federal register - U.S. Government Printing Office

6128 Federal Register / Vol. 62, No. 28 / Tuesday, February 11, 1997 / Rules and RegulationsWest Jackson Boulevard, Chicago,Illinois, 60604.Copies of the Illinois submittal areavailable for public review duringnormal business hours, between 8:00a.m. and 4:30 p.m., at the above address.FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:Randolph O. Cano, RegulationDevelopment Section, Air ProgramsBranch (AR–18J), U.S. EnvironmentalProtection Agency, 77 West JacksonBoulevard, Chicago, Illinois, 60604.Telephone: (312) 886–6036.SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:I. BackgroundSection 183(b)(3) of the Clean Air Actrequires the Administrator of USEPA toissue a Control Technique Guideline(CTG) for controlling VOM emissionsfrom the Aerospace Coatings SICcategory sources. Illinois was requiredto adopt rules controlling VOMemissions from sources in this SICcategory with a potential to emit twentyfiveor more tons per year of VOM(major sources) and located in either ofIllinois’ ozone nonattainment areas. TheChicago ozone nonattainment area iscomprised of Cook, DuPage, Kane, Lake,McHenry, Will Counties and Aux Sableand Goose Lake Townships in GrundyCounty and Oswego Township inKendall County. The Metro-East ozonenonattainment area is comprised ofMadison, Monroe, and St. ClairCounties. Illinois reviewed the data inits emissions inventory data base anddetermined that there were no majorsources in the aerospace coatingscategory located in Illinois ozonenonattainment areas. Illinois alsodetermined that should such a majorsource exist it would be subject toregulation under the provisions of theState non-CTG rules.The USEPA has reviewed thedocumentation on which this Illinoisnegative declaration is based. TheUSEPA agrees with the Illinois findingthat there are no major sources of VOMfrom aerospace coating facilities locatedin Illinois’ Chicago or Metro-East ozonenonattainment areas.II. Rulemaking ActionThe USEPA approves theincorporation of Illinois’ negativedeclaration concerning aerospacecoatings into the Illinois SIP for ozone.The USEPA is publishing this actionwithout prior proposal because USEPAviews this as a noncontroversialrevision and anticipates no adversecomments. However, in a separatedocument in this Federal Registerpublication, the USEPA is proposing toapprove the SIP revision should adverseor critical comments be filed. Thisaction will be effective on April 14,1997 unless, by March 13, 1997, adverseor critical comments are received.If the USEPA receives suchcomments, this action will bewithdrawn before the effective date bypublishing a subsequent rulemakingthat will withdraw the final action. Allpublic comments received will beaddressed in a subsequent final rulebased on this action serving as aproposed rule. The USEPA will notinstitute a second comment period onthis action. Any parties interested incommenting on this action should do soat this time. If no such comments arereceived, the public is advised that thisaction will be effective on April 14,1997.Nothing in this action should beconstrued as permitting, allowing orestablishing a precedent for any futurerequest for revision to any SIP. Eachrequest for revision to the SIP shall beconsidered separately in light of specifictechnical, economic, and environmentalfactors and in relation to relevantstatutory and regulatory requirements.III. Administrative RequirementsA. Executive Order 12866This action has been classified as aTable 3 action for signature by theRegional Administrator under theprocedures published in the FederalRegister on January 19, 1989 (54 FR2214–2225), as revised by a July 10,1995, memorandum from Mary D.Nichols, Assistant Administrator for Airand Radiation. The Office ofManagement and Budget (OMB) hasexempted this regulatory action fromExecutive Order 12866 review.B. Regulatory FlexibilityUnder the Regulatory Flexibility Act,5 U.S.C. section 600 et seq., USEPAmust prepare a regulatory flexibilityanalysis assessing the impact of anyproposed or final rule on small entities.5 U.S.C. sections 603 and 604.Alternatively, USEPA may certify thatthe rule will not have a significantimpact on a substantial number of smallentities. Small entities include smallbusinesses, small not-for-profitenterprises, and government entitieswith jurisdiction over populations ofless than 50,000.SIP approvals under section 110 andsubchapter I, part D of the Act do notcreate any new requirements, butsimply approve requirements that theState is already imposing. Therefore,because the Federal SIP approval doesnot impose any new requirements, theAdministrator certifies that it does nothave a significant impact on any smallentities affected. Moreover, due to thenature of the Federal-State relationshipunder the Act, preparation of aflexibility analysis would constituteFederal inquiry into the economicreasonableness of the State action. TheClean Air Act forbids USEPA to base itsactions concerning SIPs on suchgrounds. Union Electric Co. v. EPA., 427U.S. 246, 256–66 (1976); 42 U.S.C.7410(a)(2).C. Unfunded MandatesUnder Section 202 of the UnfundedMandates Reform Act of 1995, signedinto law on March 22, 1995, USEPAmust undertake various actions inassociation with any proposed or finalrule that includes a Federal mandatethat may result in estimated costs tostate, local, or tribal governments in theaggregate; or to the private sector, of$100 million or more. This Federalaction affirms a State finding thatadditional regulations coveringaerospace coating sources areunnecessary because no major sourcesof this type are located in the Illinoisozone nonattainment areas. No newFederal requirements are imposed.Accordingly, no additional costs tostate, local, or tribal governments, or theprivate sector, result from this action.D. Submission to Congress and theGeneral Accounting OfficeUnder 5 U.S.C. 801(a)(1)(A) as addedby the Small Business RegulatoryEnforcement Fairness Act of 1996,USEPA submitted a report containingthis rule and other required informationto the U.S. Senate, the U.S. House ofRepresentatives and the ComptrollerGeneral of the General AccountingOffice prior to publication of the rule intoday’s Federal Register. This rule isnot a major rule as defined by 5 U.S.C.804(2).E. Petitions for Judicial ReviewUnder section 307(b)(1) of the Act,petitions for judicial review of thisaction must be filed in the United StatesCourt of Appeals for the appropriatecircuit by April 14, 1997. Filing apetition for reconsideration by theAdministrator of this final rule does notaffect the finality of this rule for thepurposes of judicial review nor does itextend the time within which a petitionfor judicial review may be filed, andshall not postpone the effectiveness ofsuch rule or action. This action may notbe challenged later in proceedings toenforce its requirements. (See Section307(b)(2)).