Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).
Direct final rule.
The EPA is approving revisions to the Tennessee Department of Environment and Conservation's definition of Volatile Organic Compounds submitted on February 3, 1999 by the state of Tennessee. These revisions are designed for the State Implementation Plan (SIP) to attain the national ambient air quality standards (NAAQS) for ozone under title I of the Clean Air Act (CAA). The additional compounds HFC43-10mee, HCFC-225ca, and HCFC-225cb are added to the list of exempt compounds on the basis that they have negligible contribution to the tropospheric ozone formation.
This direct final rule is effective August 4, 2003 without further notice, unless EPA receives adverse comment by July 3, 2003. If adverse comment is received, EPA will publish a timely withdrawal of the direct final rule in the Federal Register and inform the public that the rule will not take effect.
All comments should be addressed to: Steve Scofield or Nacosta Ward; Regulatory Development Section; Air Planning Branch; Air, Pesticides, and Toxics Management Division; U. S. Environmental Protection Agency Region 4; 61 Forsyth Street, SW., Atlanta, Georgia 30303-8960.
Copies of the State submittal(s) are available at the following addresses for inspection during normal business hours:
Environmental Protection Agency Region 4, Air Planning Branch, 61 Forsyth Street, SW., Atlanta, Georgia 30303-8960. [Steve Scofield, 404-562-9034 or Nacosta Ward, 404-562-9140]. Tennessee Department of Environment and Conservation, Division of Air Pollution Control, L & C Annex, 9th Floor, 401 Church Street, Nashville, Tennessee 37243-1531. 615-532-0554.Start Further Info
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Steve Scofield or Nacosta Ward; Regulatory Development Section; Air Planning Branch; Air, Pesticides, and Toxics Management Division; U. S. Environmental Protection Agency Region 4; 61 Forsyth Street, SW., Atlanta, Georgia 30303-8960. Mr. Scofield and Ms. Ward can also be reached by telephone at 404-562-9034 and 404-562-9140, or by electronic mail at email@example.com and firstname.lastname@example.org, respectively.End Further Info End Preamble Start Supplemental Information
I. Analysis of State's Submittal
On February 3, 1999, the state of Tennessee through the Tennessee Department of Environment and Conservation submitted a revision to chapter 1200-3-18, Volatile Organic Compounds, which provides SIP definitions. The revision to chapter 1200-3-18 provides greater clarity to the existing definition. The additional compounds HFC43-10mee, HCFC-225ca, and HCFC-225cb are added to the list of exempt compounds on the basis that they have negligible contribution to the tropospheric ozone formation.
II. Final Action
EPA is approving the aforementioned changes to the State of Tennessee's SIP because they are consistent with the CAA and EPA policy. The EPA is publishing this rule without prior proposal because the Agency views this as a noncontroversial submittal and anticipates no adverse comments. However, in the proposed rules section of this Federal Register publication, EPA is publishing a separate document that will serve as the proposal to approve the SIP revision should adverse comments be filed. This rule will be effective August 4, 2003 without further notice unless the Agency receives adverse comments by July 3, 2003.
If the EPA receives such comments, then EPA will publish a document withdrawing the final rule and informing the public that the rule will not take effect. All public comments received will then be addressed in a subsequent final rule based on the proposed rule. The EPA will not institute a second comment period. Parties interested in commenting should do so at this time. If no such comments are received, the public is advised that this rule will be effective on August 4, 2003 and no further action will be taken on the proposed rule. Please note that if we receive adverse comment on an amendment, paragraph, or section of this rule and if that provision may be severed from the remainder of the rule, we may adopt as final those provisions of the rule that are not the subject of an adverse comment. Start Printed Page 33009
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 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. 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 August 4, 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).)Start List of Subjects
List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52
- Environmental protection
- Air pollution control
- Carbon monoxide
- Intergovernmental relations
- Incorporate by reference
- Nitrogen dioxide
- Particulate matter
- Reporting and recordkeeping requirements
- Volatile organic compounds
Dated: May 20, 2003.
A. Stanley Meiburg,
Acting Regional Administrator, Region 4.
Part 52 of chapter I, title 40,End Amendment Part Start Part
PART 52—[AMENDED]End Part Start Amendment Part
1. The authority citation for part 52 continues to read as follows:End Amendment Part
Subpart RR—TennesseeStart Amendment Part
2. Section 52.2220(c) is amended by revising the entry for “Section 1200-3-18-.01” to read as follows:End Amendment Part
(c) * * *
|State citation||Title/subject||Adoption date||EPA approval date||Explanation|
|* * * * * * *|
|Chapter 1200-3-18 Volatile Organic Compounds|
|Section 1200-3-18-.01||Definitions||01/12/98||June 3, 2003, [Insert citation of publication].|
|* * * * * * *|
[FR Doc. 03-13707 Filed 6-2-03; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P