[Federal Register Volume 64, Number 138 (Tuesday, July 20, 1999)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 38836-38838]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 99-18358]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
40 CFR Part 52
[MD063-3023a; FRL-6379-6]
Approval and Promulgation of Air Quality Implementation Plans;
Maryland--Fuel Burning Equipment
AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).
ACTION: Direct final rule.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: EPA is approving a State Implementation Plan (SIP) revision
submitted by the State of Maryland. This revision does not change
current requirements. The intended effect of this action is to approve
a change in the terms used in the text of a regulation to more
accurately reflect its intended purpose to exempt fuel burning
equipment, not installations, from certain general requirements
pertaining to sulfur oxides (SOx) . EPA is approving these
revisions to the Maryland SIP in accordance with the requirements of
the Clean Air Act.
DATES: This rule is effective on September 20, 1999 without further
notice, unless EPA receives adverse written comment by August 19, 1999.
If EPA receives such comments, it 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.
ADDRESSES: Written comments should be mailed to Makeba Morris, Chief,
Technical Assessment Branch, Mailcode 3AP22, U.S. Environmental
Protection Agency, Region III, 1650 Arch Street, Philadelphia,
Pennsylvania 19103. Copies of the documents relevant to this action are
available for public inspection during normal business hours at the Air
Protection Division, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Region III,
1650 Arch Street, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania 19103; the Air and
Radiation Docket and
[[Page 38837]]
Information Center, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, 401 M Street,
SW, Washington, DC 20460; and Maryland Department of the Environment,
2500 Broening Highway, Baltimore, Maryland 21224.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Artra B. Cooper at (215) 814-2096, or
by e-mail at cooper.artra@epamail.epa.gov.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
I. Background
On February 6, 1998, the State of Maryland submitted a formal
revision to its State Implementation Plan (SIP). The SIP revision
consists of a technical amendment to the text of COMAR 26.11.06.05--
Sulfur Compounds from Other than Fuel Burning Equipment, to more
accurately reflect the applicability of the regulation. The amendment
changes the term ``fuel burning installation'' to ``fuel burning
equipment.''
Summary of SIP Revision
The SIP revision consists of a technical amendment that corrects
the text of COMAR 26.11.06.05--Sulfur Compounds from Other than Fuel
Burning Equipment. The correction removes the term ``fuel burning
installations'' and replaces it with ``fuel burning equipment.'' The
intent of the regulation is to exempt fuel burning equipment (boilers)
from the provisions found in COMAR 26.11.06.05 because these units are
specifically regulated under COMAR 26.11.09--Control of Fuel Burning
Equipment, Stationary Internal Combustion Engines and Certain Fuel
Burning Installations. This SIP revision simply clarifies the
applicability of COMAR 26.11.06.05 and does not change any current
emission standards.
EPA is approving 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 today's
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 on September 20,
1999 without further notice unless the Agency receives adverse comments
by August 19, 1999. If EPA receives adverse comment, then EPA will
publish a timely withdrawal in the Federal Register informing the
public that the rule will not take effect. EPA will address all public
comments in a subsequent final rule based on the proposed rule. EPA
will not institute a second comment period on this action. Any parties
interested in commenting should do so at this time.
II. Final Action
EPA is approving administrative amendments to clarify the
applicabilty of COMAR 26.11.06.05--Sulfur Compounds from Other than
Fuel Burning Equipment, as submitted by the Maryland Department of the
Environment on February 6, 1998.
III. Administrative Requirements
A. Executive Order 12866
The Office of Management and Budget (OMB) has exempted this
regulatory action from review under E.O. 12866, entitled ``Regulatory
Planning and Review.''
B. Executive Order 12875
Under E.O. 12875, EPA may not issue a regulation that is not
required by statute and that creates a mandate upon a state, local, or
tribal government, unless the Federal government provides the funds
necessary to pay the direct compliance costs incurred by those
governments. If EPA complies by consulting, E.O. requires EPA to
provide to the Office of Management and Budget a description of the
extent of EPA's prior consultation with representatives of affected
state, local, and tribal governments, the nature of their concerns,
copies of written communications from the governments, and a statement
supporting the need to issue the regulation. In addition, E.O. 12875
requires EPA to develop an effective process permitting elected
officials and other representatives of state, local, and tribal
governments ``to provide meaningful and timely input in the development
of regulatory proposals containing significant unfunded mandates.''
Today's rule does not create a mandate on state, local or tribal
governments. The rule does not impose any enforceable duties on these
entities. Accordingly, the requirements of section 1(a) of E.O. 12875
do not apply to this rule.
C. Executive Order 13045
E.O. 13045, entitled ``Protection of Children from Environmental
Health Risks and Safety Risks'' (62 FR 19885, April 23, 1997), applies
to any rule that the EPA determines (1) is ``economically
significant,'' as defined under E.O. 12866, and (2) the environmental
health or safety risk addressed by the rule has a disproportionate
effect on children. If the regulatory action meets both criteria, the
Agency must evaluate the environmental health or safety effects of the
planned rule on children and explain why the planned regulation is
preferable to other potentially effective and reasonably feasible
alternatives considered by the Agency. This final rule is not subject
to E.O. 13045 because it is not an economically significant regulatory
action as defined by E.O. 12866, and it does not address an
environmental health or safety risk that would have a disproportionate
effect on children.
D. Executive Order 13084
Under E.O. 13084, EPA may not issue a regulation that is not
required by statute, that significantly affects or uniquely affects the
communities of Indian tribal governments, and that imposes substantial
direct compliance costs on those communities, unless the Federal
government provides the funds necessary to pay the direct compliance
costs incurred by the tribal governments. If EPA complies by
consulting, Executive Order 13084 requires EPA to provide to the Office
of Management and Budget, in a separately identified section of the
preamble to the rule, a description of the extent of EPA's prior
consultation with representatives of affected tribal governments, a
summary of the nature of their concerns, and a statement supporting the
need to issue the regulation. In addition, Executive Order 13084
requires EPA to develop an effective process permitting elected and
other representatives of Indian tribal governments ``to provide
meaningful and timely input in the development of regulatory policies
on matters that significantly or uniquely affect their communities.''
Today's rule does not significantly or uniquely affect the communities
of Indian tribal governments. This action does not involve or impose
any requirements that affect Indian Tribes. Accordingly, the
requirements of section 3(b) of E.O. 13084 do not apply to this rule.
E. Regulatory Flexibility Act
The Regulatory Flexibility Act (RFA) generally requires an agency
to conduct a regulatory flexibility analysis of any rule subject to
notice and comment rulemaking requirements unless the agency certifies
that the rule will not have a significant economic impact on a
substantial number of small entities. Small entities include small
businesses, small not-for-profit enterprises, and small governmental
jurisdictions. This final rule will not have a significant impact on a
substantial number of small entities because SIP approvals under
section 110 and subchapter I, part D of the Clean Air Act do not create
any new requirements but simply approve requirements that the State is
already imposing. Therefore, because the
[[Page 38838]]
Federal SIP approval does not create any new requirements, I certify
that this action will not have a significant economic impact on a
substantial number of small entities. Moreover, due to the nature of
the Federal-State relationship under the Clean Air Act, preparation of
a flexibility analysis would constitute Federal inquiry into the
economic reasonableness of state action. The Clean Air Act forbids EPA
to base its actions concerning SIPs on such grounds. Union Electric Co.
v. U.S. EPA, 427 U.S. 246, 255-66 (1976); 42 U.S.C. 7410(a)(2).
F. Unfunded Mandates
Under section 202 of the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995
(``Unfunded Mandates Act''), signed into law on March 22, 1995, EPA
must prepare a budgetary impact statement to accompany any proposed or
final rule that includes a Federal mandate that may result in estimated
annual costs to State, local, or tribal governments in the aggregate;
or to private sector, of $100 million or more. Under section 205, EPA
must select the most cost-effective and least burdensome alternative
that achieves the objectives of the rule and is consistent with
statutory requirements. Section 203 requires EPA to establish a plan
for informing and advising any small governments that may be
significantly or uniquely impacted by the rule. EPA has determined that
the approval action promulgated does not include a Federal mandate that
may result in estimated annual costs of $100 million or more to either
State, local, or tribal governments in the aggregate, or to the private
sector. This Federal action approves pre-existing requirements under
State or local law, and imposes no new requirements. Accordingly, no
additional costs to State, local, or tribal governments, or to the
private sector, result from this action.
G. Submission to Congress and the Comptroller General
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. This rule is not a
``major rule'' as defined by 5 U.S.C. 804(2).
H. Petitions for Judicial Review
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 September 20, 1999. Filing a
petition for reconsideration by the Administrator of this final rule
pertaining to technical amendments to COMAR 26.11.06.05, Sulfur
Compounds from Other than Fuel Burning Equipment 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, Sulfur oxides.
Dated: July 8, 1999.
Thomas Voltaggio,
Acting Regional Administrator, Region III.
40 CFR part 52 is amended as follows:
PART 52--[AMENDED]
1. The authority citation for part 52 continues to read as follows:
Authority: 42 U.S.C. 7401 et seq.
Subpart V--Maryland
2. Section 52.1070 is amended by adding paragraphs (c)(129) to read
as follows:
Sec. 52.1070 Identification of plan.
* * * * *
(c) * * *
(129) Revisions to the State of Maryland Regulations COMAR
26.11.06.05--Sulfur Compounds from Other than Fuel Burning Equipment
submitted on February 6, 1998 by the Maryland Department of the
Environment:
(i) Incorporation by reference.
(A) Letter of February 6, 1998 from the Maryland Department of the
Environment transmitting amendments to Code of Maryland Administrative
Regulations (COMAR) 26.11.06.05--Sulfur Compounds from Other than Fuel
Burning Equipment.
(B) Revision to COMAR 26.11.06.05--Sulfur Compounds from Other than
Fuel Burning Equipment, effective September 22, 1997 to replace the
term ``installations'' with the term ``equipment'' throughout the
regulation.
(ii) Additional Material.--Remainder of February 8, 1998 submittal.
[FR Doc. 99-18358 Filed 7-19-99; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P
