFR 62.02(g), will 

automatically apply to the facility. 

This Federal Register action approves 

negative declarations submitted by the 

City of Albuquerque (Bernalillo 

County), New Mexico for the following: 

sulfuric acid mist emissions from 

sulfuric acid plants, fluoride emissions 

from phosphate fertilizer plants and 

total reduced sulfur emissions from 

kraft pulp mills. 

II. State Submittal 

The Albuquerque Environmental 

Health Department submitted letters 

dated November 23, 2004, certifying 

that there are no existing sulfuric acid 

mist emissions from sulfuric acid 

plants, no existing fluoride emissions 

from phosphate fertilizer plants and no 

existing total reduced sulfur emissions 

from kraft pulp mills, under its 

Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 191 / Tuesday, October 4, 2005 / Rules and Regulations 57763 

jurisdiction in the City of Albuquerque 

and Bernalillo County, New Mexico 

(excluding tribal lands). These negative 

declarations meet the requirements of 

40 CFR 62.06. 

III. Removal of 40 CFR 62.7881 

We are removing the 40 CFR 62.7881, 

‘‘Identification of sources—negative 

declaration’’ and the centered heading 

‘‘Emissions From Existing Commercial 

and Industrial Solid Waste Incineration 

Units’’ immediately before § 62.7881, 

because this is a duplicate of the 

negative declaration in §62.7890(b). 

The EPA published in the Federal 

Register on January 10, 2005 (70 FR 

1668), a document approving a negative 

declaration submitted by the City of 

Albuquerque (Bernalillo County), New 

Mexico, which certified that there are 

no existing commercial and industrial 

solid waste incineration units in 

Bernalillo County. The January 10, 

2005, Federal Register action added a 

new undesignated center heading 

‘‘Emissions From Existing Commercial 

and Industrial Solid Waste Incineration 

(CISWI) Units’’ followed by a new 

§ 62.7881, ‘‘Identification of sources—

negative declaration.’’ We later 

discovered that there was already a 

centered heading in Subpart GG entitled 

‘‘Emissions From Existing Commercial 

and Industrial Solid Waste Incineration 

(CISWI) Units’’ that had been added 

when we approved the CISWI negative 

declaration for the State of New Mexico 

in § 62.7890 on June 13, 2003 (68 FR 

35299). On June 27, 2005 (70 FR 36849) 

we partially corrected the error by 

revising § 62.7890 to include the 

Bernalillo County CISWI negative 

declaration codified in § 62.7881. 

However the June 27, 2005, correction 

failed to remove § 62.7881 and the 

centered heading immediately before it. 

This Federal Register action corrects 

this oversight by removing § 62.7881 

and the centered heading ‘‘Emissions 

From Existing Commercial and 

Industrial Solid Waste Incineration 

(CISWI) Units’’ immediately before 

§ 62.7881. 

IV. Final Action 

We are approving negative 

declarations submitted by the City of 

Albuquerque Environmental Health 

Department certifying that there are no 

existing sulfuric acid mist emissions 

from sulfuric acid plants, no existing 

fluoride emissions from phosphate 

fertilizer plants, and no existing total 

reduced sulfur emissions from kraft 

pulp mills, under its jurisdiction in the 

City of Albuquerque/Bernalillo County 

(excluding tribal lands). 

If a designated facility is later found 

within any noted jurisdiction after 

publication of this Federal Register 

action, then the overlooked facility will 

become subject to the requirements of 

the Federal plan for that designated 

facility, including the compliance 

schedule. The Federal plan will no 

longer apply, if we subsequently receive 

and approve the 111(d)/129 plan from 

the jurisdiction with the overlooked 

facility. 

Since the City of Albuquerque has not 

submitted a demonstration of authority 

over ‘‘Indian Country,’’ (as defined in 18 

U.S.C. 1151) we are limiting our 

approval to those areas that do not 

constitute Indian Country. Under this 

definition, EPA treats as reservations, 

trust lands validly set aside for the use 

of a tribe even if the trust lands have not 

been formally designated as a 

reservation. Any existing designated 

facility that may exist on ‘‘Indian 

Country’’ is subject to the Federal plan 

for the designated facility. See 40 CFR 

62.13. 

The EPA is publishing this action 

without prior proposal because the 

Agency views this as a noncontroversial 

action and anticipates no adverse 

comments. However, in the ‘‘Proposed 

Rules’’ section of this Federal Register 

publication, EPA is publishing a 

separate document that will serve as the 

proposal to approve these rules should 

relevant adverse comments be filed. 

This action will be effective December 

5, 2005 unless EPA receives adverse 

written comments by November 3, 2005. 

If EPA receives such comments, then 

it will publish a timely withdrawal in 

the Federal Register informing the 

public that this direct final rule will not 

take effect. All public comments 

received will then be addressed in a 

subsequent direct final rule based on the 

proposed rule. The EPA will not 

institute a second comment period. 

Parties interested in commenting should 

do so at this time. If no such comments 

are received, the public is advised that 

this rule will be effective on December 

5, 2005 and no further action will be 

taken on the proposed rule. 

V. Statutory and Executive Order 

Reviews 

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. For 

this reason, 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). This action merely approves 

state and local declarations that rules 

implementing certain federal standards 

are unnecessary. 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.). Because this 

rule approves state and local 

declarations that rules implementing 

certain federal standards are 

unnecessary, 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). 

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 

(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 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 state and local declarations 

that rules implementing certain federal 

standards are unnecessary, and does not 

alter the relationship or the distribution 

of power and responsibilities 

established in the Clean Air Act. 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 is not economically 

significant. 

In reviewing State plan 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 of a prior existing requirement 

for the State to use voluntary consensus 

standards (VCS), EPA has no authority 

to disapprove a State plan submission 

for failure to use VCS. It would thus be 

inconsistent with applicable law for 

EPA, when it reviews a State plan 

submission, to use VCS in place of a 

State plan submission that otherwise 

satisfies the provisions of the Clean Air 

Act. 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. This 

rule does not impose an information 

collection burden under the provisions 

57764 Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 191 / Tuesday, October 4, 2005 / Rules and Regulations 

of the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 

(44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.). 

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. 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 December 5, 2005. Filing a 

petition for reconsideration by the 

Administrator of this direct 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 42 U.S.C. 

7607(b)(2)). 

List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 62 

Environmental protection, 

Administrative practice and procedure, 

Air pollution control, Intergovernmental 

relations, Reporting and recordkeeping 

requirements. 

Dated: September 19, 2005 

Lawrence E. Starfield, 

Acting Regional Administrator, Region 6. 

■ 40 CFR 62 is amended as follows: 

PART 62—[AMENDED] 

■ 1. The authority citation for part 62 

continues to read as follows: 

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

Subpart GG—New Mexico 

■ 2. Section 62.7851 is amended by 

adding a new paragraph (b) at the end 

to read as follows. 

§ 62.7851 Identification of sources. 

* * * * * 

(b) Negative declaration for Bernalillo 

County. 

Letter from the City of Albuquerque 

Air Pollution Control Division dated 

November 23, 2004, certifying that there 

are no existing sulfuric acid plants 

subject to 40 CFR 60 subpart Cd in 

Bernalillo County on lands under the 

jurisdiction of the Albuquerque/ 

Bernalillo County Air Quality Control 

Board. 

■ 3. Section 62.7853 is revised to read 

as follows: 

§ 62.7853 Identification of plan—negative 

declaration. 

(a) Letter from the New Mexico 

Environmental Improvement Division 

dated November 5, 1979 certifying that 

there are no existing kraft pulp mills in 

the State subject to part 60 subpart B of 

this chapter. 

(b) Letters from the City of 

Albuquerque Air Pollution Control 

Division dated July 8, 1980, and 

November 23, 2004, certifying that there 

are no existing kraft pulp mills subject 

to 40 CFR 60 subpart B in Bernalillo 

County on lands under the jurisdiction 

of the Albuquerque/Bernalillo County 

Air Quality Control Board. 

■ 4. Section 62.7854 is amended by 

redesignating the existing paragraph as 

paragraph (a) and adding a new 

paragraph (b) to read as follows: 

§ 62.7854 Identification of plan—negative 

declaration. 

(a) The State Department of Health 

and Social Services submitted on 

October 31, 1977, a letter certifying that 

there are no existing phosphate fertilizer 

plants in the State subject to part 60 

subpart B of this chapter. 

(b) Letter from the City of 

Albuquerque Air Pollution Control 

Division dated November 23, 2004, 

certifying that there are no phosphate 

fertilizer plants subject to 40 CFR 60 

subpart B in Bernalillo County on lands 

under the jurisdiction of the 

Albuquerque/Bernalillo County Air 

Quality Control Board. 

§ 62.7881 [Removed] 

■ 5. Section 62.7881, ‘‘Identification of 

sources—negative declaration’’ is 

removed and the centered heading 

‘‘Emissions From Existing Commercial 

and Industrial Solid Waste Incineration 

(CISWI) Units’’ immediately before 

§ 62.7881 is also removed. 

[FR Doc. 05–19878 Filed 10–3–05; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 6560–50–P 

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION 

AGENCY 

40 CFR Part 62 

[R06–OAR–2005–OK–0004; FRL–7979–7] 

Approval and Promulgation of State 

Plans for Designated Facilities and 

Pollutants: Oklahoma; Plan for 

Controlling Emissions From 

Commercial and Industrial Solid Waste 

Incineration Units 

AGENCY: Environmental Protection 

Agency (EPA). 

ACTION: Direct final rule. 

SUMMARY: EPA is taking direct final 

action on the ‘‘State Plan’’ submitted by 

the state of Oklahoma on June 29, 2005, 

to fulfill the requirement of sections 

111/(d)/129 of the Clean Air Act for 

commercial and industrial solid waste 

incineration (CISWI) units. The State 

Plan provides for the implementation 

and enforcement of the Emissions 

Guidelines, as promulgated by EPA 

December 1, 2000, applicable to existing 

CISWI units for which construction 

commenced on or before November 30, 

1999. The State Plan establishes 

emission limits, monitoring, operating, 

and recordkeeping requirements for 

commercial and industrial solid waste 

incinerator (CISWI) units for which 

construction commenced on or before 

November 30, 1999. 

DATES: This direct final rule is effective 

on December 5, 2005 without further 

notice, unless EPA receives adverse 

comment by November 3, 2005. If EPA 

receives such comment, EPA will 

publish a timely withdrawal in the 

Federal Register informing the public 

that this rule will not take effect. 

ADDRESSES: Comments may be 

submitted electronically, by mail, by 

facsimile, or through hand delivery/ 

courier by following the detailed 

instructions provided under the ‘‘Public 

Participation’’ heading in the 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION section of 

this document. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Mr. 

Kenneth W. Boyce, Air Planning 

Section, Environmental Protection 

Agency, Region 6, 1445 Ross Avenue, 

Suite 700, Dallas, Texas 75202–2833, at 

(214) 665–7259 or 

boyce.kenneth@epa.gov. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

Throughout this document wherever 

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

the EPA. 

Table of Contents 

I. What Action Is EPA Taking Today? 

II. Background