[Federal Register: February 9, 2004 (Volume 69, Number 26)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Page 5932-5933]
From the Federal Register Online via GPO Access [wais.access.gpo.gov]
[DOCID:fr09fe04-14]
=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
40 CFR Part 52
[MI83-03; FRL-7617-7]
Approval and Promulgation of State Implementation Plans; Michigan
AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).
ACTION: Final rule.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: The EPA is approving a revision to Michigan's definition of
volatile organic compound (VOC). EPA's approval will revise Michigan's
State Implementation Plan (SIP) for ozone. The Michigan Department of
Environmental Quality (MDEQ) submitted this SIP revision on April 25,
2003. On September 2, 2003, the EPA proposed approval of this SIP
revision and published a direct final approval as well. EPA received
adverse comments on the proposed rulemaking, and therefore withdrew the
direct final rulemaking on October 31, 2003.
DATES: This final rule is effective March 10, 2004.
ADDRESSES: Copies of the documents relevant to this action are
available for public inspection during normal business hours at the
following address: U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Region 5, Air
and Radiation Division, 77 West Jackson Boulevard, Chicago, Illinois
60604. We recommend that you telephone Kathleen D'Agostino at (312)
886-1767 before visiting the Region 5 office.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Kathleen D'Agostino, Environmental
Engineer, Criteria Pollutant Section, Air Programs Branch (AR-18J),
EPA, Region 5, 77 West Jackson Boulevard, Chicago, Illinois 60604.
Telephone: (312) 886-1767. E-Mail Address: dagostino.kathleen@epa.gov.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION is organized
in the following order:
I. What Action Is EPA Taking Today?
II. What Public Comments Were Received and What Is EPA's Response?
III. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews.
I. What Action Is EPA Taking Today?
EPA is approving a revision to Michigan's definition of VOC.
Michigan's revised definition of the term volatile organic compound is
``any compound of carbon or mixture of compounds of carbon that
participates in photochemical reactions, excluding the following
materials, all of which have been determined by the United States
Environmental Protection Agency to have negligible photochemical
reactivity: * * *'' The definition goes on to list the exempt
compounds. When test methods measure exempt compounds, i.e. any of
those contained in the list of excluded compounds, Michigan's
definition allows for their exclusion providing that two specific
criteria are met: (1) The exempt compounds must be accurately
quantified and (2) MDNR must approve the exclusion.
EPA's approval of the new definition of VOC will revise Michigan's
SIP for ozone.
II. What Public Comments Were Received and What Is EPA's Response?
We received one adverse comment on our proposed approval of
Michigan's revised definition of VOC. Below, we have paraphrased the
comment and responded to it.
Comment: I assume ozone and VOC standards are being made more lax
and for that reason I oppose this proposal. Polluted air from Michigan
is transported east and negatively impacts the health of citizens of
the eastern United States. Michigan power plants must be required to
clean the air.
Response: Ozone and VOC standards are not being made more lax. The
definition of VOC currently in Michigan's SIP for ozone was approved in
1992. It met EPA's approval criteria, but had a more complicated
structure, with divisions based on vapor pressure. In 1998, Michigan
submitted a revised definition of VOC that we believe would have
relaxed ozone standards. We proposed to disapprove this revision on
June 10, 1999. After we published this proposed disapproval in the
Federal Register, Michigan withdrew that version of the definition and
revised it, modeling its definition after the federal definition at 40
CFR 51.100(s).
Since the 1992 approval, EPA has issued rules listing additional
compounds as non-photochemically reactive. Michigan has included these
compounds as exempt in the revised definition. This does not relax
Michigan's definition of VOC because compounds which are not
photochemically reactive, by their nature, do not contribute to the
formation of ozone.
EPA recognizes that the transport of ozone and its precursors,
particularly oxides of nitrogen (NOX), is a significant
problem that must be addressed if all areas in the country are to
attain the national ambient air quality standards for ozone. This is
why EPA issued the Ozone Transport Rulemaking on October 27, 1998. In
that rule, EPA limits NOX emissions by assigning states
[[Page 5933]]
NOX budgets. All states affected by the rule, including
Michigan, will be meeting their NOX budgets by controlling
emissions from power plants and other large industrial sources.
III. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews
Executive Order 12866: Regulatory Planning and Review
Under Executive Order 12866, ``Regulatory Planning and Review'' (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.
Executive Order 13211: Actions Concerning Regulations That
Significantly Affect Energy Supply, Distribution, or Use
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).
Regulatory Flexibility Act
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.).
Unfunded Mandates Reform Act
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 nor
does it significantly or uniquely affect small governments, as
described in the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995 (Pub. L. 104-4).
Executive Order 13175: Consultation and Coordination with Indian Tribal
Governments
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,
``Consultation and Coordination with Indian Tribal Governments'' (65 FR
67249, November 9, 2000).
Executive Order 13132: Federalism
This action also does not have federalism implications because it
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, ``Federalism'' (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 Act.
Executive Order 13045: Protection of Children From Environmental Health
and Safety Risks
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 a significant regulatory
action under Executive Order 12866.
National Technology Transfer Advancement Act
Section 12(d) of the National Technology Transfer and Advancement
Act of 1995 (NTTA), 15 U.S.C. 272, requires federal agencies to use
technical standards that are developed or adopted by voluntary
consensus to carry out policy objectives, so long as such standards are
not inconsistent with applicable law or otherwise impracticable. In
reviewing SIP submissions, EPA's role is to approve state choices,
provided that they meet the criteria of the Act. Absent a prior
existing requirement for the state to use voluntary consensus
standards, EPA has no authority to disapprove a SIP submission for
failure to use such standards, and it would thus be inconsistent with
applicable law for EPA to use voluntary consensus standards in place of
a SIP submission that otherwise satisfies the provisions of the Act.
Therefore, the requirements of section 12(d) of the NTTA do not apply.
Paperwork Reduction Act
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.).
Congressional Review Act
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 action is not a ``major rule'' as defined by 5 U.S.C.
804(2).
Under section 307(b)(1) of the Act, petitions for judicial review
of this action must be filed in the United States Court of Appeals for
the appropriate circuit by April 9, 2004. 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, Oxides of nitrogen, Ozone, Volatile organic compounds.
Dated: January 23, 2004.
Bharat Mathur,
Acting Regional Administrator, Region 5.
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 X--Michigan
0
2. Section 52.1170 is amended by adding paragraph (c)(119) to read as
follows:
Sec. 52.1170 Identification of plan.
* * * * *
(c) * * *
(119) The Michigan Department of Environmental Quality submitted a
revision to Michigan's State Implementation Plan for ozone on April 25,
2003. This submittal contained a revised definition of volatile organic
compound.
(i) Incorporation by reference.
(A) R 336.1122 Definitions; V, effective March 13, 2003.
[FR Doc. 04-2621 Filed 2-6-04; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P