[Federal Register Volume 65, Number 248 (Tuesday, December 26, 2000)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 81371-81373]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 00-32557]


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

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

40 CFR Part 52

[AZ063-0034; FRL-6916-4]


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

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Final rule.

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

SUMMARY: EPA is finalizing a limited approval of revisions to the Pinal 
County Air Quality Control District (PCAQCD) portion of the Arizona 
State Implementation Plan (SIP). This action was proposed in the 
Federal Register on July 24, 2000 and concerns volatile organic 
compound (VOC) emissions from stationary storage tanks, dock loading 
and leakages from pumps and compressors. Under authority of the Clean 
Air Act as amended in 1990 (CAA or the Act), this action approves local 
rules that regulate these emission sources but identifies several rule 
deficiencies. There are no sanctions associated with this action as 
PCAQCD is in attainment with the ozone NAAQS.

EFFECTIVE DATE: This rule is effective on January 25, 2001.

ADDRESSES: You can inspect copies of the administrative record for this 
action at EPA's Region IX office during normal business hours. You can 
inspect copies of the submitted SIP revisions at the following 
locations:
    EPA, Region IX, 75 Hawthorne Street, San Francisco, CA 94105.
    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, Phoenix, AZ 85012.
    Pinal County Air Quality Control District, Building F, 31 North 
Pinal Street, (P.O. Box 987), Florence, AZ 85232.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Andrew Steckel, Rulemaking Office 
(AIR-4), U.S. EPA, Region IX, (415) 744-1185.

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

I. Proposed Action

    On July 24, 2000 (65 FR 45566), EPA proposed a limited approval of 
the following rules that were submitted for incorporation into the 
Arizona SIP.

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
         Local agency             Rule No.                   Rule title                   Adopted     Submitted
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
PCAQCD........................     5-18-740  Storage of Volatile Organic Compounds--       02/22/95     11/27/95
                                              Organic Compound Emissions.
PCAQCD........................     5-19-800  General..................................     02/22/95     11/27/95
PCAQCD........................    5-24-1055  Pumps and Compressors--Organic Compound       02/22/95     11/27/95
                                              Emissions.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    We proposed a limited approval because we determined that these 
rules improve the SIP and are largely consistent with the relevant CAA 
requirements. However, we cannot grant a full approval because the 
rules contain deficiencies which conflict with section 110 of the Act. 
Our proposed action contains more information on the basis for this 
rulemaking, but the major deficiency that we identified is that the 
rules do not adequately specify test methods, recordkeeping, 
monitoring, and other requirements needed to make the rules 
enforceable.

II. Public Comments and EPA Responses

    EPA's proposed action provided a 30-day public comment period. 
During this period, we received a letter dated August 22, 2000 from 
Donald Gabrielson of PCAQCD. This letter clarified that EPA's proposed 
action ``will not trigger a requirement for additional revisions of 
these rules.'' EPA concurs with this statement. The letter also 
requested that EPA explicitly delete old PCAQCD rules R7-3-3.1, 3-2 and 
3-3 when approving new PCAQCD rules 5-18-740, 19-800 and 24-1055. As 
stated below, EPA's final action to approve the new rules will 
supercede the old rules.

III. EPA Action

    No comments were submitted that change our assessment of the rules 
as described in our proposed action. Therefore, as authorized in 
sections 110(k)(3) and 301(a) of the Act, EPA is finalizing a limited 
approval of the submitted rules. This action incorporates the submitted 
rules into the Arizona SIP, including those provisions identified as 
deficient and will supercede Rules 7-3-3.1, 7-3-3.2, and 7-3-3.3 from 
the SIP. Note that the submitted rules have been adopted by the PCAQCD, 
and EPA's final limited approval does not prevent PCAQCD from enforcing 
them. Because this is an attainment area, EPA is not simultaneously 
finalizing a limited disapproval of the rules. As a result, no 
sanctions clocks under section 179 or FIP clocks under section 110(c) 
are associated with this action.

IV. Administrative Requirements

A. Executive Order 12866

    The Office of Management and Budget (OMB) has exempted this 
regulatory action from Executive Order (E.O.) 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 E.O. 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 E.O. 13045 because it does not involve 
decisions intended to mitigate health or safety risks.

C. Executive Order 13084

    Under E.O. 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

[[Page 81372]]

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, E.O. 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 E.O. 13084 do not apply.

D. Executive Order 13132

    E.O. 13132, entitled Federalism (64 FR 43255, August 10, 1999) 
revokes and replaces E.O. 12612, Federalism and 12875, Enhancing the 
Intergovernmental Partnership. E.O. 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 E.O. 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 
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 E.O. 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 
significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities.
    Moreover, due to the nature of the Federal-State relationship under 
the CAA, preparation of flexibility analysis would constitute Federal 
inquiry into the economic reasonableness of state action. The Clean Air 
Act forbids EPA to base its actions concerning SIPs on such grounds. 
Union Electric Co., v. U.S. EPA, 427 U.S. 246, 255-66 (1976); 42 U.S.C. 
7410(a)(2).

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 February 26, 2001. 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).

[[Page 81373]]

List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52

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

    Dated: November 28, 2000.
Felicia Marcus,
Regional Administrator, Region IX.

    Part 52, chapter I, title 40 of the 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 et seq.

Subpart D--Arizona

    2. Section 52.120 is amended by adding paragraph (c)(84)(i)(F) to 
read as follows:


Sec. 52.120  Identification of plan.

* * * * *
    (c) * * *
    (84)
    (i) * * *
    (F) Amendments to Rules 5-18-740, 5-19-800, and 5-24-1055 adopted 
on February 22, 1995.
* * * * *
[FR Doc. 00-32557 Filed 12-22-00; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P