[Federal Register: September 18, 2003 (Volume 68, Number 181)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Page 54672-54677]
From the Federal Register Online via GPO Access [wais.access.gpo.gov]
[DOCID:fr18se03-12]
=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
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, paige.carrie@epa.gov, or
Alan Shar shar.alan@epa.gov.
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
Diggs.Thomas@epa.gov, 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