[Federal Register Volume 67, Number 219 (Wednesday, November 13, 2002)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 68764-68767]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 02-28351]


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

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

40 CFR Part 52

[AZ 080-0060; FRL-7261-6]


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 full disapproval of revisions to the Pinal 
County Air Quality Control District's (PCAQCDs) portion of the Arizona 
State Implementation Plan (SIP). These revisions concern the 
incorporation by reference of external documents into the SIP. We are 
also finalizing a full approval of a revision to the PCAQCD portion of 
the Arizona SIP concerning definitions and a removal of rules 
previously approved in error. We are finalizing action on local rules 
under the Clean Air Act as amended in 1990 (CAA or the Act).

EFFECTIVE DATE: This rule is effective on December 13, 2002.

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 rule revisions at the following 
locations:

Environmental Protection Agency, Region IX, 75 Hawthorne Street, San 
Francisco, CA 94105-3901.
Environmental Protection Agency, Air Docket (6102), Ariel Rios 
Building, 1200 Pennsylvania Avenue, NW., Washington DC 20460.
Arizona Department of Environmental Quality, 1110 West Washington 
Street, Phoenix, AZ 85007.
Pinal County Air Quality Control District, Building F, 31 North Pinal 
Street (P.O. Box 987), Florence, AZ 85232.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Al Petersen, Rulemaking Office (AIR-
4), Air Division, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Region IX, 75 
Hawthorne Street, San Francisco, CA 94105; (415) 947-4118.

[[Page 68765]]


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

I. Proposed Action

    On November 19, 2001 (66 FR 57914), EPA proposed a full disapproval 
of the rules in Table 1 that were submitted for incorporation into the 
Arizona SIP.

                                            Table 1.--Submitted Rules
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
               Local agency                   Rule No.             Rule title             Amended     Submitted
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
PCAQCD....................................      1-2-110  Adopted Documents............     07/29/98     10/07/98
PCAQCD....................................      1-3-130  Adopted Documents............     05/14/97     10/07/98
PCAQCD....................................      3-1-020  Adopted Documents............     05/14/97     10/07/98
PCAQCD....................................      4-1-010  Adopted Documents............     05/14/97     10/07/98
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    We proposed a full disapproval because we determined that these 
rules have limited enforceability due to relying on references to rules 
not contained in the SIP. Our proposed action contains more information 
on the rules and our evaluation.
    On November 19, 2001 (66 FR 57914), EPA proposed a full approval of 
the rule in Table 2 that was submitted for incorporation into the 
Arizona SIP, because we believe it fulfills all relevant CAA 
requirements.

                                            Table 2.--Submitted Rule
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
               Local agency                  Rule No.             Rule Title             Amended      Submitted
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
PCAQCD...................................      1-3-140   Definitions................     07/29/98      10/07/98
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    On November 19, 2001 (66 FR 57914), EPA proposed the removal from 
the Arizona SIP of rules in Table 3 that were originally approved in 
error.

                                    Table 3.--Rules for Removal From the SIP
      [Previously Approved on April 9, 1996 (61 FR 15717), as Clarified on December 20, 2000 (65 FR 79742]
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
               Local agency                   Rule No.             Rule title             Amended     Submitted
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
PCAQCD....................................      1-3-130  Adopted Documents............     10/12/95     11/27/95
PCAQCD....................................      3-1-020  Adopted Documents............     06/29/93     11/27/95
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

We proposed removing these rules from the SIP because we determined 
that these rules have limited enforceability due to relying on 
references to rules not contained in the SIP. Our proposed action 
contains more information on the rules and our evaluation.

II. Public Comments and EPA Responses

    EPA's proposed action provided a 30-day public comment period. 
During this period, we did not receive any comments.

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), EPA is finalizing a full disapproval of 
Rules 1-2-110, 1-3-130, 3-1-020, and 4-1-010. As a result, these rules 
will not be in the Arizona SIP and sanctions will not be imposed under 
section 179 of the CAA as described in 59 FR 39832 (August 4, 1994).
    As authorized in sections 110(k)(3) and 301(a) of the CAA, EPA is 
finalizing a full approval of Rule 1-3-140. This action incorporates 
the submitted rule into the Arizona SIP.
    As authorized in section 110(k)(6), EPA is finalizing the removal 
from the Arizona SIP of Rules 1-3-130 and 3-1-020.

IV. Administrative Requirements

A. Executive Order 12866

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

B. Executive Order 13211

    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.

C. 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.

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

[[Page 68766]]

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. Executive Order 13175

    Executive Order 13175, entitled ``Consultation and Coordination 
with Indian Tribal Governments'' (65 FR 67249, November 6, 2000), 
requires EPA to develop an accountable process to ensure ``meaningful 
and timely input by tribal officials in the development of regulatory 
policies that have tribal implications.'' ``Policies that have tribal 
implications'' is defined in the Executive Order to include regulations 
that have ``substantial direct effects on one or more Indian tribes, on 
the relationship between the Federal government and the Indian tribes, 
or on the distribution of power and responsibilities between the 
Federal government and Indian tribes.''
    This final rule does not have tribal implications. It will not have 
substantial direct effects on tribal governments, 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 in Executive Order 13175. 
Thus, Executive Order 13175 does not apply to this rule.

F. 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.
    EPA's disapproval of the state request under section 110 and 
subchapter I, part D of the Clean Air Act does not affect any existing 
requirements applicable to small entities. Any pre-existing federal 
requirements remain in place after this disapproval. Federal 
disapproval of the state submittal does not affect state 
enforceability. Moreover, EPA's disapproval of the submittal does not 
impose any new Federal requirements. Therefore, 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 Clean Air Act, 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).

G. 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.

H. 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.

I. 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).

J. 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 January 13, 2003. 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 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,

[[Page 68767]]

Reporting and recordkeeping requirements.

    Dated: August 2, 2002.
Laura Yoshii,
Deputy 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)(G), 
(c)(84)(i)(H), and (c)(107) to read as follows:


Sec.  52.120  Identification of plan.

* * * * *
    (c) * * *
    (84) * * *
    (i) * * *
    (G) Previously approved on April 9, 1996 in paragraph (c)(84)(i)(A) 
of this section and now deleted without replacement, Rule 3-1-020.
    (H) Previously approved on April 9, 1996 in paragraph (c)(84)(i)(D) 
of this section and now deleted without replacement, Rule 1-3-130.
* * * * *
    (107) Amended rules for the following agency were submitted on 
October 7, 1998 by the Governor's designee.
    (i) Incorporation by reference.
    (A) Pinal County Air Quality Control District.
    (1) Rule 1-3-140, adopted on June 29, 1993 and amended on July 29, 
1998.
* * * * *
    3. Section 52.133 is amended by adding paragraphs (f) and (g) to 
read as follows:


Sec.  52.133  Rules and regulations.

* * * * *
    (f) Rules 1-3-130 and 3-1-020 submitted on November 27, 1995 of the 
Pinal County Air Quality Control District regulations have limited 
enforceability because they reference rules not contained in the 
Arizona State Implementation Plan. Therefore, these rules are removed 
from the Arizona State Implementation Plan.
    (g) Rules 1-2-110, 1-3-130, 3-1-020, and 4-1-010 submitted on 
October 7, 1998 of the Pinal County Air Quality Control District 
regulations have limited enforceability because they reference rules 
not contained in the Arizona State Implementation Plan. Therefore, 
these rules are disapproved.

[FR Doc. 02-28351 Filed 11-12-02; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P