53130 Federal Register / Vol. 73, No. 179 / Monday, September 15, 2008 / Rules and Regulations 

Federal Government and Indian tribes, 

or on the distribution of power and 

responsibilities between the Federal 

Government and Indian tribes. 

Energy Effects 

We have analyzed this rule under 

Executive Order 13211, Actions 

Concerning Regulations That 

Significantly Affect Energy Supply, 

Distribution, or Use. We have 

determined that it is not a ‘‘significant 

energy action’’ under that order because 

it is not a ‘‘significant regulatory action’’ 

under Executive Order 12866 and is not 

likely to have a significant adverse effect 

on the supply, distribution, or use of 

energy. The Administrator of the Office 

of Information and Regulatory Affairs 

has not designated it as a significant 

energy action. Therefore, it does not 

require a Statement of Energy Effects 

under Executive Order 13211. 

Technical Standards 

The National Technology Transfer 

and Advancement Act (NTTAA) (15 

U.S.C. 272 note) directs agencies to use 

voluntary consensus standards in their 

regulatory activities unless the agency 

provides Congress, through the Office of 

Management and Budget, with an 

explanation of why using these 

standards is inconsistent with 

applicable law or otherwise impractical. 

Voluntary consensus standards are 

technical standards (e.g., specifications 

of materials, performance, design, or 

operation; test methods; sampling 

procedures; and related management 

systems practices) that are developed or 

adopted by voluntary consensus 

standards bodies. 

This rule does not use technical 

standards. Therefore, we did not 

consider the use of voluntary consensus 

standards. 

Environment 

We have analyzed this rule under 

Commandant Instruction M16475.lD 

and Department of Homeland Security 

Management Directive 5100.1, which 

guide the Coast Guard in complying 

with the National Environmental Policy 

Act of 1969 (NEPA) (42 U.S.C. 4321– 

4370f), and have concluded under the 

Instruction that there are no factors in 

this case that limit the use of a 

categorical exclusion under section 

2.B.2 of the Instruction. Therefore, 

under figure 2–1, paragraph (34)(g) of 

the Commandant Instruction 

M16475.1D, this rule is categorically 

excluded from further environmental 

documentation because it is a regulation 

establishing a safety zone. 

A final ‘‘Environmental Analysis 

Check List’’ and a final ‘‘Categorical 

Exclusion Determination’’ are available 

in the docket where indicated under 

ADDRESSES. 

List of Subjects 33 CFR Part 165 

Harbors, Marine Safety, Navigation 

(water), Reporting and recordkeeping 

requirements, Security measures, and 

Waterways. 

■ For the reasons discussed in the 

preamble, the Coast Guard amends 33 

CFR part 165 as follows: 

PART 165—REGULATED NAVIGATION 

AREAS AND LIMITED ACCESS AREAS 

■ 1. The authority citation for part 165 

continues to read as follows: 

Authority: 33 U.S.C. 1226, 1231; 46 U.S.C. 

Chapter 701, 3306, 3703; 50 U.S.C. 191, 195; 

33 CFR 1.05–1, 6.04–1, 6.04–6, and 160.5; 

Public Law 107–295, 116 Stat. 2064; 

Department of Homeland Security Delegation 

No. 0170.1. 

■ 2. Add § 165.T14–173 to read as 

follows: 

§ 165.T14–173 Safety Zone; Agat Bay and 

adjacent waters, GU. 

(a) Location. The following areas, 

within the Guam Captain of the Port 

Zone (See 33 CFR 3.70–15), from the 

surface of the water to the ocean floor, 

are a safety zone: 

(1) All waters bounded by a circle 

with a 300-meter radius on the surface 

and a 2750-meter radius underwater, 

centered at 13°23′42′′ N and 144°35′00′′ 

E (NAD 1983); 

(2) All waters bounded by a circle 

with a 300-meter radius on the surface 

and a 2750-meter radius underwater, 

centered at 13°27′42′′ N and 144°38′30′′ 

E. 

(b) Effective Dates. This rule is 

effective beginning September 15, 2008, 

through September 17, 2008, daily 

between the hours of 8 a.m. and 11:59 

p.m. 

(c) Enforcement Period. This rule will 

be enforced from 8 a.m. through 11:59 

p.m., each day, from September 15, 

2008, through September 17, 2008. 

(d) Regulations. The general 

regulations governing safety zones 

contained in 33 CFR 165.23 apply. Entry 

into, transit through or anchoring within 

this zone is prohibited unless 

authorized by the Captain of the Port or 

a designated representative thereof. 

(e) Enforcement. Any Coast Guard 

commissioned, warrant, or petty officer, 

and any other Captain of the Port 

representative permitted by law, may 

enforce this temporary safety zone. 

(f) Waiver. The Captain of the Port 

may waive any of the requirements of 

this rule for any person, vessel, or class 

of vessel upon finding that application 

of the safety zone is unnecessary or 

impractical for the purpose of maritime 

security. 

Dated: September 3, 2008. 

T. Sparks, 

Captain, U.S. Coast Guard, Captain of the 

Port Guam. 

[FR Doc. E8–21549 Filed 9–11–08; 4:15 pm] 

BILLING CODE 4910–15–P 

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION 

AGENCY 

40 CFR Part 52 

[EPA–R03–OAR–2005–MD–0013; FRL– 

8714–5] 

Approval and Promulgation of Air 

Quality Implementation Plans; 

Maryland; Amendments to the Control 

of Incinerators 

AGENCY: Environmental Protection 

Agency (EPA). 

ACTION: Final rule. 

SUMMARY: EPA is approving a State 

Implementation Plan (SIP) revision 

submitted by the Maryland Department 

of the Environment (MDE). This 

revision pertains to amendments to the 

regulations for the control of 

incinerators. This action is being taken 

under the Clean Air Act (CAA or the 

Act). 

DATES: Effective Date: This final rule is 

effective on October 15, 2008. 

ADDRESSES: EPA has established a 

docket for this action under Docket ID 

Number EPA–R03–OAR–2005–MD– 

0013. All documents in the docket are 

listed in the www.regulations.gov Web 

site. Although listed in the electronic 

docket, some information is not publicly 

available, i.e., confidential business 

information (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 through 

www.regulations.gov or in hard copy for 

public inspection during normal 

business hours at the Air Protection 

Division, U.S. Environmental Protection 

Agency, Region III, 1650 Arch Street, 

Philadelphia, Pennsylvania 19103. 

Copies of the State submittal are 

available at the Maryland Department of 

the Environment, 1800 Washington 

Boulevard, Suite 705, Baltimore, 

Maryland 21230. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Marilyn Powers, (215) 814–2308, or by 

e-mail at powers.marilyn@epa.gov. 


jlentini on PROD1PC65 with RULES
Federal Register / Vol. 73, No. 179 / Monday, September 15, 2008 / Rules and Regulations 53131 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

I. Background 

On January 31, 2006 (70 FR 5033), 

EPA published a notice of proposed 

rulemaking (NPR) for the State of 

Maryland. The NPR proposed approval 

of the amendments to regulations .01 

and .05 under COMAR 26.11.08 Control 

of Incinerators. The formal SIP revision 

was submitted by the MDE on October 

31, 2005 (#05–06). Other specific 

requirements of the SIP revision and the 

rationale for EPA’s proposed action are 

explained in the NPR and will not be 

restated here. On March 2, 2006, EPA 

received an adverse comment on its 

January 31, 2006 NPR. A summary of 

the comment submitted and EPA’s 

response is provided in Section II of this 

document. 

II. Summary of Public Comments and 

EPA Responses 

Comment: A commenter submitted 

test results from the following 

pollutants: visible emissions, particulate 

matter, carbon monoxide, nitrogen 

oxides, sulfur dioxide, hydrogen 

chloride, metals (cadmium, mercury, 

and lead), dioxins, and furans 

concerning human and animal 

crematories. The test results show that 

the emissions of nearly all the tested 

pollutants increased when the operating 

temperature was raised. From the test 

results, the commenter indicates that 

there is no benefit to the higher 

operating temperatures required in 

many states. The commenter indicates 

that the test results also demonstrate 

that crematories are capable of low 

emissions without the use of additional 

control equipment. 

Response: This rulemaking is limited 

to the amendments of .01 and .05 under 

COMAR 26.11.08 Control of 

Incinerators. These amendments define 

the term ‘‘crematory’’ and clarify that 

crematories are subject to the 0.1 grain 

loading particulate matter requirement. 

This rulemaking does not address 

visible emissions or emissions of carbon 

monoxide, nitrogen oxides, sulfur 

dioxide, hydrogen chloride, metals, 

dioxins, and furans. Comments 

regarding emissions of these pollutants 

are not relevant to this rulemaking. EPA 

is required to respond only to comments 

relevant to the rulemaking. See, e.g., 

Whitman v. American Trucking Ass’n., 

531 U.S. 457, 471 (2001). To the extent 

that the comment addresses a pollutant 

relevant to this rulemaking, such as 

particulate matter, the commenter 

appears to be challenging the State’s 

decision to regulate crematories in the 

particular manner it has chosen. The 

CAA is based upon ‘‘cooperative 

federalism,’’ which contemplates that 

each State will develop its own SIP, and 

that States retain a large degree of 

flexibility in choosing which sources to 

control and to what degree. EPA must 

approve a State’s plan if it meets the 

minimum requirements of the CAA. 

Union Electric Co. v. EPA, 427 U.S. 246, 

264–266 (1976). The comment therefore 

presents no basis for EPA disapproving 

the proposed SIP revision. 

III. Final Action 

EPA is approving Maryland’s SIP 

revision submitted on October 31, 2005. 

The SIP revision clarifies that 

crematories are subject to the particulate 

matter requirements of COMAR 

26.11.08 by amending the definitions in 

section .01 and the emissions 

requirements in section .05. 

IV. Statutory and Executive Order 

Reviews 

A. General Requirements 

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 

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 

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 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. 

B. Submission to Congress and the 

Comptroller General 

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 action 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). 

C. 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 November 14, 

2008. Filing a petition for 

reconsideration by the Administrator of 

this final rule does not affect the finality 

of this action 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 approving a 

Maryland SIP revision that amends 

COMAR 26.11.08 may not be challenged 

later in proceedings to enforce its 

requirements. (See section 307(b)(2).) 


jlentini on PROD1PC65 with RULES
53132 Federal Register / Vol. 73, No. 179 / Monday, September 15, 2008 / Rules and Regulations 

List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52 

Environmental protection, Air 

pollution control, Incorporation by 

reference, Particulate matter, Reporting 

and recordkeeping requirements. 

Dated: August 29, 2008. 

Donald S. Welsh, 

Regional Administrator, Region III. 

■ 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 et seq. 

Subpart V—Maryland 

■ 2. In (52.1070, the table in paragraph 

(c) is amended by revising the entries 

for COMAR 10.18.08.01 and 10.18.08.05 

to read as follows: 

§ 52.1070 Identification of plan. 

* * * * * 

(c) * * * 

EPA-APPROVED REGULATIONS IN THE MARYLAND SIP 

Code of Maryland 

administrative regulations 

(COMAR) citation 

Title/subject State effective 

date EPA approval date Additional explanation/ citation at 40 CFR § 52.1100 

* * * * * * * 

COMAR 10.18.08/26.11.08 Control of Incinerators 

10.18.08/26.11.08.01 .............. Definitions .............................. 9/12/05 9/15/08 [Insert page number 

where the document begins].

Definition of ‘‘crematory’’ is 

added. 

* * * * * * * 

10.18.08/26.11.08.05 .............. Particulate Matter ................... 9/12/05 9/15/08 [Insert page number 

where the document begins].

Sections .05A(3) and 

.05B(2)(a) are revised. 

* * * * * * * 

* * * * * 

[FR Doc. E8–21310 Filed 9–12–08; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 6560–50–P 

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION 

AGENCY 

40 CFR Part 52 

[EPA–R03–OAR–2008–0333; FRL–8714–4] 

Approval and Promulgation of Air 

Quality Implementation Plans; Virginia, 

Reasonably Available Control 

Technology (RACT) for Norfolk 

Southern Corporation 

AGENCY: Environmental Protection 

Agency (EPA). 

ACTION: Final rule. 

SUMMARY: EPA is approving a State 

Implementation Plan (SIP) revision 

submitted by the Commonwealth of 

Virginia removing a nitrogen oxide 

(NOX) reasonably available control 

technology (RACT) permit from the 

Virginia SIP for sources located at the 

Norfolk Southern Railway Company— 

East End Shops’ facility located in 

Roanoke, Virginia, which have 

permanently shut down. This action is 

being taken under the Clean Air Act 

(CAA). 

DATES: Effective Date: This final rule is 

effective on October 15, 2008. 

ADDRESSES: EPA has established a 

docket for this action under Docket ID 

Number EPA–R03–OAR–2008–0333. All 

documents in the docket are listed in 

the www.regulations.gov Web site. 

Although listed in the electronic docket, 

some information is not publicly 

available, i.e., confidential business 

information (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 through 

www.regulations.gov or in hard copy for 

public inspection during normal 

business hours at the Air Protection 

Division, U.S. Environmental Protection 

Agency, Region III, 1650 Arch Street, 

Philadelphia, Pennsylvania 19103. 

Copies of the State submittal are 

available at the Virginia Department of 

Environmental Quality, 629 East Main 

Street, Richmond, Virginia 23219. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Ellen Wentworth, (215) 814–2034, or by 

e-mail at wentworth.ellen@epa.gov. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

I. Background 

On May 27, 2008 (73 FR 30340), EPA 

published a notice of proposed 

rulemaking (NPR) for the 

Commonwealth of Virginia. The NPR 

proposed approval of the removal of a 

NOX RACT permit from the Virginia SIP 

for sources located at the Norfolk 

Southern Railway Company—East End 

Shops’ facility, in Roanoke, Virginia 

which have permanently shut down. 

The formal SIP revision was submitted 

by the Virginia Department of 

Environmental Quality (VADEQ) on 

February 11, 2008. 

II. Summary of SIP Revision 

On February 11, 2008, the 

Commonwealth of Virginia submitted a 

revision to its SIP which requested the 

removal of NOX RACT permit No. 

20468, issued to the Norfolk Southern 

Railway Company—East End Shops’ 

facility in Roanoke, Virginia, from the 

Virginia SIP. Since the time of EPA’s 

approval of the NOX RACT 

requirements for NOX RACT-subject 

sources at this facility (70 FR 21621, 

April 27, 2005), many sources, 

including those that had previously 

been subject to the NOX RACT 

requirements of 9 VAC 5–40 via permit 

No. 20468, were permanently shut 

down. As a result, the VADEQ requested 

that EPA remove NOX RACT permit No. 

20468 from the Virginia SIP since it was 

no longer applicable. The SIP revision 

consisted of mutual shut down 

agreements between the VADEQ and the 

Norfolk Southern Railway Company— 


jlentini on PROD1PC65 with RULES