

[Federal Register: August 31, 2006 (Volume 71, Number 169)]
[Rules and Regulations]               
[Page 51761-51766]
From the Federal Register Online via GPO Access [wais.access.gpo.gov]
[DOCID:fr31au06-14]                         


[[Page 51761]]

=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

40 CFR Part 52

[EPA-R01-OAR-2005-CT-0001; A-1-FRL-8209-6]

 
Approval and Promulgation of Air Quality ImplementationPlans; 
Connecticut; VOC Regulations and One-Hour Ozone Attainment 
Demonstration Shortfall

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Direct final rule.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

SUMMARY: The EPA is approving a State Implementation Plan (SIP) 
revision submitted by the State of Connecticut. This revision 
establishes requirements to reduce volatile organic compound (VOC) 
emissions from portable fuel containers, automotive refinishing 
operations, and gasoline dispensing facilities. The intended effect of 
this action is to approve these requirements into the Connecticut SIP. 
These control measures are needed to meet a portion of the shortfall in 
emission reduction identified in Connecticut's one-hour ozone 
attainment demonstration SIP. This action also approves these control 
measures, along with a previously approved control measure, as 
fulfilling the shortfall in emission reductions identified in 
Connecticut's one-hour ozone attainment demonstration SIP. EPA is 
taking this action in accordance with the Clean Air Act (CAA).

DATES: This direct final rule will be effective October 30, 2006, 
unless EPA receives adverse comments by October 2, 2006. If adverse 
comments are received, EPA will publish a timely withdrawal of the 
direct final rule in the Federal Register informing the public that the 
rule will not take effect.

ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, identified by Docket ID No. EPA-R01-
OAR-2005-CT-0001 by one of the following methods:
    1. http://www.regulations.gov: Follow the on-line instructions for 

submitting comments.
    2. E-mail: arnold.anne@epa.gov.
    3. Fax: (617) 918-0047.
    4. Mail: ``EPA-R01-OAR-2005-CT-0001,'' Anne Arnold, U.S. 
Environmental Protection Agency, EPA New England Regional Office, One 
Congress Street, Suite 1100 (mail code CAQ), Boston, MA 02114-2023.
    5. Hand Delivery or Courier. Deliver your comments to: Anne Arnold, 
Manager, Air Quality Planning Unit, Office of Ecosystem Protection, 
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, EPA New England Regional Office, 
One Congress Street, 11th floor, (CAQ), Boston, MA 02114-2023. Such 
deliveries are only accepted during the Regional Office's normal hours 
of operation. The Regional Office's official hours of business are 
Monday through Friday, 8:30 to 4, excluding legal holidays.
    Instructions: Direct your comments to Docket ID No. EPA-R01-OAR-
2005-CT-0001. EPA's policy is that all comments received will be 
included in the public docket without change and may be made available 
online at http://www.regulations.gov, including any personal 

information provided, unless the comment includes information claimed 
to be Confidential Business Information (CBI) or other information 
whose disclosure is restricted by statute. Do not submit through 
http://www.regulations.gov, or e-mail, information that you consider to be CBI 

or otherwise protected. The http://www.regulations.gov Web site is an 

``anonymous access'' systems, which means EPA will not know your 
identity or contact information unless you provide it in the body of 
your comment. If you send an e-mail comment directly to EPA without 
going through http://www.regulations.gov your e-mail address will be 

automatically captured and included as part of the comment that is 
placed in the public docket and made available on the Internet. If you 
submit an electronic comment, EPA recommends that you include your name 
and other contact information in the body of your comment and with any 
disk or CD-ROM you submit. If EPA cannot read your comment due to 
technical difficulties and cannot contact you for clarification, EPA 
may not be able to consider your comment. Electronic files should avoid 
the use of special characters, any form of encryption, and be free of 
any defects or viruses.
    Docket: All documents in the electronic docket are listed in the 
http://www.regulations.gov index. Although listed in the index, some 

information is not publicly available, i.e., CBI or other information 
whose disclosure is restricted by statute. Certain other material, such 
as copyrighted material, is not placed on the Internet and will be 
publicly available only in hard copy form. Publicly available docket 
materials are available either electronically in http://www.regulations.gov or 

in hard copy at Office of Ecosystem Protection, U.S. Environmental 
Protection Agency, EPA New England Regional Office, One Congress 
Street, Suite 1100, Boston, MA. EPA requests that if at all possible, 
you contact the contact listed in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT 
section to schedule your inspection. The Regional Office's official 
hours of business are Monday through Friday, 8:30 to 4, excluding legal 
holidays.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Richard P. Burkhart, Air Quality 
Planning, Office of Ecosystem Protection, U.S. Environmental Protection 
Agency, EPA New England Regional Office, One Congress Street, 11th 
floor, (CAQ), Boston, MA 02114-2023. Phone: 617-918-1664, Fax: (617) 
918-0664, E-mail: burkhart.richard@epa.gov.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

I. General Information

A. How Can I Get Copies of This Document and Other Related Information?

    In addition to the publicly available docket materials available 
for inspection electronically in Regional Material in EDocket, and the 
hard copy available at the Regional Office, which are identified in the 
ADDRESSES section above, copies of the state submittal and EPA's 
technical support document are also available for public inspection 
during normal business hours, by appointment at the Bureau of Air 
Management, Department of Environmental Protection, State Office 
Building, 79 Elm Street, Hartford, CT 06106.

II. Rulemaking Information

    This section is organized as follows:

    A. What action is EPA taking?
    B. What are the requirements of Connecticut's new regulations?
    C. Why is EPA approving Connecticut's regulations?
    D. What is the process for EPA to approve these SIP revisions?
III. Final Action
IV. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews

A. What action is EPA taking?

    EPA is approving Connecticut's Section 22a-174-43, ``Portable Fuel 
Container Spillage Control,'' the subsections of Section 22a-174-3b, 
``Exemptions from Permitting for Construction and Operation of External 
Combustion Units, Automotive Refinishing Operations, Emergency Engines, 
Nonmettalic Mineral Processing Equipment and Surface Coating 
Operations' that apply to autobody refinishing operations and Section 
22a-174-30, ``Dispensing of Gasoline/Stage I and Stage II Vapor 
Recovery,'' and incorporating these regulations into the Connecticut 
SIP. EPA is also approving these measures, along with Connecticut's 
previously approved municipal waste combuster

[[Page 51762]]

rule, as meeting the shortfall emissions reduction identified by EPA in 
our previous approval of Connecticut's 1-hour ozone attainment 
demonstration SIP.

B. What are the requirements of Connecticut's new regulations?

Portable Fuel Containers
    The Section 22a-174-43 Portable Fuel Containers rule applies to any 
person who sells, supplies, offers for sale, or manufactures for sale 
in Connecticut portable fuel containers or spouts or both for use in 
Connecticut. Connecticut's portable fuel container rule includes 
performance standards for portable fuel containers and spouts in order 
to ensure spill-proof systems. For example, the rule requires that 
portable fuel containers have an automatic shut-off that stops the fuel 
flow before the target fuel tank overflows. Connecticut's rule 
prohibits any person to sell, supply, offer for sale, or manufacture 
for sale in Connecticut, on or after May 1, 2004, any portable fuel 
container or spout that does not meet all of the specified performance 
standards. There is, however, a specified list of exemptions from the 
rule. For example, the rule does not apply to portable fuel containers 
with a nominal capacity less than or equal to one quart or to 
containers or spouts that have been granted an innovative products 
exemption by California Air Resources Board (CARB) or the New York 
Department of Environmental Conservation. The exemption for innovative 
products is considered reasonable, because in order to receive an 
innovative products exemption the CARB and New York rules require that 
the manufacturer demonstrate that the use of the product will result in 
emissions below the highest emitting container in its product category 
as determined from applicable testing. Connecticut's rule also includes 
an exemption for products that have received a variance pursuant to the 
variance provisions in New York's portable fuel container rule. This 
exemption is acceptable because few variances are expected to be 
granted. For example, the compliance date of New York's portable fuel 
container rule was January 1, 2003, and as of March 1, 2006 no 
variances have been granted by New York.
    In addition, Connecticut's rule includes the appropriate testing 
and recordkeeping requirements to ensure compliance with the specified 
performance standards. Specifically, the rule requires the use of 
several test methods and procedures adopted by CARB. The portable fuel 
container rule is expected to achieve a creditable VOC reduction of at 
least 2.3 tons per summer day by 2007. The method used to calculate 
this reduction is shown in the Connecticut submittal and EPA agrees 
with the method.
    More recently, EPA proposed new standards that would limit 
hydrocarbon emissions that evaporate from or permeate through gasoline 
cans (71 FR 15803, March 29, 2006). EPA's proposal starts with gasoline 
cans manufactured in 2009. The proposed standard would limit 
evaporation and permeation emissions from these cans to 0.3 grams of 
hydrocarbons per gallon per day. The Connecticut rule limits the 
permeation emissions from portable fuel containers to less than or 
equal to 0.4 grams of hydrocarbons per gallon per day. If, as proposed, 
the final EPA standard for permeation emissions from portable fuel 
containers is more stringent than the current state standard, the 
federal standard will supersede the state standard as of 2009.
Autobody Refinishing
    Connecticut's Section 22a-174-3b, ``Exemptions from Permitting for 
Construction and Operation of External Combustion Units, Automotive 
Refinishing Operations, Emergency Engines, Nonmettalic Mineral 
Processing Equipment and Surface Coating Operations,'' allows owners or 
operators of these types of operations to construct and operate such a 
source without obtaining a general permit pursuant to Section 22a-174 
or a permit pursuant to Section 22a-174-3a, provided that they comply 
with the applicable provisions of the Section 22a-174-3b regulation. 
Connecticut submitted to EPA as a SIP revision only those subsections 
of Section 22a-174-3b that apply to automotive refinishing operations.
    EPA has evaluated the portion of Connecticut's Section 22a-174-3b 
that applies to automotive refinishing operations against applicable 
EPA guidance documents and the OTC model rule for this source category. 
An analysis of Connecticut's regulations is presented below.
    EPA has issued control technique guidelines (CTGs) and, in some 
cases, national regulations for certain VOC source categories. A CTG is 
a document issued by EPA which establishes a ``presumptive norm'' for 
Reasonably Available Control Technology (RACT) for a specific VOC 
source category. EPA has issued a national rule for autobody 
refinishing.\1\ EPA has also issued an ACT for automobile 
refinishing.\2\ Similar to a CTG, an ACT (alternative control 
techniques) document contains information on emissions, control 
options, and costs that states can use in developing RACT rules. Unlike 
a CTG, however, the ACT document presents options only, and does not 
contain a recommendation on RACT.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ ``National Volatile Organic Compound Emission Standards for 
Automobile Refinish Coatings,'' 40 CFR Part 59, Subpart B.
    \2\ ``Alternative Control Techniques Document: Automobile 
Refinishing,'' (EPA-453/R-94-031), April 1994.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    In addition, the OTC (Ozone Transport Commission) has developed 
model rules for several VOC source categories, including mobile 
equipment repair and refinishing (MERR),\3\ and the OTC states, 
including Connecticut, have signed a memorandum of understanding (MOU) 
committing to adopt these model rules.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \3\ ``Model Rule for Mobile Equipment Repair and Refinishing,'' 
Ozone Transport Commission, March 6, 2001.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The coating limits in the OTC MERR model rule are the same as the 
limits included in EPA's national autobody refinishing rule. The OTC 
rule, however, applies to the person applying the coatings, whereas the 
national rule applies to manufacturers or importers that sell or 
distribute automobile refinish coatings. In addition, the OTC rule 
includes application equipment requirements, good housekeeping, 
pollution prevention, and training measures. These additional 
requirements are similar to those discussed in EPA's ACT document for 
automobile refinishing.
    The portion of Connecticut's Section 22a-174-3b that applies to 
automotive refinishing operations establishes:
    (a) A limit on the total amount of VOC-containing coatings or 
solvents of 2,000 gallons in any twelve month rolling period;
    (b) Requirements that limit the type of application equipment 
utilized to high-volume low-pressure (HVLP) spray equipment, 
electrostatic application equipment, or other application methods with 
a guaranteed transfer efficiency of at least 65%;
    (c) Cleaning standards for any application equipment; and
    (d) Other work practice standards, such as record keeping, and the 
storing of coatings and solvents in closed containers.
    VOC limits for mobile equipment repair and refinishing coatings are 
not included in Connecticut's revised SIP, but are in effect nationally 
under the Federal requirements at 40 CFR Part 59,

[[Page 51763]]

Subpart B, National VOC Emissions Standards for Automobile Refinish 
Coatings, which were adopted by EPA in 1998. Connecticut's autobody 
regulations have similar requirements to those specified in the OTC 
model rule, which are also similar to those discussed in EPA's ACT 
document for autobody refinishing.
    The new requirements for autobody refinishing in Connecticut are 
expected to achieve a creditable VOC reduction of at least 3.0 tons per 
summer day by May 2007. The method used to calculate this emission 
reduction is contained in the December 1, 2004 state submittal. EPA 
considers these emission reduction estimates, which are consistent with 
a report on VOC control measures,\4\ to be reasonable estimates.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \4\ ``Control Measure Development Support Analysis of Ozone 
Transport Commission Model Rules,'' E.H. Pechan and Associates, 
Inc., March 31, 2001.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Stage I/II Vapor Recovery
    Connecticut revised the Section 22a-174-30, Stage I/II Vapor 
Recovery rule to include new requirements for PV (pressure/vacuum) vent 
valves and to require more frequent testing of the Stage II systems (3 
years vs. 5 years). Compliance with the PV vent valve requirements is 
due by May 10, 2005, and the three year re-testing requirement begins 
November 15, 2004.
    The revised Section 22a-174-30 Stage I/II Vapor Recovery Rule 
includes a testing requirement for the PV vent valve, but does not 
specify a particular test method. Instead, the regulation specifies a 
performance standard with a pressure range that any test method must be 
able to measure. See 22a-174-30(e)(1)(E). In addition, DEP submitted a 
fact sheet that clarifies what test method DEP expects to use to test 
PV vent valves. Specifically, the fact sheet includes the test 
procedures from the New Hampshire Department of Environmental Services 
``304--PV Vent Cap Test Procedure.'' The fact sheet states that this 
test method is accepted in Connecticut, and also provides that CARB 
test procedures or other procedures approved by the Connecticut DEP are 
also acceptable.
    These provisions leave DEP some discretion to approve alternative 
test methods without further EPA approval. Nevertheless, EPA believes 
the combination of testing provisions DEP has in place provide for an 
acceptable framework for determining an adequate test method for PV 
vent valves. First, any test method DEP might approve must be able to 
measure the performance standard required in the Stage I/II regulation. 
Any test method that cannot detect pressures accurately enough to 
measure within the ranges provided for in section 22a-174-30(e)(1)(E) 
would obviously not qualify under the regulation. Therefore, DEP's 
discretion in approving alternative test methods is circumscribed by 
this regulatory standard. Second, DEP has submitted a fact sheet 
explaining which test methods it finds acceptable. This fact sheet 
provides good evidence that DEP has selected reliable methods. EPA is 
approving this SIP with the understanding that the State will only use 
test methods of the quality identified in that fact sheet. Third, test 
methods for PV vent valves are not complicated procedures, and they do 
not present the multiple opportunities for technical judgment calls 
inherent in more involved test methods. Thus, EPA does not anticipate 
that DEP and EPA would find it difficult to agree on whether a test 
method is sufficiently accurate to measure the performance standard 
provided for in DEP's regulation. Finally, in the unlikely event that a 
facility uses a test method EPA deems unreliable, nothing in the SIP-
approved regulation prevents EPA from requiring testing using an 
acceptable test method. The Stage I/II regulation neither specifies a 
test method nor specifically authorizes DEP to designate a test method 
that would be binding on EPA or any other party as the sole method for 
determining compliance with the PV vent valve requirement. The fact 
sheet DEP has submitted with the SIP is a statement of the test methods 
that DEP is prepared to accept, but it is not legally binding as a 
matter of state law, nor is it formally incorporated by reference into 
the SIP as a matter of federal law. Although EPA does not anticipate 
any disagreement over appropriate test methodology, the Agency can 
ultimately require the performance of the test method it deems 
appropriate to enforce this provision, because the SIP does not 
restrict EPA's choice of test methods.
    The fact sheet also states that the PV vent testing must be 
conducted prior to dispensing gasoline for new stations and as part of 
the next regularly scheduled Stage II system test for existing 
facilities. In addition, the SIP submittal states that direct mailings 
were sent to testing companies and gasoline station owners informing 
them of the new requirements and the PV vent testing procedure.
    The previous version of Section 22a-174-30 was approved into the 
Connecticut SIP. Therefore, the revised rule must meet the Section 
110(l) anti-backsliding provisions of the Clean Air Act. The previous 
version of 22a-174-30 was approved as meeting the Section 182(b)(3) 
Stage II vapor recovery requirements of the Clean Air Act. The new rule 
includes the previous requirements approved into the SIP, along with 
the new PV vent valve and more frequent testing requirements discussed 
above. These new requirements are expected to achieve additional 
emissions reductions beyond those achieved by the previously approved 
rule. Therefore, the new Section 22a-174-30 meets the Clean Air Act 
anti-backsliding requirement. The new requirements for PV vent valves 
are expected to achieve a creditable VOC reduction of at least 1.4 tons 
per summer day by 2007. The method used to calculate this reduction is 
shown in the Connecticut submittal and EPA agrees with the method.

C. Why is EPA approving Connecticut's regulations?

    EPA has evaluated Connecticut's regulations and has found that they 
are consistent with EPA guidance, and/or the Ozone Transport Commission 
model rules. These control measures are needed to meet a portion of the 
shortfall emissions reduction identified in Connecticut's 1-hour ozone 
attainment demonstration SIP (66 FR 63921, December 11, 2001). The 
specific requirements of Connecticut's regulations, the amount of VOC 
reductions expected, and EPA's evaluation of these requirements are 
detailed in a memo dated June 8, 2006, entitled ``Technical Support 
Document--Connecticut--VOC Regulations and Shortfall Commitment'' (TSD) 
and in the SIP submittal from the Connecticut DEP. The TSD and 
Connecticut's regulations are available in the docket supporting this 
action. The total emission reduction from these three VOC regulations 
will be at least 6.7 tons of VOC per summer day by 2007. These emission 
reductions, coupled with emission reductions from Connecticut's 
previously approved regulation on municipal waste combusters (66 FR 
63311, December 6, 2001) which will result in an emission reduction of 
at least 1.3 tons of nitrogen oxides by 2007, fills the emission 
reduction shortfall identified in the 1-hour attainment plan for the 1-
hour severe portion of Connecticut.\5\ This level of emission 
reduction, therefore, fulfills the commitment Connecticut made in its 
1-hour attainment demonstration to achieve additional emission 
reductions within the state, to

[[Page 51764]]

help bring about attainment for the now revoked 1-hour ozone standard. 
The commitment was for 0.5 tons per summer day of NOX and 
5.4 tons per summer day of VOC. These emission reductions will also 
help Connecticut to ultimately achieve the more stringent 8-hour ozone 
standard as well.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \5\ The Connecticut portion of the New York-Northern New Jersey-
Long Island severe ozone nonattainment area.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

D. What is the process for EPA to approve these SIP revisions?

    The EPA is publishing this rule without prior proposal because the 
Agency views this as a noncontroversial amendment 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 action will be effective October 30, 
2006 without further notice unless the EPA receives adverse comments by 
October 2, 2006.
    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 October 30, 2006 and no 
further action will be taken on the proposed rule. Please note that if 
EPA receives adverse comment on an amendment, paragraph, or section of 
this rule and if that provision may be severed from the remainder of 
the rule, EPA may adopt as final those provisions of the rule that are 
not the subject of an adverse comment.

III. Final Action

    EPA is approving Section 22a-174-43, ``Portable Fuel Container 
Spillage Control,'' the autobody refinishing requirements of Section 
22a-174-3b, ``Exemptions from Permitting for Construction and Operation 
of External Combustion Units, Automotive Refinishing Operations, 
Emergency Engines, Nonmettalic Mineral Processing Equipment and Surface 
Coating Operations,'' and Connecticut's Section 22a-174-30, 
``Dispensing of Gasoline/Stage I and Stage II Vapor Recovery,'' and 
incorporating these regulations into the Connecticut SIP. These three 
rules will achieve an emissions reduction of at least 6.7 tons of VOC 
per summer day by 2007. EPA is also approving these measures, along 
with Connecticut's previously approved municipal waste combuster rule, 
as fulfilling the commitment Connecticut made in its 1-hour attainment 
demonstration to adopt additional measures to address the emission 
reduction shortfall.

IV. 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), because it 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 October 30, 2006. Interested 
parties should comment in response to the proposed rule rather than 
petition for judicial review, unless the objection arises after the 
comment period allowed for in the proposal. 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, Ozone, Reporting and

[[Page 51765]]

recordkeeping requirements, Volatile organic compounds.

    Dated: July 31, 2006.
Robert W. Varney,
Regional Administrator, , EPA New England.

0
Part 52 of 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 H--Connecticut

0
2. Section 52.370 is amended by adding paragraph (c)(95) to read as 
follows:


Sec.  52.370  Identification of plan.

* * * * *
    (c) * * *
    (95) Revisions to the State Implementation Plan submitted by the 
Connecticut Department of Environmental Protection on December 1, 2004 
and April 4, 2006.
    (i) Incorporation by reference.
    (A) Section 22a-174-30 of the Connecticut Regulations for the 
Abatement of Air Pollution, entitled ``Dispensing of Gasoline/Stage I 
and Stage II Vapor Recovery,'' effective in the State of Connecticut on 
May 10, 2004, with the exception of subsection (c)(5), which 
Connecticut did not submit as part of the SIP revision.
    (B) Section 22a-174-3b of the Connecticut Regulations for the 
Abatement of Air Pollution, entitled ``Exemptions from Permitting for 
Construction and Operation of External Combustion Units, Automotive 
Refinishing Operations, Emergency Engines, Nonmettalic Mineral 
Processing Equipment and Surface Coating Operations,'' effective in the 
State of Connecticut on April 4, 2006, except for the following 
subsections which Connecticut did not submit as part of the SIP 
revision: (a)(1), (5), (6), (7), (10), (11), (12), (15), (17); (b)(1) 
for an external combustion unit, nonmetallic mineral processing 
equipment, an emergency engine or a surface coating operation; (b)(2) 
for an external combustion unit, nonmetallic mineral processing 
equipment, an emergency engine or a surface coating operation; (c) 
External combustion unit; (e) Emergency engine; (f) Nonmetallic mineral 
processing equipment; (g) Surface coating operation; and (h) Fuel 
sulfur content.
    (C) Section 22a-174-43 of the Connecticut Regulations for the 
Abatement of Air Pollution, entitled ``Portable Fuel Container Spillage 
Control,'' effective in the State of Connecticut on May 10, 2004.
    (ii) Additional materials.
    (A) Pressure Vacuum Vent Cap Test Procedures
    (B) Table 1 showing the emission reductions resulting from the 
measures Connecticut adopted to meet the shortfall identified in the 
Connecticut one-hour ozone attainment demonstration.
    (C) Nonregulatory portions of the submittal.

0
3. Section 52.377 is amended by adding paragraph (e) to read as 
follows:


Sec.  52.377  Control strategy: Ozone.

* * * * *
    (e) Commitment Fulfillment--Connecticut has fulfilled the 
commitment in section 52.377(d), to adopt additional NOX and 
VOC control measures to meet the emission reduction shortfall in its 1-
hour severe ozone nonattainment area.

0
4. In Sec.  52.385, Table 52.385 is amended by adding three new 
entries: a new state citation 22a-174-3b; a new entry to existing state 
citation 22a-174-30; and a new state citation 22a-174-43 to read as 
follows:


Sec.  52.385  EPA-approved Connecticut regulations.

* * * * *

                                     Table 52.385.--EPA-Approved Regulations
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                 Dates
                                      --------------------------
 Connecticut State    Title/subject        Date         Date     Federal Register    Section        Comments/
     citation                          adopted  by    approved        citation        52.370       description
                                          State        by EPA
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

                                                  * * * * * * *
22a-174-3b........  Permits for             4/4/06      8/31/06  [Insert Federal       (c)(95)  Only the
                     construction and                             Register page                  automotive
                     operation of                                 number where                   refinishing
                     stationary                                   the document                   requirements of
                     sources.                                     begins].                       22a-174-3b are
                                                                                                 being approved.
                                                                                                 Connecticut did
                                                                                                 not submit the
                                                                                                 other
                                                                                                 subsections of
                                                                                                 the rule as
                                                                                                 part of its SIP
                                                                                                 revision.

                                                  * * * * * * *
22a-174-30........  Gaso-line Vapor        5/10/04      8/31/06  [Insert Federal       (c)(95)  Added new
                     Recovery.                                    Register page                  requirements
                                                                  number where                   for PV vents
                                                                  the document                   and increased
                                                                  begins].                       frequency of
                                                                                                 Stage II
                                                                                                 testing. All of
                                                                                                 22a-174-30 is
                                                                                                 approved with
                                                                                                 the exception
                                                                                                 of subsection
                                                                                                 (c)(5), which
                                                                                                 the state did
                                                                                                 not submit as
                                                                                                 part of the SIP
                                                                                                 revision.

                                                  * * * * * * *
22a-174-43........  Portable Fuel          5/10/04      8/31/06  [Insert Federal       (c)(95)
                     Container                                    Register page
                     Spillage Control.                            number where
                                                                  the document
                                                                  begins].

                                                  * * * * * * *
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------


[[Page 51766]]

[FR Doc. 06-7314 Filed 8-30-06; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6560-50-P
