Daily Rules, Proposed Rules, and Notices of the Federal Government
On November 2, 2011 (76 FR 67640), EPA published a notice of proposed rulemaking (NPR) for the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania. The NPR proposed approval of the Pennsylvania 1997 annual PM
On November 27, 2009 (74 FR 62251), EPA published findings of failure to submit a SIP revision that demonstrates attainment of the 1997 PM
On May 12, 2005 (76 FR 70093), EPA published the Clean Air Interstate Rule (CAIR) that addresses the interstate transport requirements of the CAA with respect to the 1997 ozone and 1997 PM
On December 30, 2011, the Court issued an order addressing the status of the Transport Rule and CAIR in response to motions filed by numerous parties seeking a stay of the Transport Rule pending judicial review. In that order, the Court stayed the Transport Rule pending the Court's resolution of the petitions for review of that rule in
EPA does not believe that the circumstances set forth above preclude EPA from approving the April 12, 2012 Pennsylvania attainment plan as amended on August 3, 2012 for the Philadelphia Area. While the monitoring data that show the Philadelphia Area attained the 1997 annual PM
Most importantly, EPA notes that this action is approving an attainment plan that demonstrated that the Philadelphia Area would attain the 1997 annual PM
Pennsylvania's SIP revision demonstrates attainment of the 1997 annual PM
On August 3, 2012, Michael L. Krancer, Secretary of PADEP sent a letter to Shawn M. Garvin, Regional Administrator of EPA Region III withdrawing the analysis of RACM/RACT which had been included in the April 12, 2010 attainment plan since the requirement for the RACM/RACT analysis was suspended by the May 16, 2012 (77 FR 28782) clean data determination pursuant to 40 CFR 51.1004(c). Specifically, PADEP withdrew section IV.B. in its entirety, pages 29-31 in part, and Appendix G in its entirety.
Other specific requirements of the 1997 annual PM
EPA reviewed the methodology that PADEP used to estimate marine vessel emissions and found that proper guidance was followed pertaining to gathering characteristics of the port that included the types of vessels, the shipping traffic, arrival information, and any limitations on the data gathered. EPA verified that the marine vessels' emissions were accounted for in the supporting spreadsheets provided for nonroad emission estimates. EPA also verified that land-based sources for cargo handling equipment, such as terminal tractors, cranes, container handlers and forklifts, were accounted for in the nonroad spreadsheets by county provided by PADEP.
EPA is approving Pennsylvania's April 12, 2010 attainment plan as amended on August 3, 2012 for the 1997 annual PM
Under the CAA, the Administrator is required to approve a SIP submission that complies with the provisions of the CAA and applicable Federal regulations. 42 U.S.C. 7410(k); 40 CFR 52.02(a). Thus, in reviewing SIP submissions, EPA's role is to approve state choices, provided that they meet the criteria of the CAA. Accordingly, this action merely approves state law as meeting Federal requirements and does not impose additional requirements beyond those imposed by state law. For that reason, this action:
• Is not a “significant regulatory action” subject to review by the Office of Management and Budget under Executive Order 12866 (58 FR 51735, October 4, 1993);
• Does not impose an information collection burden under the provisions of the Paperwork Reduction Act (44 U.S.C. 3501
• Is certified as not having a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities under the Regulatory Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 601
• 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);
• Does not have Federalism implications as specified in Executive Order 13132 (64 FR 43255, August 10, 1999);
• Is not an economically significant regulatory action based on health or safety risks subject to Executive Order 13045 (62 FR 19885, April 23, 1997);
• Is not a significant regulatory action subject to Executive Order 13211 (66 FR 28355, May 22, 2001);
• Is not subject to requirements of Section 12(d) of the National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act of 1995 (15 U.S.C. 272 note) because application of those requirements would be inconsistent with the CAA; and
•Does not provide EPA with the discretionary authority to address, as appropriate, disproportionate human health or environmental effects, using practicable and legally permissible methods, under Executive Order 12898 (59 FR 7629, February 16, 1994).
In addition, this rule does not have tribal implications as specified by Executive Order 13175 (65 FR 67249, November 9, 2000), because the SIP is not approved to apply in Indian country located in the state, and EPA notes that it will not impose substantial direct costs on tribal governments or preempt tribal law.
The Congressional Review Act, 5 U.S.C. 801
Under section 307(b)(1) of the CAA, petitions for judicial review of this action must be filed in the United States Court of Appeals for the appropriate circuit by October 29, 2012. Filing a petition for reconsideration by the Administrator of this final rule does not affect the finality of this action 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 pertaining to the Pennsylvania 1997 annual PM
Environmental protection, Air pollution control, Incorporation by reference, Nitrogen dioxide, Particulate matter, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements, Sulfur oxides, Volatile organic compounds.
40 CFR part 52 is amended as follows:
42 U.S.C. 7401
(e) * * *
(1) * * *