[Federal Register Volume 65, Number 190 (Friday, September 29, 2000)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 58359-58361]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 00-24568]


=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

40 CFR Part 52

[AZ 063-0029a; FRL-6866-1]


Revisions to the Arizona State Implementation Plan, Pinal County 
Air Quality Control District

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Direct final rule.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

SUMMARY: EPA is taking direct final action to approve revisions to the 
Arizona State Implementation Plan (SIP) which concern the control of 
sulfur emissions within the Pinal County Air Quality Control District 
(PCAQCD). We are approving three local rules and rescinding one local 
rule that regulate these emissions under the Clean Air Act as amended 
in 1990 (CAA or the Act).

DATES: This rule is effective on November 28, 2000 without further 
notice, unless EPA receives adverse comments by October 30, 2000. If we 
receive such comment, we will publish a timely withdrawal in the 
Federal Register to notify the public that this rule will not take 
effect.

ADDRESSES: Mail comments to Andy Steckel, Rulemaking Office Chief (AIR-
4), U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Region IX, 75 Hawthorne 
Street, San Francisco, CA 94105-3901.
    You can inspect copies of the submitted SIP revisions and EPA's 
technical support documents (TSDs) at our Region IX office during 
normal business hours. You may also see copies of the submitted SIP 
revisions at the following locations:

Environmental Protection Agency, Air Docket (6102), Ariel Rios 
Building, 1200 Pennsylvania Avenue, NW., Washington, DC 20460.
Arizona Department of Environmental Quality, 3033 North Central Avenue, 
Phoeniz, AZ 85012.
Pinal County Air Quality Control District, Building F, 31 North Pinal 
Street, Florence, AZ 85232.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Christine Vineyard, Rulemaking Office 
(AIR-4), U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Region IX, (415) 744-
1197.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Throughout this document, ``we,'' ``us'' and 
``our'' refer to EPA.

Table of Contents

I. The State's Submittal
    A. What rules did the State submit?
    B. What is the purpose of the submitted rule revisions?
II. EPA's Evaluation and Action
    A. How is EPA evaluating the rules?
    B. Do the rules meet the evaluation criteria?
    C. Public comment and final action.
III. Background Information
    Why were these rules submitted?
IV. Administrative Requirements

I. The State's Submittal

A. What Rules Did the State Submit?

    Table 1 lists the rules we are approving and the rule we are 
rescinding with the dates that they were adopted by the local air 
agency and submitted by the Arizona Department of Environmental 
Quality.

                                            Table 1.--Submitted Rules
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
              Local agency                  Rule No.              Rule title              Adopted     Submitted
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
PCAQCD..................................     5-22-950  Fossil Fuel Fired Steam             02/22/95     11/27/95
                                                        Generator Standard
                                                        Applicability.
PCAQCD..................................     5-22-960  Fossil Fuel Fired Steam             02/22/95     11/27/95
                                                        Generator Sulfur Dioxide
                                                        Emission Limitation.
PCAQCD..................................    5-24-1024  Sulfite pulp mills--sulfur          02/22/95     11/27/95
                                                        compound emissions.
PCAQCD..................................      7-3-2.5  Other Industries (repealed)....     06/20/96     10/07/98
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    On February 2, 1996 and April 24, 1999, these rule submittals were 
found to meet the completeness criteria in 40 CFR part 51, appendix V, 
which must be met before formal EPA review.

B. What Is The Purpose of the Submitted Rule Revisions?

    The rules submitted by the PCAQCD are intended to replace existing 
SIP rules that apply to both Pinal and Gila Counties formerly known as 
the Pinal-Gila Counties Air Quality Control District.\1\ Therefore, the 
submitted rule revisions are applicable to the Pinal County Air Quality 
Control District only. The SIP rules as applicable to Gila County will 
not change. TSD has more information about these rules.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ Pinal County was a participant in a multi-county air quality 
control district known as the Pinal-Gila Air Quality Control 
District. In 1988 the respective Boards of Supervisors of Pinal 
County and Gila County agreed to dissolve the Pinal-Gila Counties 
Air Quality Control Districts. Gila County terminated its 
participation in the air district and gave jurisdiction for air 
quality control in Gila County to the State of Arizona. PCAQCD was 
formed to regulate air quality in Pinal County.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

II. EPA's Evaluation and Action

A. How Is EPA Evaluating the Rules?

    In determining the approvability of the SO2 rules, EPA 
must evaluate each rule for consistency with the requirements of the 
CAA and EPA regulations, as found in section 110 and 40 CFR part 51 
(Requirements for Preparation, Adoption, and Submittal of 
Implementation Plans).
    While the portion of PCAQCD applicable to these submittals is in 
attainment with the SO2 NAAQS, many of the general SIP 
requirements regarding enforceablity and SIP relaxation (see 110(l)and 
193 of the Act), for example, are still appropriate for these rules.
    Guidance and policy documents that we used to define specific 
enforceability requirements include the following:

    1. ``Issues Relating to VOC Regulation Cutpoints, Deficiencies, and 
Deviations; Clarification to Appendix D of November 24, 1987 Federal 
Register Document,'' (Blue Book), notice of availability published in 
the May 25, 1988 Federal Register.
    2. ``SO2 Guideline Document,'' EPA-452/R-94-008.

B. Do the Rules Meet the Evaluation Criteria?

    We believe these rules are consistent with the relevant policy and 
guidance regarding enforceability and SIP relaxations. The rule 
revisions are primarily administrative, where PCAQCD renumbers existing 
SIP regulations to make them applicable to Pinal County only and 
rescinds one rule that is no longer applicable. The TSD has more 
information on our evaluation.

[[Page 58360]]

C. Public Comment and Final Action

    As authorized in section 110(k)(3) of the Act, EPA is fully 
approving the submitted rules because we believe they fulfill all 
relevant requirements. We do not think anyone will object to this, so 
we are finalizing the approval without proposing it in advance. 
However, in the Proposed Rules section of this Federal Register, we are 
simultaneously proposing approval of the same submitted rules. If we 
receive adverse comments by October 30, 2000, we will publish a timely 
withdrawal in the Federal Register to notify the public that the direct 
final approval will not take effect and we will address the comments in 
a subsequent final action based on the proposal. If we do not receive 
timely adverse comments, the direct final approval will be effective 
without further notice on November 28, 2000. This will incorporate 
these rules into the federally enforceable SIP and remove the rescinded 
rule from the SIP for Pinal County.

III. Background Information

Why Were These Rules Submitted?

    40 CFR 81.303 provides the attainment status designations for air 
districts in Arizona. In Pinal County, there are two clearly defined 
sulfur dioxide nonattainment areas. One surrounds the BHP copper 
smelter located in San Manuel; the other surrounds the ASARCO Hayden 
copper smelter complex. Since Arizona statutes have exclusive 
jurisdiction over copper smelters, the Arizona Department of 
Environmental Quality prepares and executes the implementation plans 
for those sulfur dioxide nonattainment areas. The rules submitted by 
the PCAQCD applies to sources in the portion of the county designated 
``attainment'' for sulfur dioxide.
    Sulfur dioxide is formed by the combustion of fuels containing 
sulfur compounds. High concentrations of SO2 affect 
breathing and may aggravate existing respiratory and cardiovascular 
disease.

IV. Administrative Requirements

A. Executive Order 12866

    The Office of Management and Budget (OMB) has exempted this 
regulatory action from Executive Order 12866, entitled ``Regulatory 
Planning and Review.''

B. Executive Order 13045

    Executive Order 13045, entitled Protection of Children from 
Environmental Health Risks and Safety Risks (62 FR 19885, April 23, 
1997), applies to any rule that: (1) Is determined to be ``economically 
significant'' as defined under Executive Order 12866, and (2) concerns 
an environmental health or safety risk that EPA has reason to believe 
may have a disproportionate effect on children. If the regulatory 
action meets both criteria, the Agency must evaluate the environmental 
health or safety effects of the planned rule on children, and explain 
why the planned regulation is preferable to other potentially effective 
and reasonably feasible alternatives considered by the Agency.
    This rule is not subject to Executive Order 13045 because it does 
not involve decisions intended to mitigate environmental health or 
safety risks.

C. Executive Order 13084

    Under Executive Order 13084, Consultation and Coordination with 
Indian Tribal Governments, EPA may not issue a regulation that is not 
required by statute, that significantly affects or uniquely affects the 
communities of Indian tribal governments, and that imposes substantial 
direct compliance costs on those communities, unless the Federal 
government provides the funds necessary to pay the direct compliance 
costs incurred by the tribal governments. If the mandate is unfunded, 
EPA must provide to OMB, in a separately identified section of the 
preamble to the rule, a description of the extent of EPA's prior 
consultation with representatives of affected tribal governments, a 
summary of the nature of their concerns, and a statement supporting the 
need to issue the regulation. In addition, Executive Order 13084 
requires EPA to develop an effective process permitting elected and 
other representatives of Indian tribal governments ``to provide 
meaningful and timely input in the development of regulatory policies 
on matters that significantly or uniquely affect their communities.''
    Today's rule does not significantly or uniquely affect the 
communities of Indian tribal governments. Accordingly, the requirements 
of section 3(b) of Executive Order 13084 do not apply to this rule.

D. Executive Order 13132

    Executive Order 13132, entitled Federalism (64 FR 43255, August 10, 
1999) revokes and replaces Executive Orders 12612, Federalism and 
12875, Enhancing the Intergovernmental Partnership. Executive Order 
13132 requires EPA to develop an accountable process to ensure 
``meaningful and timely input by State and local officials in the 
development of regulatory policies that have federalism implications.'' 
``Policies that have federalism implications'' is defined in the 
Executive Order to include regulations that 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.'' Under 
Executive Order 13132, EPA may not issue a regulation that has 
federalism implications, that imposes substantial direct compliance 
costs, and that is not required by statute, unless the Federal 
government provides the funds necessary to pay the direct compliance 
costs incurred by State and local governments, or EPA consults with 
State and local officials early in the process of developing the 
proposed regulation. EPA also may not issue a regulation that has 
federalism implications and that preempts State law unless the Agency 
consults with State and local officials early in the process of 
developing the proposed regulation.
    This rule will 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, because it 
merely acts on a state rule implementing a federal standard, and does 
not alter the relationship or the distribution of power and 
responsibilities established in the Clean Air Act. Thus, the 
requirements of section 6 of the Executive Order do not apply to this 
rule.

E. Regulatory Flexibility Act

    The Regulatory Flexibility Act (RFA) generally requires an agency 
to conduct a regulatory flexibility analysis of any rule subject to 
notice and comment rulemaking requirements unless the agency certifies 
that the rule will not have a significant economic impact on a 
substantial number of small entities. Small entities include small 
businesses, small not-for-profit enterprises, and small governmental 
jurisdictions.
    This final rule will not have a significant impact on a substantial 
number of small entities because SIP approvals under section 110 and 
subchapter I, part D of the Clean Air Act do not create any new 
requirements but simply act on requirements that the State is already 
imposing. Therefore, because the Federal SIP approval does not create 
any new requirements, I certify that this action will not have a

[[Page 58361]]

significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities.

F. 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 
private sector, of $100 million or more. Under section 205, EPA must 
select the most cost-effective 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 acts on pre-
existing requirements under State or local law, and imposes no new 
requirements. Accordingly, no additional costs to State, local, or 
tribal governments, or to the private sector, result from this action.

G. National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act

    Section 12 of the National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act 
(NTTAA) of 1995 requires Federal agencies to evaluate existing 
technical standards when developing a new regulation. To comply with 
NTTAA, EPA must consider and use ``voluntary consensus standards'' 
(VCS) if available and applicable when developing programs and policies 
unless doing so would be inconsistent with applicable law or otherwise 
impractical.
    EPA believes that VCS are inapplicable to today's action because it 
does not require the public to perform activities conducive to the use 
of VCS.

H. 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 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 rule is not a ``major'' rule as defined by 5 U.S.C. 
804(2).

I. 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 28, 2000. 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, Ozone, Reporting and 
recordkeeping requirements, Sulfur Oxides.

    Dated: August 18, 2000.
Nora McGee,
Acting Regional Administrator, Region IX.

    Part 52, chapter I, title 40 of the Code of Federal Regulations is 
amended as follows:

PART 52--[AMENDED]

    1. Authority citation for part 52 continues to read as follows:

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

Subpart D--Arizona

    2. Section 52.120 is amended by adding paragraphs (c)(18)(iv)(C) 
and (c)(84)(i)(E) to read as follows:


Sec. 52.120  Identification of plan.

* * * * *
    (c) * * *
    (18) * * *
    (iv) * * *
    (C) Previously approved on December 17, 1979 and now deleted 
without replacement Rule 7-3-2.5.
* * * * *
    (84) * * *
    (i) * * *
    (E) Rules 5-22-950, 5-22-960, and 5-24-1045 codified on February 
22, 1995.
* * * * *
[FR Doc. 00-24568 Filed 9-28-00; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P