[Federal Register Volume 72, Number 88 (Tuesday, May 8, 2007)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 25973-25975]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: E7-8689]


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

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

40 CFR Part 52

[EPA-R09-OAR-2006-0827; FRL-8302-9]


Revisions to the Arizona State Implementation Plan, Maricopa 
County Environmental Services Department

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Direct final rule.

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

SUMMARY: EPA is taking direct final action to approve a revision to the 
Maricopa County Environmental Services Department (MCESD) portion of 
the Arizona State Implementation Plan (SIP). This revision concerns 
particulate matter (PM-10) emissions from open burning. We are 
approving a local rule under the Clean Air Act as amended in 1990 (CAA 
or the Act).

DATES: This rule is effective on July 9, 2007 without further notice, 
unless EPA receives adverse comments by June 7, 2007. If we receive 
such comments, we will publish a timely withdrawal in the

[[Page 25974]]

Federal Register to notify the public that this direct final rule will 
not take effect.

ADDRESSES: Submit comments, identified by docket number EPA-R09-OAR-
2006-0827, by one of the following methods:
     Federal eRulemaking Portal: http://www.regulations.gov. 
Follow the on-line instructions.
     E-mail: [email protected].
     Mail or deliver: Andrew Steckel (Air-4), U.S. 
Environmental Protection Agency Region IX, 75 Hawthorne Street, San 
Francisco, CA 94105.
    Instructions: All comments will be included in the public docket 
without change and may be made available online at http://www.regulations.gov, including any personal information provided, 
unless the comment includes Confidential Business Information (CBI) or 
other information whose disclosure is restricted by statute. 
Information that you consider CBI or otherwise protected should be 
clearly identified as such and should not be submitted through http://www.regulations.gov or e-mail http://www.regulations.gov is an 
``anonymous access'' system, and EPA will not know your identity or 
contact information unless you provide it in the body of your comment. 
If you send e-mail directly to EPA, your e-mail address will be 
automatically captured and included as part of the public comment. 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.
    Docket: The index to the docket for this action is available 
electronically at http://www.regulations.gov and in hard copy at EPA 
Region IX, 75 Hawthorne Street, San Francisco, California. While all 
documents in the docket are listed in the index, some information may 
be publicly available only at the hard copy location (e.g., copyrighted 
material), and some may not be publicly available in either location 
(e.g., CBI). To inspect the hard copy materials, please schedule an 
appointment during normal business hours with the contact listed in the 
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Al Petersen, EPA Region IX, (415) 947-
4118, [email protected].

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

Table of Contents

I. The State's Submittal
    A. What rule did the State submit?
    B. Are there other versions of this rule?
    C. What are the purposes of the submitted rule revision?
II. EPA's Evaluation and Action
    A. How is EPA evaluating the rule?
    B. Does the rule meet the evaluation criteria?
    C. Public Comment and Final Action
III. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews

I. The State's Submittal

A. What rule did the State submit?

    Table 1 lists the rule we are approving with the dates that the 
rule was amended by the local air agency and submitted by the Arizona 
Department of Environmental Quality (ADEQ).

                                            Table 1.--Submitted Rule
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
            Local agency                   Rule              Rule title          Revised     Submitted
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
MCESD...............................  314....................  Open Outdoor Fires.....     04/20/05     06/08/06
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    On December 7, 2006, the submittal of MCESD Rule 314 was determined 
by operation of law to meet the completeness criteria in 40 CFR Part 51 
Appendix V, which must be met before formal EPA review.

B. Are there other versions of these rules?

    A version of MCESD Rule 314 was approved into the SIP on August 12, 
2002 (67 FR 52416).

C. What are the purposes of the submitted rule revision?

    Section 110(a) of the Clean Air Act (CAA) requires states to submit 
regulations that control volatile organic compounds, nitrogen oxides, 
particulate matter, and other air pollutants which harm human health 
and the environment. These rules were developed as part of local air 
districts' programs to control these pollutants.
    The purposes of the submitted MCESD Rule 314 revision are as 
follows:
     (314.200): The rule revises various definitions in order 
to improve clarity.
     (314.302.6 and 314.302.7): The rule adds the requirements 
that an air curtain destructor (a) be used to burn vegetative material 
greater than 6 inches diameter and (b) not operate closer than 500 feet 
from the nearest dwelling.
     (314.402.3 and 314.402.4): The rule adds the requirements 
that (a) a permittee must comply with the regulations of the local fire 
agency and (b) Maricopa County must obtain a permit for its own burning 
from ADEQ.
    EPA's technical support document (TSD) has more information about 
these rules.

II. EPA's Evaluation and Action

A. How is EPA evaluating the rules?

    Generally, SIP rules must be enforceable (see section 110(a) of the 
CAA) and must not relax existing requirements (see sections 110(l) and 
193). SIP rules in serious PM-10 nonattainment areas must require for 
significant sources best available control measures (BACM), including 
best available control technology (BACT) (see section 189(b)). MCESD 
regulates a serious PM-10 nonattainment area (see 40 CFR part 81), so 
MCESD Rule 314 must fulfill the requirements of BACM/BACT.
    Guidance and policy documents that we used to help evaluate rules 
consistently include the following:
     Requirements for Preparation, Adoption, and Submittal of 
Implementation Plans, U.S. EPA, 40 CFR part 51.
     PM-10 Guideline Document (EPA-452/R-93-008).

B. Does the rule meet the evaluation criteria?

    We believe MCESD Rule 314 is consistent with the relevant policy 
and guidance regarding enforceability, BACM/BACT, and SIP relaxations. 
The TSD has more information on our evaluation.

C. Public Comment and Final Action

    As authorized in section 110(k)(3) of the CAA, EPA is fully 
approving the submitted rule because we believe it fulfills all 
relevant requirements. We do not think anyone will object to this 
approval, so we are finalizing it without proposing it in advance. 
However, in the Proposed Rules section of this Federal Register, we are 
simultaneously proposing approval of the same submitted rule. If we 
receive adverse comments by June 7, 2007, we will publish a timely 
withdrawal in the Federal Register to notify the public that the direct 
final approval will not take effect and we will address the comments in 
a subsequent final action based on the proposal. If we do not

[[Page 25975]]

receive timely adverse comments, the direct final approval will be 
effective without further notice on July 9, 2007. This will incorporate 
the rule into the federally enforceable SIP.

III. 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 (Pub. L. 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 approves a state rule 
implementing a Federal standard.
    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. 
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 July 9, 2007. Filing a 
petition for reconsideration by the Administrator of this final rule 
does not affect the finality of this rule for the purposes of judicial 
review nor does it extend the time within which a petition for judicial 
review may be filed, and shall not postpone the effectiveness of such 
rule or action. This action may not be challenged later in proceedings 
to enforce its requirements. (See section 307(b)(2).)

List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52

    Environmental protection, Air pollution control, Incorporation by 
reference, Intergovernmental relations, Particulate matter, Reporting 
and recordkeeping requirements.

    Dated: March 23, 2007.
Laura Yoshii,
Acting Regional Administrator, Region IX.

0
Part 52, chapter I, title 40 of the Code of Federal Regulations is 
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 D--Arizona

0
2. Section 52.120 is amended by adding paragraph (c)(135) to read as 
follows:


Sec.  52.120  Identification of plan.

* * * * *
    (c) * * *
    (135) An amended regulation was submitted on June 8, 2006, by the 
Governor's designee.
    (i) Incorporation by reference.
    (A) Maricopa County Environmental Services Department.
    (1) Rule 314, adopted on July 13, 1988 and amended on April 20, 
2005.
* * * * *
 [FR Doc. E7-8689 Filed 5-7-07; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P