[Federal Register Volume 66, Number 228 (Tuesday, November 27, 2001)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 59161-59166]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 01-29383]


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

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

40 CFR Part 70

[FRL-7107-4]
RIN 2060-AJ60


Change to Definition of Major Source

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Final rule.

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

SUMMARY: This action promulgates a proposed change to the definition of 
``major source''. The change would no longer require States to provide 
that sources in categories subject to standards under section 111 or 
112 promulgated after August 7, 1980 must include fugitive emissions in 
determining major source status under section 302 or part D of title I 
of the Act. The EPA is making this change to address a petition by the 
American Mining Congress (now known as the National Mining Association) 
challenging the requirement in the current regulation that sources in 
all section 111 or 112 categories must count fugitive emissions, 
regardless of when the section 111 or 112 standards were promulgated, 
in determining major source status under section 302 or part D of title 
I. By making this change, we will also allow full approval in several 
State programs that contain the August 7, 1980 date.

EFFECTIVE DATE: November 27, 2001.

ADDRESSES: Docket No. A-93-50 contains information considered by EPA in 
developing the promulgated rule and is available for public inspection 
between 8:00 a.m. and 5:30 p.m., Monday through Friday, excluding 
Federal holidays, at the following address: U.S. EPA, Air and Radiation 
Docket and Information Center (6102), 401 M Street SW, Washington, DC 
20460, telephone (202) 260-7548. The docket is located at the above 
address in room M-1500, Waterside Mall (ground floor). A reasonable fee 
may be charged for copying docket materials.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: For further information, contact Mr. 
Raymond H. Vogel, Jr., Operating Permits Group, Information Transfer 
and Program Implementation Division (MD-12), Office of Air Quality 
Planning and Standards, U.S. EPA, Research Triangle Park, North 
Carolina 27711, telephone number (919) 541-3153, facsimile number (919) 
541-5509, electronic mail address: [email protected].

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Regulated Entities

    Categories and entities potentially affected by this action include 
facilities currently required to obtain title V permits by State 
programs because of having been required to count fugitive emissions 
for sources in categories subject to section 111 or 112 standards 
promulgated after August 7, 1980.

World Wide Web (WWW)

    After signature, the final rule will be posted on the policy and 
guidance page for newly proposed or final rules of EPA's Technology 
Transfer Network at http://www.epa.gov/ttn/oarpg/t5.html. For more 
information, call the TTN HELP line at (919) 541-5384.

Table of Contents

I. Background and Public Participation
II. Response to Comments on Proposed Rule
    A. Proposal to insert August 7, 1980 date into paragraph 
(2)(xxvii) of the ``major source'' definition.
    B. Proposal to delete the phrase ``but only with respect to 
those air pollutants that have been regulated for that category.''
III. Administrative Requirements
    A. Executive Order 12866: ``Significant Regulatory Action 
Determination.''
    B. Regulatory Flexibility Act Compliance as amended by the Small 
Business Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act of 1966 (SBREFA), 5 
U.S.C. 601 et seq.
    C. Paperwork Reduction Act.
    D. Submission to Congress and the Comptroller General.
    E. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act.
    F. Executive Order 13132 (Federalism).
    G. Executive Order 13175: Consultation with Tribes.
    H. Executive Order 13045: Protection of Children from 
Environmental Health Risks and Safety Risks.
    I. Executive Order 13211 (Energy Effects).
    J. National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act.

I. Background and Public Participation

    Title V of the Clean Air Act (the Act) requires EPA to promulgate 
regulations governing the establishment of operating permits programs. 
The current regulations were promulgated on July 21, 1992 and codified 
at 40 CFR part 70. All major sources are required to obtain Title V 
operating permits. Major sources include those sources subject to 
prevention of significant deterioration (PSD) and nonattainment new 
source review (NSR), and any other sources with the potential to emit 
100 tons per year of an air pollutant. To determine major source status 
under section 302 or part D of title I, the current rules require you 
to count fugitive emissions if you are subject to a standard under 
section 111 or 112, regardless of when the standard was promulgated. 
The EPA proposed to revise the definition of ``major source'' for 
section 302 and part D of title I in August, 1994 to limit the 
requirement to count fugitive emissions to source categories regulated 
by section 111 or 112 standards promulgated as of August 7, 1980. (See 
59 FR 44460, August 29, 1994.) We proposed this revision in response to 
a petitioner who asserted that EPA could not require that fugitive 
emissions be counted for determining major source status until EPA 
conducted rulemaking as required under section 302(j) of the Act. The 
EPA has not performed such rulemaking; therefore, we are today revising 
the rule to add the August 7, 1980 date. In the future, EPA will 
consider doing rulemaking under section 302(j) for individual source 
categories.
    Subsequently, in August 1995, EPA proposed to revise the same part 
of the ``major source'' definition that it had proposed to change in 
1994, this time to limit the requirement to count fugitive emissions 
for section 111 or 112 standards to those standards for which EPA had 
performed the rulemaking required under section 302(j). (See 60 FR 
45530, August 31, 1995.) This change was proposed simply for 
administrative reasons, to allow EPA to avoid revising part 70 each 
time it performed a section 302(j) rulemaking. Today's rule does not 
adopt this language because some commenters expressed concern about 
knowing whether EPA had performed the latest section 302(j) rulemaking 
and which source categories they must as a result consider in 
determining major source status. Nevertheless, EPA will approve a State 
program that adopts the language we proposed in August, 1995 in lieu of 
the language promulgated in today's rule because the 1995 language 
effectively covers the same source categories.
    The EPA also proposed in the same 1995 notice to delete the phrase 
``but only with respect to those air pollutants that have been 
regulated for that category.'' The EPA proposed to delete this phrase 
to make the regulatory definitions of part 70 consistent with the 
corresponding provisions of the PSD and NSR nonattainment programs 
(hereafter, the term ``NSR'' is used to refer collectively to both 
programs). As

[[Page 59162]]

mentioned later in this preamble, today's rule takes final action by 
deleting this phrase.
    Under today's final rule, for purposes of determining whether a 
source is a major source under section 302 or part D of title I, a 
source belonging to a source category subject to a section 111 or 112 
standard is required to include fugitive emissions of all regulated 
pollutants under section 302 or part D of title I in its calculation of 
major source status only if the standard was promulgated as of August 
7, 1980. Under today's final rule, for purposes of determining whether 
a source is a major source under section 302 or part D of title I, 
State title V permitting programs are not required to provide that 
sources belonging to categories subject to section 111 or 112 standards 
promulgated after August 7, 1980 must include fugitive emissions of all 
regulated pollutants under section 302 or part D of title I in 
calculating major source status. Sources must, however, continue to 
include fugitive emissions of all hazardous air pollutants in 
determining major source status under section 112 of the Act.
    The final rule takes effect today, November 27, 2001. State 
permitting authorities with programs that currently provide the August 
7, 1980 limitation on including fugitive emissions need take no action, 
since their rules would be consistent with this final rule with respect 
to the August 7, 1980 date. Other permitting authorities may, but are 
not required to, revise their programs to include the August 7, 1980 
limitation. That is, States may include requirements that are more 
stringent than the Federal requirements, by requiring sources subject 
to section 111 or 112 standards promulgated after August 7, 1980 to 
count fugitive emissions in major source determinations under section 
302 or part D of title I. (See section 116 of the Act which allows 
States, within certain exceptions, to adopt requirements that are not 
less stringent than the requirements of the Act.)
    Except where legislative action is needed as described in the 
following paragraph, States must revise their programs by November 27, 
2002 to delete the phrase ``but only with respect to those air 
pollutants that have been regulated for that category.'' The 
Administrator specifies a deadline of 12 months for submittal of 
program revisions to delete the ``but only with respect to'' phrase in 
light of the narrow scope of the revision required of State programs. 
Authority for this deadline is provided in 40 CFR 70.4(i)(1), which 
specifies that the deadline for submittal of revisions to State part 70 
programs following revision of relevant Federal regulations is 180 days 
or ``such other period as the Administrator may specify, following 
notification * * * '' Today's notice is the notification that triggers 
the 12-month deadline.
    If a State can demonstrate that additional legal authority is 
needed, the deadline for submittal of a revised program to delete the 
phrase ``but only with respect to those air pollutants that have been 
regulated for that category'' is November 27, 2003. Authority for this 
deadline is the same provision in 40 CFR 70.4(i)(1) described in the 
preceding paragraph for the 12-month deadline.
    Any sources that become subject to part 70 because of revisions to 
State programs deleting the ``but only with respect to'' phrase must 
apply for title V permits either within 12 months of EPA's approval of 
the revised State program or by an earlier deadline that the permitting 
authority establishes. As provided in section 503(c) of the Act and 40 
CFR 70.5(a)(1)(i), a timely application for a source applying for a 
permit for the first time is one that is submitted within 12 months 
after the source becomes subject to the operating permits program or on 
or before such earlier date as the permitting authority may establish.

II. Response to Comments on Proposed Rule

A. Proposal To Insert August 7, 1980 Date Into Paragraph (2)(xxvii) of 
the ``Major Source'' Definition

    The preamble for the proposed rule in August 1994 described the 
rationale for the proposed revision. Public comments were solicited at 
the time of proposal and a public hearing was held. Industry 
representatives, regulatory agencies, environmental groups, and the 
general public were given the opportunity to comment on the proposed 
rule and to provide additional information during and after the public 
comment period, and at the public hearing.
    We received comments on this proposed rule revision, including a 
number of comments from industry in support of inserting the August 7, 
1980 date in paragraph (2)(xxvii) of the major source definition. 
However, several regulatory agencies opposed this change. One of these 
agencies commented that source categories regulated by new source 
performance standards (NSPS) are the significant source categories and 
for this reason should be required to include fugitive emissions for 
purposes of applicability determinations. Another agency commented that 
State fee levels for title V were based on an evaluation of sources 
that would be subject to the program under the original major source 
definition, and to change that definition could result in fewer 
emission fees which could adversely affect State permitting programs.
    The EPA responds that we do agree that sources in categories 
subject to section 111 standards are significant sources of emissions. 
We also understand that States may have forecasted emission fees based 
on the original major source definition, and that overall fees could 
potentially drop as a result of this change. However, as EPA noted in 
the preamble to the proposed rule, we did not follow the procedural 
steps necessary under section 302(j) to expand the scope of sources for 
which fugitive emissions must be counted in making major source 
determinations. (See 59 FR 44460, 44514.) Because the Agency is 
required to undertake rulemaking under section 302(j) before it can 
require the inclusion of fugitive emissions of regulated pollutants 
under section 302 or part D of title I in major source determinations 
and because this rulemaking has not occurred for sources subject to 
section 111 or 112 standards promulgated after August 7, 1980, we have 
to revise the rule as described.
    Finally, today's final rule inserts the August 7, 1980 date using 
the exact language from the corresponding provisions in the 
nonattainment NSR and PSD regulations in 40 CFR parts 51 and 52. This 
ensures that the title V and NSR programs are entirely consistent.

B. Proposal To Delete the Phrase ``but Only With Respect to Those Air 
Pollutants That Have Been Regulated for That Category''

    Today's action also deletes the phrase ``but only with respect to 
those air pollutants that have been regulated for that category'' from 
paragraph (2)(xxvii) of the major source definition. The EPA proposed 
to delete this phrase in its 1995 supplemental proposal to revise part 
70. (See 60 FR 45530, August 31, 1995.)
    Five industry commenters opposed the deletion of the phrase. Two of 
these commenters recommended that EPA keep the phrase until it 
undertakes new rulemaking under section 302(j), at which time the 
Agency could expand the types of fugitive emissions that must be 
considered when determining major source status. Two other commenters 
also noted that the rules implementing title V are intended to ensure 
that larger sources of potentially harmful emissions are drawn into the 
program more

[[Page 59163]]

quickly than smaller, nonmajor sources. They also noted that the 
purpose of the title V program is to compile in one permit all the 
requirements for regulated pollutants emitted from a major source. 
These commenters believe that neither of these purposes are served by 
counting the fugitive emissions of unregulated pollutants in the major 
source determination. Commenters also suggested that there is no need 
to rush sources subject to section 111 or 112 standards into the permit 
program on the basis of unregulated emissions, as these sources will be 
required to have permits independently of the major source program if 
and when EPA decides to require them to obtain permits. Commenters note 
that Congress, under section 502(a) of the Act, gives EPA authority to 
exempt nonmajor sources from the permit program by rule, and that this 
is evidence of Congressional intent to exclude sources from the program 
if the emissions of regulated pollutants do not reach major source 
levels.
    Commenters also asserted that it is not necessary to count 
unregulated fugitive emissions to harmonize the title V program with 
the NSR program, as EPA has suggested. Any potential problems caused by 
the inconsistency can be easily cured, they assert, by changing the 
part 70 rule implementing title V to require that a source required to 
have a permit under part C or D of the Act is also required to have a 
title V permit.
    The EPA disagrees with the approach advocated by the commenters. 
The Agency believes it is necessary to have consistent applicability 
approaches for the title V and NSR programs because title V 
incorporates major source definitions from section 302 and part D of 
title I which are used in the NSR program. Inconsistencies between 
title V and NSR could lead to a source being considered major under 
nonattainment NSR or PSD, but nonmajor under title V.\1\ Being 
considered nonmajor has certain ramifications in the part 70 program. 
Title V operating permits for nonmajor sources are required under 40 
CFR 70.3(c)(2) to include all the applicable requirements for the 
emissions units that caused the source to be subject to part 70. If an 
emission unit at the nonmajor source did not trigger the requirement to 
apply for a title V permit, then none of that unit's applicable 
requirements are required to be included in the source's permit.\2\ In 
addition, a part 70 source is required under 40 CFR 70.5(c)(3)(i) to 
report in its permit application emissions for which it is major as 
defined by part 70. If EPA adopted inconsistent applicability 
approaches between title V and NSR, a source could exclude reporting 
information about emissions for which it is major under title V from 
its part 70 permit application, even if it had the potential to emit 
those emissions in major amounts under PSD or nonattainment NSR. Also, 
deleting the ``but only with respect to those air pollutants that have 
been regulated for that category'' phrase will not bring fugitive 
emissions of ``unregulated'' pollutants into major source 
determinations as commenters assert. Technically, a pollutant is 
considered regulated once it is subject to regulation under the Act. A 
pollutant need not be specifically regulated by a section 111 or 112 
standard to be considered regulated. (See 61 FR 38250, 38309, July 23, 
1996.)
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ Consider, for example, a source that has the potential to 
emit nonmajor levels of fugitive emissions of particulate matter 
(PM) regulated by an NSPS and major levels (over 250 tons) of 
fugitive emissions of volatile organic compounds (VOC's) which are 
not regulated by this NSPS. If part 70 continued to include the 
phrase ``but only with respect to those air pollutants that have 
been regulated for that category,'' the source would be nonmajor for 
title V because only its PM emissions would be counted. Yet, the 
source would be major for NSR because of the VOC emissions.
    \2\ All applicable requirements are required to be included, 
however, for units that caused the source to be subject to part 70. 
(See 40 CFR 70.3(c)(2).)
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The EPA agrees with commenters who pointed out that any source 
required to have a permit under part C or D is also required to have a 
title V permit. (See section 502(a) of the Act.) However, this does not 
make the source a major source for part 70 and the inconsistencies 
noted above would still remain. A source required to have a part C or D 
permit but considered nonmajor for part 70 would be subject to part 70, 
but would not be required to include all applicable requirements for 
all emissions units in its title V permit. Additionally, the 
requirement in part 70 for a source to report emissions of all 
pollutants for which it is major would not be in effect because the 
source would be considered nonmajor under part 70. These arguments 
point to the need for sources which emit or have the potential to emit 
air pollutants in major amounts under NSR to be treated as major 
sources under title V. A further argument for consistency is that the 
PSD program does not include sources with the potential to emit between 
100 and 250 tons/year, whereas the title V program does.
    The EPA also disagrees with commenters who contend that Congress 
intended for EPA to exempt or defer all nonmajor sources by including 
the provision in section 502(a) which allows EPA to exclude nonmajor 
sources from the title V program by rule. While Congress gave EPA 
discretion to exempt some categories of nonmajor sources if the 
Administrator determined that compliance with title V permitting 
requirements would be impracticable, infeasible or unnecessarily 
burdensome on such categories, it did not require that EPA exclude all 
nonmajor sources. In fact, the presumption in section 502(a) is that 
nonmajor sources subject to a section 111 or 112 standard will be 
permitted. Congress simply provided that EPA could, in its discretion 
and after making the necessary finding, exempt some nonmajor sources 
from the requirement to obtain a title V permit. Requiring consistent 
applicability approaches is wholly within this Congressional intent, 
even if it could result in more sources being major under the title V 
program compared to approaches suggested by commenters.
    Finally, EPA disagrees with commenters who contend that sources in 
a category subject to a section 111 or 112 standard should be deferred 
from title V if they do not emit major amounts of fugitive pollutants 
regulated by that specific standard. Under the approach advocated by 
commenters, a source subject to a section 111 or 112 standard emitting 
major amounts of fugitive emissions of a pollutant could be considered 
nonmajor for part 70 if the pollutant was not regulated by the section 
111 or 112 standard that applied to the source. In the view of the 
Agency, if a source emits or has the potential to emit major amounts of 
fugitive emissions of a regulated pollutant under section 302 or part D 
of title I, and there has been the requisite rulemaking performed under 
section 302(j), then the source must be considered major and subject to 
title V, even if the pollutant is not regulated by a section 111 or 112 
standard. Inclusion of fugitive emissions of all regulated pollutants 
under section 302 and part D of title I, not just those regulated by 
section 111 or 112 standards, is the approach used in the NSR program. 
As mentioned previously, EPA believes it is important to maintain 
consistency between NSR and title V.
    In addition, following the commenters' approach would require EPA 
to exempt sources from title V that emit or have the potential to emit 
major amounts of fugitive emissions, even if the Agency has undertaken 
the rulemaking required by section 302(j). Congress clearly expressed 
its intent in section 502(a) to subject major sources to title V by 
precluding EPA from exempting major sources from title V requirements. 
In addition, Congress

[[Page 59164]]

provided a mechanism in section 302(j) for determining whether fugitive 
emissions must be considered in applicability determinations under 
section 302 or part D of title I. Where EPA has performed the 
rulemaking required by section 302(j), as it has for section 111 and 
112 standards promulgated as of August 7, 1980, EPA must follow an 
approach that gives due weight to the Congressional intent expressed in 
section 502(a) of subjecting major sources to title V. Accordingly, EPA 
rejects commenters' views and instead adopts an approach that requires 
sources to have title V permits if they are subject to a section 111 or 
112 standard promulgated as of August 7, 1980 and emit or have the 
potential to emit major amounts of fugitive emissions of any regulated 
pollutant under section 302 or part D of title I, even if the pollutant 
is not regulated by the section 111 or 112 standard.

III. Administrative Requirements

A. Executive Order 12866: ``Significant Regulatory Action 
Determination''

    Under Executive Order 12866 (58 FR 51735, October 4, 1993) we must 
determine whether the regulatory action is ``significant'' and 
therefore subject to Office of Management and Budget (OMB) review and 
the requirements of the Executive Order. The Order defines 
``significant regulatory action'' as one that is likely to result in a 
rule that may:
    (1) Have an annual effect on the economy of $100 million or more, 
adversely affecting in a material way the economy, a sector of the 
economy, productivity, competition, jobs, the environment, public 
health or safety in State, local, or tribal governments or communities;
    (2) create a serious inconsistency or otherwise interfere with an 
action taken or planned by another agency;
    (3) materially alter the budgetary impact of entitlement, grants, 
user fees, or loan programs of the rights and obligations of recipients 
thereof; or
    (4) raise novel legal or policy issues arising out of legal 
mandates, the President's priorities, or the principles set forth in 
the Executive Order.
    Because this action involves a narrow change to a single regulatory 
requirement, it has been determined not to meet any of the criteria 
listed above. Thus, it has been determined that this action is not a 
``significant regulatory action'' under the terms of Executive Order 
12866, and is not subject to OMB review.
    Executive Order 12866 also encourages agencies to provide a 
meaningful public comment period, and suggests that in most cases the 
comment period should be 60 days. The EPA provided a 60-day comment 
period and a public hearing on the entire proposed rule, including the 
change that is the subject of today's action, in 1994.

B. Regulatory Flexibility Act Compliance as Amended by the Small 
Business Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act of 1966 (SBREFA), 5 U.S.C. 
601 et seq.

    The Regulatory Flexibility Act 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.
    We analyzed the potential impact of the proposed regulatory 
revisions on small entities and determined that any cost increases 
would be substantially less than one percent of revenues. Since today's 
action involves a single regulatory provision of the many that were 
proposed, we certify that this action will not have a significant 
economic impact on a substantial number of small entities.

C. Paperwork Reduction Act

    The OMB has approved the information collection requirements 
contained in this rule under the provisions of the Paperwork Reduction 
Act, 44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq. and has assigned OMB control no. 2060-0243.
    The Administrator has determined that the net effect of this rule 
could result in fewer sources submitting applications for title V 
permits, and accordingly, in less paperwork. Some State and local 
permitting agencies will be required to revise their title V programs, 
and to submit them for EPA and public review, and to respond to 
comments.
    Because the amount of paperwork could be reduced for some sources, 
this action should reduce the overall burden on sources. There could be 
minimal increase in burden on some permitting authorities that will be 
required to revise their program; however, that increase in burden 
should be inconsequential in light of the very limited scope of this 
rule. Up to 112 permitting authorities are potential one-time 
respondents, although fewer than 112 should need actual rule changes. 
Burden means the total time, effort or financial resources expended to 
generate, and maintain, retain, or provide information to the 
permitting authority as required by this rule. This includes the time 
needed to review instructions; develop, acquire, install and use 
technology and systems for collecting, validating and verifying 
information or processing and maintaining information; adjust the 
existing ways to comply with previous instructions and requirements; 
train personnel to respond to the collection of information; search 
data sources; complete and review the information; and transmit the 
information.

D. 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. The 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. This rule is not a 
major rule as defined by 5 U.S.C. 804(2).

E. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act

    Title II of the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995 (UMRA), Public 
Law 104-4, establishes requirements for Federal agencies to assess the 
effects of their regulatory actions on State, local, and tribal 
governments and the private sector. Under section 202 of the UMRA, EPA 
generally must prepare a written statement, including a cost-benefit 
analysis, for proposed and final rules with ``Federal mandates'' that 
may result in expenditures to State, local, and tribal governments, in 
the aggregate, or to the private sector, of $100 million or more in any 
one year. Before promulgating an EPA rule for which a written statement 
is needed, section 205 of the UMRA generally requires EPA to identify 
and consider a reasonable number of regulatory alternatives and adopt 
the least costly, most cost-effective, or least burdensome alternative 
that achieves the objectives of the rule. The provisions of section 205 
do not apply when they are inconsistent with applicable law. Moreover, 
section 205 allows EPA to adopt an alternative other than the least 
costly, most cost-effective or least burdensome alternative if the 
Administrator publishes with the final rule an explanation of why that 
alternative was not adopted. Before EPA

[[Page 59165]]

establishes any regulatory requirements that may significantly or 
uniquely affect small governments, including tribal governments, it 
must have developed under section 203 of the UMRA a small government 
agency plan. The plan must provide for notifying potentially affected 
small governments, enabling officials of affected small governments to 
have meaningful and timely input in the development of EPA regulatory 
proposals with significant Federal intergovernmental mandates, and 
informing, educating, and advising small governments on compliance with 
the regulatory requirements.
    Because of the very limited scope of this action, the EPA has 
determined that this action contains no regulatory requirements that 
might significantly or uniquely affect small governments. The EPA has 
also determined that this action does not contain a Federal mandate 
that may result in expenditures of $100 million or more for State, 
local, and tribal governments, in the aggregate, or the private sector 
in any one year. Thus, this proposal is not subject to the requirements 
of the UMRA.

F. Executive Order 13132 (Federalism)

    Executive Order 13132, entitled ``Federalism'' (64 FR 43255, August 
10, 1999), 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. The 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.
    If EPA complies by consulting, Executive Order 13132 requires EPA 
to provide to the Office of Management and Budget (OMB), in a 
separately identified section of the preamble to the rule, a federalism 
summary impact statement (FSIS). The FSIS must include a description of 
the extent of EPA's prior consultation with State and local officials, 
a summary of the nature of their concerns and the Agency's position 
supporting the need to issue the regulation, and a statement of the 
extent to which the concerns of State and local officials have been 
met. Also, when EPA transmits a draft final rule with federalism 
implications to OMB for review pursuant to Executive Order 12866, EPA 
must include a certification from the Agency's federalism official 
stating that EPA has met the requirements of Executive Order 13132 in a 
meaningful and timely manner.
    This action 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. This 
action would not alter the overall relationship or distribution of 
powers between governments for the part 70 program. Thus, the 
requirements of section 6 of the Executive Order do not apply to this 
rule.

G. Executive Order 13175: Consultation With Tribes

    It does 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), because it does not alter 
the relationship or the distribution of power and responsibilities 
established in the Clean Air Act. Accordingly, this rule is not subject 
to Executive Order 13175.

H. Executive Order 13045: Protection of Children from Environmental 
Health Risks and Safety Risks

    Executive Order 13045, ``Protection of Children from Environmental 
Health Risks and Safety Risks'' (62 FR 19885, April 23, 1997), applies 
to any rule that the EPA determines (1) economically significant as 
defined under Executive Order 12866, and (2) the environmental health 
or safety risk addressed by the rule has 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 action is not subject to Executive Order 13045, because it is 
not an economically significant regulatory action as defined by 
Executive Order 12866, and it does not address an environmental health 
or safety risk that would have a disproportionate effect on children.

I. Executive Order 13211 (Energy Effects)

    This rule is not subject to Executive Order 13211, ``Actions 
Concerning Regulations That Significantly Affect Energy Supply, 
Distribution, or Use'' (66 FR 28355, May 22, 2001) because it is not a 
significant regulatory action under Executive Order 12866.

J. National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act

    Section 12(d) of the National Technology Transfer and Advancement 
Act (NTTAA), Public Law 104-113, section 12(d) (15 U.S.C. 272 note) 
directs EPA to use voluntary consensus standards in its regulatory 
activities unless to do so would be inconsistent with applicable law or 
otherwise impractical. Voluntary consensus standards are technical 
standards (e.g., materials specifications, test methods, sampling 
procedures, business practices, etc.) that are developed or adopted by 
voluntary consensus standard bodies. The NTTAA directs EPA to provide 
Congress, through OMB, explanations when the Agency decides not to use 
available and applicable voluntary consensus standards. This action 
does not involve technical standards. Therefore, EPA is not considering 
the use of any voluntary consensus standards.

List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 70

    Environmental protection, Administrative practice and procedure, 
Air pollution control, Intergovernmental relations, Reporting and 
recordkeeping requirements.

    Dated: November 19, 2001.
Christine Todd Whitman,
Administrator.
    For the reasons set out in the preamble, title 40, chapter I, part 
70 of the Code of Federal Regulations is amended as follows:

PART 70--[AMENDED]

    1. The authority citation for part 70 continues to read as follows:

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


[[Page 59166]]



    2. Section 70.2 is amended by revising paragraph (2)(xxvii) of the 
definition of ``major source'' to read as follows:


Sec. 70.2  Definitions

* * * * *
    Major source * * *
    (2) * * *
    (xxvii) Any other stationary source category, which as of August 7, 
1980 is being regulated under section 111 or 112 of the Act.
* * * * *
[FR Doc. 01-29383 Filed 11-26-01; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P