[Federal Register Volume 68, Number 181 (Thursday, September 18, 2003)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 54672-54677]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 03-23747]


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

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

40 CFR Parts 52 and 81

[NM-43-1-7600a; FRL-7556-7]


Approval and Promulgation of Implementation Plans; New Mexico; 
Redesignation of Grant County to Attainment for Sulfur Dioxide

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Direct final rule.

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

SUMMARY: The EPA is taking direct final action on a request to 
redesignate Grant County, New Mexico from nonattainment area to 
attainment for the sulfur dioxide (SO2) National Ambient Air 
Quality Standards (NAAQS). In conjunction with this action, EPA is also 
approving the maintenance plan, and its associated contingency measures 
plan for the Grant County nonattainment area, which were submitted to 
ensure that the attainment of SO2 NAAQS will continue to be 
maintained. The redesignation request and maintenance and contingency 
measures plans were submitted as a revision to the New Mexico State 
Implementation Plan (SIP) by the New Mexico Environment Department 
(NMED) on February 21, 2003. We are approving these revisions in 
accordance with the requirements of the Federal Clean Air Act (Act).

DATES: This rule is effective on November 17, 2003 without further 
notice, unless EPA receives relevant adverse comment by October 20, 
2003. If EPA receives such comment, EPA will publish a timely 
withdrawal in the Federal Register informing the public that this rule 
will not take effect.

ADDRESSES: Comments may be submitted by mail to: Mr. Thomas Diggs (6PD-
L), Environmental Protection Agency, 1445 Ross Avenue, Dallas, Texas 
75202-2733. Comments may also be submitted electronically, by 
facsimile, or through hand delivery/courier. Follow the detailed 
instructions as provided in the General Information section of this 
document.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Carrie Paige, Air State and Tribal 
Operations Section (6PD-S), EPA Region 6, 1445 Ross Avenue, Dallas, 
Texas 75202-2733, telephone (214) 665-6521, [email protected], or 
Alan Shar [email protected].

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Table of Contents

A. What Action is EPA Taking?
B. Why was this SIP Revision Submitted?
C. What is the NAAQS for SO2?
D. What is a SIP?
E. What is the Federal approval process for a SIP?
F. What does Federal approval of a SIP mean to me?
G. What Requirements Must the State Meet for Approval of a 
Redesignation and How Did the State Meet Them?
Final Action
General Information
    Statutory and Executive Order Reviews

    Throughout this document ``we,'' ``us,'' and ``our'' means EPA.

A. What Action Is EPA Taking?

    The EPA designated Grant County, New Mexico as nonattainment for 
violating the secondary SO2 NAAQS on March 3, 1978, at 43 FR 
9016. On September 11, 1978, at 43 FR 40428, EPA designated Grant 
County, New Mexico as nonattainment for violating

[[Page 54673]]

the primary SO2 NAAQS. Any area designated as not attaining 
the primary or secondary SO2 NAAQS as of the date of 
enactment of the 1990 Amendments was designated nonattainment for 
SO2 by operation of law upon enactment, pursuant to section 
107(d)(1)(C)(i) of the Act (April 22, 1991, at 56 FR 16274).
    On February 21, 2003, the Governor of New Mexico submitted to us a 
revision to the New Mexico SO2 SIP (February 21, 2003 
submittal). The February 21, 2003 submittal specifically requested EPA 
to redesignate the portion of Grant County, New Mexico, located in the 
Air Quality Control Region (AQCR) No. 021, from nonattainment to 
attainment for the SO2 NAAQS. This particular portion of 
Grant County is restricted to a 3.5 mile radius around the Kennecott 
Copper Corporation (now owned by the Phelps Dodge Corporation and 
called the Hurley smelter) and land above 6470 feet Mean Sea Level 
within an 8 mile radius of the Hurley Smelter in Hurley, New Mexico. 
The air monitoring data for this area reveals values better than 
national standards for SO2. The February 21, 2003, submittal 
also included a maintenance plan for this area to ensure that 
attainment of the SO2 NAAQS will be maintained through 
permitting and the applicable SIP rules. The State also submitted a 
contingency measures plan that consists of monitoring measures.
    In this document we are approving NMED's request to redesignate the 
Grant County primary and secondary SO2 nonattainment areas 
to attainment of the SO2 NAAQS. We are also approving the 
maintenance plan and the contingency measures plan for this area into 
the New Mexico SO2 SIP. See our Technical Support Document 
(TSD) for additional information and our evaluation of this submittal.

B. Why Was This SIP Revision Submitted?

    The NMED believes that the Grant County area is now eligible for 
redesignation because EPA approved New Mexico's SIP in 1982, and the 
SO2 monitors in the nonattainment area of Grant County have 
not recorded exceedances of either the primary or secondary 
SO2 NAAQS since 1979.

C. What Is the NAAQS for SO2?

    Under section 109 of the Act, EPA established the NAAQS to protect 
public health and welfare. The NAAQS address 6 criteria pollutants, 
which are carbon monoxide, nitrogen dioxide, ozone, lead, particulate 
matter, and sulfur dioxide (SO2).
    High concentrations of SO2 affect breathing and may 
aggravate existing respiratory and cardiovascular disease. Sensitive 
populations include asthmatics, individuals with bronchitis or 
emphysema, children and the elderly. SO2 is also a primary 
contributor to acid deposition or acid rain, which causes acidification 
of lakes and streams and can damage trees, crops, historic buildings 
and statues. In addition, sulfur compounds in the air contribute to 
visibility impairment in large parts of the country. This is especially 
noticeable in national parks.
    Ambient SO2 results largely from stationary sources such 
as coal and oil combustion, steel mills, refineries, pulp and paper 
mills and from nonferrous smelters. There are 3 NAAQS for 
SO2:

--An annual arithmetic mean of 0.03 ppm (80 ug/m\3\);
--A 24-hour level of 0.14 ppm (365 ug/m\3\); and
--A 3-hour level of 0.50 ppm (1300 ug/m\3\).

The first two standards are primary (health-related) standards, while 
the 3-hour NAAQS is a secondary (welfare-related) standard. The annual 
mean standard is not to be exceeded, while the short-term standards are 
not to be exceeded more than once per year. Our TSD contains the 
ambient SO2 monitored values for the Grant County, New 
Mexico nonattainment area.

D. What Is a SIP?

    Section 110 of the Act requires states to develop air pollution 
regulations and control strategies to ensure that state air quality 
meets the NAAQS that EPA has established.
    Each state must submit these regulations and control strategies to 
us for approval and incorporation into the federally enforceable SIP. 
Each federally approved SIP is designed to protect air quality. These 
SIPs can be extensive, containing state regulations or other 
enforceable documents and supporting information such as emission 
inventories, monitoring networks, and modeling demonstrations.

E. What Is the Federal Approval Process for a SIP?

    When a state wants to incorporate its regulations into the 
federally enforceable SIP, the state must formally adopt the 
regulations and control strategies consistent with state and Federal 
requirements. This process includes a public notice, a public hearing, 
a public comment period, and a formal adoption by a state-authorized 
rulemaking body.
    Once a state adopts a rule, regulation, or control strategy, the 
state may submit the adopted provisions to us and request that we 
include these provisions in the federally enforceable SIP. We must then 
decide on an appropriate Federal action, provide public notice on this 
action, and seek additional public comment regarding this action. If we 
receive relevant adverse comments, we must address them prior to taking 
a final action.
    Under section 110 of the Act, when we approve all state regulations 
and supporting information, those state regulations and supporting 
information become a part of the federally approved SIP. You can find 
records of these SIP actions in the Code of Federal Regulations (CFR) 
at Title 40, part 52, entitled ``Approval and Promulgation of 
Implementation Plans.'' The actual state regulations that we approved 
are not reproduced in their entirety in the CFR but are ``incorporated 
by reference,'' which means that we have approved a given state 
regulation with a specific effective date.

F. What Does Federal Approval of a SIP Mean to Me?

    A state may enforce state regulations before and after we 
incorporate those regulations into a federally approved SIP. After we 
incorporate those regulations into a federally approved SIP, both EPA 
and the public may also take enforcement action against violators of 
these regulations.

G. What Requirements Must the State Meet for Approval of a 
Redesignation and How Did the State Meet Them?

1. The State Must Show That the Area Is Attaining the Applicable NAAQS

    An area is considered to be in attainment of the SO2 
NAAQS provided that the primary and secondary standards have not been 
violated within the last three years. Grant County has had two monitors 
in place that have shown no violations since 1997; these monitors are 
in Bayard, NM and Hurley, NM. The monitor in Bayard has been in place 
since 1974 (and has shown no violations since 1979) and the monitor in 
Hurley has been in place since 1997. These monitors meet the 
requirements of 40 CFR Parts 53 and 58.
    The monitor in Hurley is located in the area of highest 
concentration for SO2 within the nonattainment area, as 
studied by the EPA Regional Office and NMED before deployment of the 
monitor in 1997. The monitor was placed where modeling indicated the 
highest concentration was likely to occur. As a result of this 
modeling, NMED does not have to submit additional material reproving 
that the data is representative of the point of

[[Page 54674]]

highest concentration in the nonattainment area.

2. The SIP for the Area Must Be Fully Approved Under Section 110(k) of 
the Act and Must Satisfy All Requirements That Apply to the Area

    The Grant County SO2 SIP revision was approved by EPA on 
May 5, 1982 (47 FR 19332) and contained limits pertaining to the sole 
source of SO2, the Hurley Smelter. The EPA approved changes 
to New Mexico's SO2 plan for Grant County on September 26, 
1997 (62 FR 50514).

3. The EPA Has Determined That the Improvement in Air Quality Is Due to 
Permanent and Enforceable Reductions in Emissions

    Air quality improvement in the Grant County SO2 
nonattainment area is attributed to the SO2 emission limits 
in the SIP and to the operating restrictions within the Title V permit 
imposed on the facility that contributed to the nonattainment status. 
Reductions in emissions are therefore permanent and enforceable.

4. The State Has Met All Applicable Requirements Under Section 110 and 
Part D of the Act That Were Applicable Prior to Submittal of the 
Complete Redesignation Request

    The requirements under Section 110 and Part D are met with the 
prior approval of the SIP revisions for the source in the area in 1982, 
the approval of revisions in 1997 (62 FR 50514), and with the detailed 
study of the modeling generated by the NMED in 1997.

5. EPA Is Fully Approving a Maintenance Plan, Including a Contingency 
Plan, for the Area Under Section 175A of the Act

Maintenance Plan
    Section 175A of the Act requires states to submit a SIP revision 
which provides for the maintenance of the NAAQS in the area for at 
least 10 years after approval of the redesignation. The basic 
components needed to ensure proper maintenance of the NAAQS are: 
attainment inventory, maintenance demonstration, verification of 
continued attainment, ambient air monitoring network, and a contingency 
plan.
a. Attainment Inventory
    The state's submittal contains the emission inventory of 
SO2 sources in the Grant County nonattainment area, dating 
back to 1997. It clearly shows that Grant County has not exceeded the 
SO2 NAAQS since 1997.
b. Maintenance Demonstration and Verification of Continued Attainment
    Maintenance of the SO2 NAAQS in the Grant County 
nonattainment area has been achieved through the SIP and Title V permit 
requirements. The SO2 emitting source involved in the Grant 
County SO2 redesignation (the Hurley Smelter) is meeting the 
SO2 emission limits identified in the SIP rules and permit. 
NMED will track the maintenance plan through the semi-annual review of 
permit conditions, air emission inventory and state regulations 20.2.41 
NMAC and 20.2.3 NMAC which verify that the State of New Mexico has the 
continued legal authority needed to implement and enforce air quality 
controls to maintain the SO2 NAAQS in Grant County.
c. Monitoring Network
    After a detailed study of the modeling generated by the NMED in 
1997 for placement of a new monitor in the Grant County nonattainment 
area, the Regional Office determined (in a letter to NMED dated August 
26, 2002) that ``the monitor was placed where modeling indicated the 
highest concentration was likely to occur.'' A copy of this letter is 
being attached to our TSD for reference purposes. Therefore, the NMED 
will use the current SO2 air monitoring station located in 
Hurley, New Mexico to verify continuing attainment of the NAAQS in the 
area. The Hurley monitoring station meets 40 CFR Part 58. The 
SO2 monitoring station located in Bayard, New Mexico will be 
discontinued.
d. Contingency Plan
    Section 175A of the Act requires that the maintenance plan include 
contingency provisions to correct any violation of the NAAQS after 
redesignation of the area. However, the General Preamble for the 
Implementation of Title I of the Act Amendments of 1990 (57 FR 13498) 
states that SO2 provisions require special considerations. A 
primary reason is that SO2 control methods are well 
established and understood. Therefore, contingency measures for 
SO2 need only consist of a comprehensive program to identify 
sources of violations of the SO2 NAAQS and to undertake an 
aggressive follow-up for compliance and enforcement.
    Upon verification of a violation of either the 24-hour or 3-hour 
SO2 NAAQS, if the Hurley Smelter is responsible for the 
violation, NMED will work with this source to ensure that the violation 
will not occur again. If necessary, NMED will write and adopt rules or 
amend the company's Title V permit to control SO2 emissions 
at the company.
    The State will be utilizing both the currently approved SIP 
requirements and Title V permit as tools for implementation of 
SO2 Maintenance Plan. The State will be utilizing both Title 
V reporting, testing, compliance certification, and recordkeeping 
controls combined with the Continuous Emission Monitoring System (CEMS) 
data for SO2 emissions as its Contingency Plan. It is EPA's 
finding that these reporting, testing, compliance certification, 
recordkeeping controls and the CEMS data requirements are a 
comprehensive program for identifying violations caused by the smelter. 
The February 21, 2003 submittal does not propose to remove or relax any 
of the existing SIP approved measures for controlling SO2 
emissions. A new major source of SO2 or an existing source 
with major modification, including a process that may have been shut 
down or ceased operation, will not only have to comply with the 
existing federally approved SO2 SIP provisions, it will also 
need to comply with terms and conditions that may be more stringent 
than existing SIP requirements imposed on the source in its air permit 
to ensure the area will continue maintaining the attainment status.
    As detailed above, the State has met the maintenance plan 
requirements of Section 175A of the Act and the maintenance plan is 
fully approvable. The contingency measures plan is also fully 
approvable.

Final Action

    We have evaluated the State's submittal and have determined that it 
meets the applicable requirements of the Act, and EPA regulations, and 
conforms to EPA policy. Therefore, we are approving the State of New 
Mexico's request to redesignate Grant County from a primary and 
secondary SO2 nonattainment area to an SO2 NAAQS 
attainment area. We are also approving the maintenance and contingency 
measures plans for Grant County into the New Mexico SIP. Furthermore, 
we are approving the NMED's request to discontinue the current 
SO2 monitoring in Bayard, NM.
    The EPA is publishing this rule without prior proposal because we 
view this as a noncontroversial amendment and anticipate no relevant 
adverse comments. However, in the ``Proposed Rules'' section of today's 
Federal Register publication, we are publishing a separate document 
that will serve as the proposal to approve the Maintenance Plan if 
relevant adverse

[[Page 54675]]

comments are received. This rule will be effective on November 17, 2003 
without further notice unless we receive relevant adverse comment by 
October 20, 2003. If EPA receives relevant adverse comments, we will 
publish a timely withdrawal in the Federal Register informing the 
public that the rule will not take effect. We will address all public 
comments in a subsequent final rule based on the proposed rule. We will 
not institute a second comment period on this action. Any parties 
interested in commenting must do so at this time.

General Information

A. What Is the Public Rulemaking File?

    The EPA is committed to ensuring public access to the information 
used to inform the Agency's decisions regarding the environment and 
human health and to ensuring that the public has an opportunity to 
participate in the Agency's decision-making process. The official 
public rulemaking file consists of the documents specifically 
referenced in a particular agency action, any public comments received, 
and other information related to the action. The public rulemaking file 
does not include Confidential Business Information (CBI) or other 
information for which disclosure is restricted by statute, although 
such information is a part of the Agency's official administrative 
record for the action.

B. How Can I Get Copies of This Document and Other Related Information?

    1. An official public rulemaking file is available for inspection 
at the Regional Office. The Regional Office has established an official 
public rulemaking file for this action under Identification Number (ID 
No.) NM-43-1-7600. The public rulemaking file is available for viewing 
at the Air Planning Section (6PD-L), Environmental Protection Agency, 
1445 Ross Avenue, Suite 700, Dallas, Texas 75202-2733. Contact the 
person listed in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section to 
schedule your inspection. If possible, schedule the appointment two 
working days in advance of your visit. Official hours of business for 
the Regional Office are Monday through Friday, 8:30 a.m. to 4 p.m. 
excluding Federal holidays. Copies of any State submittals and EPA's 
TSD are also available for public inspection at the New Mexico 
Environment Department, Air Quality Bureau, 2044 Galisteo Street, Santa 
Fe, New Mexico 87505 during official business by appointment.
    2. You may access this Federal Register document electronically 
through the Regulations.gov Web site located at http://www.regulations.gov. The Regulations.gov Web site is the central online 
rulemaking portal of the United States government and is a public 
service to increase participation in the government's regulatory 
activities by offering a central point for submitting comments on 
regulations.

C. How and to Whom Do I Submit Comments?

    You may submit comments electronically, by mail, through hand 
delivery/courier or by facsimile. Instructions for submitting comments 
by each method are discussed below. To ensure proper receipt by EPA, 
identify the appropriate ID No. in the subject line on the first page 
of your comment. Please ensure that your comments are submitted within 
the specified comment period. Comments received after the close of the 
comment period will be marked ``late.'' The EPA is not required to 
consider these late comments. If you wish to submit CBI or information 
that is otherwise protected by statute, please follow the instructions 
in section D below.
    1. Electronically. To submit comments electronically (via e-mail, 
Regulations.gov, or on disk or CD-ROM), EPA recommends that you include 
your name, mailing address, and an e-mail address or other contact 
information in the body of your comment. Also include this contact 
information on the outside of any disk or CD ROM you submit, and in any 
cover letter accompanying the disk or CD ROM. This ensures that you can 
be identified as the submitter of the comment and allows EPA to contact 
you in case EPA cannot read your comment due to technical difficulties 
or needs further information on the substance of your comment. The 
EPA's policy is that EPA will not edit your comments. Any identifying 
or contact information provided in the body of a comment will be 
included as part of the comment that is placed in the public rulemaking 
file and may be made available in EPA's public Web sites. If EPA cannot 
read your comment due to technical difficulties and cannot contact you 
for clarification, EPA may not be able to consider your comment.
    i. E-mail. Comments may be submitted by electronic mail (e-mail) to 
[email protected], Attention ``Public comment on ID No. NM-43-1-
7600.'' In contrast to the Regulations.gov Web site, EPA's e-mail 
system is not an ``anonymous'' system. If you send an e-mail comment 
directly to EPA, your e-mail address will be automatically captured and 
included as part of the comment that is placed in the official public 
rulemaking file.
    ii. Regulations.gov. Comments may be submitted electronically at 
the Regulations.gov Web site, the central online rulemaking portal of 
the United States government. Every effort is made to ensure that the 
Web site includes all rule and proposed rule notices that are currently 
open for public comment. You may access the Regulations.gov Web site at 
http://www.regulations.gov. Select ``Environmental Protection Agency'' 
at the top of the page and click on the ``Go'' button. The list of 
current EPA actions available for comment will be displayed. Select the 
appropriate action and follow the online instructions for submitting 
comments. Unlike EPA's e-mail system, the Regulations.gov Web site is 
an ``anonymous'' system, which means that any personal information, e-
mail address, or other contact information will not be collected unless 
it is provided in the text of the comment. See the Privacy Notice at 
the Regulations.gov Web site for further information. Please be advised 
that EPA cannot contact you for any necessary clarification unless your 
contact information is included in the body of comments submitted 
through the Regulations.gov Web site.
    iii. Disk or CD ROM. You may submit comments on a disk or CD ROM 
that you mail to: Thomas Diggs (6PD-L), Environmental Protection 
Agency, 1445 Ross Avenue, Suite 700, Dallas, Texas 75202-2733. Please 
include the text ``Public comment on ID No. NM-43-1-7600.'' on the disk 
or CD ROM. These electronic submissions will be accepted in 
WordPerfect, Word, or ASCII file format. You should avoid the use of 
special characters and any form of encryption.
    2. By Mail. Send your comments to: Thomas Diggs (6PD-L), 
Environmental Protection Agency, 1445 Ross Avenue, Suite 700, Dallas, 
Texas 75202-2733. Please include the text ``Public comment on ID No. 
NM-43-1-7600'' in the subject line of the first page of your comments.
    3. By Hand Delivery or Courier. Deliver your written comments or 
comments on a disk or CD ROM to: Thomas Diggs (6PD-L) Environmental 
Protection Agency, 1445 Ross Avenue, Suite 700, Dallas, Texas 75202-
2733. Attention ``Public comment on ID No. NM-43-1-7600.'' Such 
deliveries are only accepted during official hours of business, which 
are Monday through Friday, 8:30 a.m. to 4 p.m., excluding Federal 
holidays.

[[Page 54676]]

    4. By Facsimile. Fax your comments to: 214-665-7263, Attention 
``Public comment on ID No. NM-043-1-7600.''

D. How Should I Submit CBI to the Agency?

    You may assert a business confidentiality claim covering CBI 
information included in comments submitted by mail or hand delivery in 
either paper or electronic format. CBI should not be submitted via e-
mail or at the Regulations.gov Web site. Clearly mark any part or all 
of the information submitted which is claimed as CBI at the time the 
comment is submitted to EPA. CBI should be submitted separately, if 
possible, to facilitate handling by EPA. Submit one complete version of 
the comment that includes the properly labeled CBI for EPA's official 
administrative record and one copy that does not contain the CBI to be 
included in the public rulemaking file. If you submit CBI on a disk or 
CD ROM, mark the outside of the disk or the CD ROM that it contains CBI 
and then identify the CBI within the disk or CD ROM. Also submit a non-
CBI version if possible. Information which is properly labeled as CBI 
and submitted by mail or hand delivery will be disclosed only in 
accordance with procedures set forth in 40 CFR Part 2. For comments 
submitted by EPA's e-mail system or through the Regulations.gov Web 
site, no CBI claim may be asserted. Do not submit CBI to the 
Regulations.gov Web site or via EPA's e-mail system. Any claim of CBI 
will be waived for comments received through the Regulations.gov Web 
site or EPA's e-mail system. For further advice on submitting CBI to 
the Agency, contact the person listed in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION 
CONTACT section of this document.

Statutory and Executive Order Reviews

    Under Executive Order 12866 (58 FR 51735, October 4, 1993), this 
action is not a ``significant regulatory action'' and therefore is not 
subject to review by the Office of Management and Budget. For this 
reason, this action is also not subject to Executive Order 13211, 
``Actions Concerning Regulations That Significantly Affect Energy 
Supply, Distribution, or Use'' (66 FR 28355, May 22, 2001). This action 
merely approves state law as meeting Federal requirements and imposes 
no additional requirements beyond those imposed by state law. 
Accordingly, the Administrator certifies that this rule will not have a 
significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities 
under the Regulatory Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 601 et seq.). Because 
this rule approves pre-existing requirements under state law and does 
not impose any additional enforceable duty beyond that required by 
state law, it does not contain any unfunded mandate or significantly or 
uniquely affect small governments, as described in the Unfunded 
Mandates Reform Act of 1995 (Public Law 104-4).
    This rule also does not have tribal implications because it will 
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). This action also does not have Federalism 
implications because it does 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 (64 
FR 43255, August 10, 1999). This action merely approves 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. This rule also is not subject to Executive Order 13045 
``Protection of Children from Environmental Health Risks and Safety 
Risks'' (62 FR 19885, April 23, 1997), because it is not economically 
significant.
    In reviewing SIP submissions, EPA's role is to approve state 
choices, provided that they meet the criteria of the Clean Air Act. In 
this context, in the absence of a prior existing requirement for the 
State to use voluntary consensus standards (VCS), EPA has no authority 
to disapprove a SIP submission for failure to use VCS. It would thus be 
inconsistent with applicable law for EPA, when it reviews a SIP 
submission, to use VCS in place of a SIP submission that otherwise 
satisfies the provisions of the Clean Air Act. Thus, the requirements 
of section 12(d) of the National Technology Transfer and Advancement 
Act of 1995 (15 U.S.C. 272 note) do not apply. This rule does not 
impose an information collection burden under the provisions of the 
Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.).
    The Congressional Review Act, 5 U.S.C. section 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 action is not a ``major rule'' as defined by 5 U.S.C. 
section 804(2).
    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 17, 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 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

40 CFR Part 52

    Environmental protection, Air pollution control, Intergovernmental 
relations, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements, Sulfur oxides.

40 CFR Part 81

    Environmental protection, Air pollution control, National parks, 
Wilderness areas.

    Dated: September 2, 2003.
Lawrence Starfield,
Acting Regional Administrator, Region 6.

0
40 CFR Parts 52 and 81 are amended as follows:

PART 52--[AMENDED]

0
1. The authority citation for part 52 continues to read as follows:

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

Subpart GG--New Mexico

0
2. In Sec.  52.1620 paragraph (e) is amended by adding two new entries 
to the end of the table entitled ``EPA Approved Nonregulatory 
Provisions and Quasi-Regulatory Measures in the New Mexico SIP,'' to 
read as follows:


Sec.  52.1620  Identification of plan.

* * * * *
    (e) * * *

[[Page 54677]]



            EPA Approved Nonregulatory Provisions and Quasi-Regulatory Measures in the New Mexico SIP
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                        Applicable geo-          State
       Name of SIP provision            graphic or non-       submittal/    EPA approval date     Explanation
                                        attainment area     effective date
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
 
                                                  * * * * * * *
Revision for Attainment, and         Portion of Grant             02/21/03  9/18/03 [insert    .................
 Maintenance Plan of SO2 Standards.   County, this portion                   FR page
                                      is restricted to a                     citation].
                                      3.5 mile radius
                                      around the Kennecott
                                      Copper Corporation
                                      (now owned by the
                                      Phelps Dodge
                                      Corporation and
                                      called the Hurley
                                      smelter) and land
                                      above 6470 feet Mean
                                      Sea Level within an
                                      8 mile radius of the
                                      Hurley Smelter/
                                      Concentrator in
                                      Hurley.
Contingency Measures Plan..........  Portion of Grant             02/21/03  9/18/03 [insert    .................
                                      County, this portion                   FR page
                                      is restricted to a                     citation].
                                      3.5 mile radius
                                      around the Kennecott
                                      Copper Corporation
                                      (now owned by the
                                      Phelps Dodge
                                      Corporation and
                                      called the Hurley
                                      smelter) and land
                                      above 6470 feet Mean
                                      Sea Level within an
                                      8 mile radius of the
                                      Hurley Smelter/
                                      Concentrator in
                                      Hurley.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

PART 81--[AMENDED]

0
1. The authority citation for part 81 continues to read as follows:

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

0
2. In Sec.  81.332 the SO2 table is amended by revising the 
entry for the AQCR 012 to read as follows:


Sec.  81.332  New Mexico.

* * * * *

                                                 New Mexico--SO2
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                  Does not meet   Does not meet                    Better than
                Designated area                      primary        secondary       Cannot be        national
                                                    standards       standards      classified       standards
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
AQCR 012:
Grant County...................................  ..............  ..............  ..............               X
Remainder of AQCR..............................  ..............  ..............  ..............               X
 
                                                  * * * * * * *
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

* * * * *
[FR Doc. 03-23747 Filed 9-17-03; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P