Revisions to the California State Implementation Plan, Antelope Valley Air Quality Management District, 63696-63698 [E6-18173]

Download as PDF cprice-sewell on PROD1PC66 with RULES 63696 Federal Register / Vol. 71, No. 210 / Tuesday, October 31, 2006 / Rules and Regulations 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 VerDate Aug<31>2005 15:23 Oct 30, 2006 Jkt 211001 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 January 2, 2007. 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, Intergovernmental relations, Ozone, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements, Volatile organic compounds. Dated: July 24, 2006. Alexis Strauss, Acting Regional Administrator, Region IX. Part 52, Chapter I, Title 40 of the Code of Federal Regulations is amended as follows: I PART 52—[AMENDED] 1. The authority citation for part 52 continues to read as follows: I Authority: 42 U.S.C. 7401 et seq. Subpart F—California 2. Section 52.220 is amended by adding paragraph (c)(342)(i)(A) and (c)(342)(i)(A)(1) to read as follows: I § 52.220 Identification of plan. * * * * * (c) * * * (342) * * * (i) * * * (A) Yolo-Solano Air Quality Management District. (1) Rule 2.21, adopted on March 23, 1994, and amended on September 14, 2005. * * * * * [FR Doc. E6–18167 Filed 10–30–06; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6560–50–P PO 00000 Frm 00032 Fmt 4700 Sfmt 4700 ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY 40 CFR Part 52 [EPA–R09–OAR–2006–0747; FRL–8231–5] Revisions to the California State Implementation Plan, Antelope Valley Air Quality Management District Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). ACTION: Direct final rule. AGENCY: SUMMARY: EPA is taking direct final action to approve a revision to the Antelope Valley Air Quality Management District (AVAQMD) portion of the California State Implementation Plan (SIP). This revision concerns volatile organic compound (VOC) emissions from the usage of solvents. We are approving a local rule that regulates these emission sources under the Clean Air Act as amended in 1990 (CAA or the Act). DATES: This rule is effective on January 2, 2007 without further notice, unless EPA receives adverse comments by November 30, 2006. If we receive such comments, we will publish a timely withdrawal in the Federal Register to notify the public that this direct final rule will not take effect. ADDRESSES: Submit comments, identified by docket number EPA–R09– OAR–2006–0747, by one of the following methods: • Federal eRulemaking Portal: http:// www.regulations.gov. Follow the on-line instructions. • E-mail: steckel.andrew@epa.gov. • Mail or deliver: Andrew Steckel (Air-4), U.S. Environmental Protection Agency Region IX, 75 Hawthorne Street, San Francisco, CA 94105. Instructions: All comments 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 Confidential Business Information (CBI) or other information whose disclosure is restricted by statute. Information that you consider CBI or otherwise protected should be clearly identified as such and should not be submitted through www.regulations.gov or e-mail. www.regulations.gov is an ‘‘anonymous access’’ system, and EPA will not know your identity or contact information unless you provide it in the body of your comment. If you send e-mail directly to EPA, your e-mail address will be automatically captured and included as part of the public comment. If EPA cannot read your comment due E:\FR\FM\31OCR1.SGM 31OCR1 63697 Federal Register / Vol. 71, No. 210 / Tuesday, October 31, 2006 / Rules and Regulations to technical difficulties and cannot contact you for clarification, EPA may not be able to consider your comment. Docket: The index to the docket for this action is available electronically at http://www.regulations.gov and in hard copy at EPA Region IX, 75 Hawthorne Street, San Francisco, California. While all documents in the docket are listed in the index, some information may be publicly available only at the hard copy location (e.g., copyrighted material), and some may not be publicly available in either location (e.g., CBI). To inspect the hard copy materials, please schedule an appointment during normal business hours with the contact listed in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Al Petersen, EPA Region IX, (415) 947– 4118, petersen.alfred@epa.gov. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Throughout this document, ‘‘we,’’ ‘‘us’’ and ‘‘our’’ refer to EPA. II. EPA’s Evaluation and Action A. How Is EPA Evaluating the Rule? B. Do the Rule Revisions Meet the Evaluation Criteria? C. EPA Recommendation To Further Improve a Rule D. Public Comment and Final Action III. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews I. the State’s Submittal A. What Rule Did the State Submit? Table of Contents I. The State’s Submittal A. What Rule Did the State Submit? B. Are There Other Versions of This Rule? C. What Is the Purpose of the Submitted Rule Revisions? Table 1 lists the rule we are approving with the date that the amended rule was adopted by the local air agency and submitted by the California Air Resources Board (CARB). TABLE 1.—SUBMITTED RULE FOR DIRECT FINAL APPROVAL Local agency Rule No. AVAQMD .................................... 442 On March 30, 2006, the submittal of March 10, 2006 was determined to meet the completeness criteria in 40 CFR part 51, appendix V, which must be met before formal EPA review. B. Are There Other Versions of This Rule? We approved a version of AVAQMD Rule 442 into the SIP on November 16, 1983 (48 FR 52054). cprice-sewell on PROD1PC66 with RULES C. What Is the Purpose of the Submitted Rule Revisions? VOCs help produce ground-level ozone and smog, which harm human health and the environment. Section 110(a) of the CAA requires states to submit regulations that control VOC emissions. This rule was developed as part of the local air district’s programs to control these pollutants. The purposes of the AVAQMD Rule 442 revisions relative to the SIP rule are as follows: • The rule is revised to conform to present AVAQMD rule format and to be consistent with other District rules. • A section on purpose is added for clarity. • A section on applicability is added to clarify that the rule is not applicable to other rules with VOC emission limits in Regulation IV (such as Rules 461, 462, 463, and 464) and Regulation XI (such as Rules 1102 and 1151). • A section with definitions is added for clarity. • A section with monitoring, recordkeeping, and reporting requirements is added to determine compliance. • A section describing specific test methods is added to determine compliance. VerDate Aug<31>2005 15:23 Oct 30, 2006 Jkt 211001 Rule title Amended Usage of Solvents .......................................................................... • The current VOC emissions limit that allows disposal of up to 1.3 gallons per day of VOC by any means is made more stringent by prohibiting disposal of VOC in a manner that would allow evaporation of VOC into the atmosphere. • The current emissions limit for VOC of 18 kg (39.6 pounds) per day is retained and converted to the equivalent monthly emission limit of 540 kg (1,190 pounds) per month. • The current VOC emissions limit for organic materials that come in contact with a flame, are baked, are heat cured, or are heat polymerized of 195 kg (429 pounds) per month is removed; however, the VOC emissions limit for these processes are covered by other rules in Regulations IV and XI. • The current VOC emissions limit deletes the 8,036 kg (18,000 pounds) per day limit for ‘‘non-photochemically reactive’’ solvents. A part of these solvents are covered by the ‘‘VOC’’ limit and a part do not have a limit because they are not precursors to ozone. • A limit on VOC emissions from coating aerospace assemblies and a limit for tire manufacturers expired by their own terms. • A limit on VOC emissions from primer or topcoat application to motor vehicles is covered by Rule 1151. • An exemption for aerosol cans is added, because they are regulated by Rule 1102. • Exemptions for high solid or ultrahigh solid materials are removed due to a change in VOC terminology. EPA’s technical support document (TSD) has more information about this rule. PO 00000 Frm 00033 Fmt 4700 Sfmt 4700 Submitted 11/15/05 03/10/06 II. EPA’s Evaluation and Action A. How Is EPA Evaluating the Rule? Generally, SIP rules must be enforceable (see section 110(a) of the CAA), must require Reasonably Available Control Technology (RACT) for major sources in nonattainment areas (see section 182(a)(2)(A)), and must not relax existing requirements (see sections 110(l) and 193). The AVAQMD regulates a 1-hour ozone nonattainment area (see 40 CFR part 81). However, RACT is not required for Rule 442, because no major sources of VOC are expected to be covered by Rule 442. Major sources are covered by other rules in Regulations IV and XI. Guidance and policy documents that we use to help evaluate specific enforceability and RACT requirements consistently include the following: • Requirements for Preparation, Adoption, and Submittal of Implementation Plans, U.S. EPA, 40 CFR part 51. • Portions of the proposed post-1987 ozone and carbon monoxide policy that concern RACT, 52 FR 45044, November 24, 1987. • Issues Relating to VOC Regulation Cutpoints, Deficiencies, and Deviations, EPA, May 25, 1988 (the Bluebook). • Guidance Document for Correcting Common VOC & Other Rule Deficiencies, EPA Region 9, August 21, 2001 (the Little Bluebook). B. Does the Rule Meet the Evaluation Criteria? We believe the rule is consistent with the relevant policy and guidance regarding enforceability, RACT, and SIP relaxations. The TSD has more information on our evaluation. E:\FR\FM\31OCR1.SGM 31OCR1 63698 Federal Register / Vol. 71, No. 210 / Tuesday, October 31, 2006 / Rules and Regulations C. EPA Recommendation To Further Improve a Rule The TSD describes an additional revision to AVAQMD Rule 442 that does not affect EPA’s current action but is recommended for the next time the local agency modifies the rule. D. Public Comment and Final Action As authorized in section 110(k)(3) of the CAA, EPA is fully approving the submitted AVAQMD Rule 442 because we believe it fulfills all relevant requirements. We do not think anyone will object to this approval, so we are finalizing it without proposing it in advance. However, in the Proposed Rules section of this Federal Register, we are simultaneously proposing approval of the same submitted rule. If we receive adverse comments by November 30, 2006, we will publish a timely withdrawal in the Federal Register to notify the public that the direct final approval will not take effect and we will address the comments in a subsequent final action based on the proposal. If we do not receive timely adverse comments, the direct final approval will be effective without further notice on January 2, 2007. This will incorporate the rule into the federally enforceable SIP. cprice-sewell on PROD1PC66 with RULES 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 VerDate Aug<31>2005 15:23 Oct 30, 2006 Jkt 211001 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. PO 00000 Frm 00034 Fmt 4700 Sfmt 4700 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 January 2, 2007. 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, Intergovernmental relations, Ozone, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements, Volatile organic compounds. Dated: September 1, 2006. Laura Yoshii, Acting Regional Administrator, Region IX. Part 52, chapter I, title 40 of the Code of Federal Regulations is amended as follows: I PART 52—[AMENDED] 1. The authority citation for part 52 continues to read as follows: I Authority: 42 U.S.C. 7401 et seq. Subpart F—California 2. Section 52.220 is amended by adding paragraph (c)(344) to read as follows: I § 52.220 Identification of plan. * * * * * (c) * * * (344) New and amended regulations for the following APCDs were submitted on March 10, 2006, by the Governor’s designee. (i) Incorporation by reference. (A) Antelope Valley Air Quality Management District. (1) Rule 442, adopted on May 7, 1976 and amended on November 15, 2005. * * * * * [FR Doc. E6–18173 Filed 10–30–06; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6560–50–P E:\FR\FM\31OCR1.SGM 31OCR1

Agencies

[Federal Register Volume 71, Number 210 (Tuesday, October 31, 2006)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 63696-63698]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: E6-18173]


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

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

40 CFR Part 52

[EPA-R09-OAR-2006-0747; FRL-8231-5]


Revisions to the California State Implementation Plan, Antelope 
Valley Air Quality Management District

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Direct final rule.

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

SUMMARY: EPA is taking direct final action to approve a revision to the 
Antelope Valley Air Quality Management District (AVAQMD) portion of the 
California State Implementation Plan (SIP). This revision concerns 
volatile organic compound (VOC) emissions from the usage of solvents. 
We are approving a local rule that regulates these emission sources 
under the Clean Air Act as amended in 1990 (CAA or the Act).

DATES: This rule is effective on January 2, 2007 without further 
notice, unless EPA receives adverse comments by November 30, 2006. If 
we receive such comments, we will publish a timely withdrawal in the 
Federal Register to notify the public that this direct final rule will 
not take effect.

ADDRESSES: Submit comments, identified by docket number EPA-R09-OAR-
2006-0747, by one of the following methods:
     Federal eRulemaking Portal: http://www.regulations.gov. 
Follow the on-line instructions.
     E-mail: steckel.andrew@epa.gov.
     Mail or deliver: Andrew Steckel (Air-4), U.S. 
Environmental Protection Agency Region IX, 75 Hawthorne Street, San 
Francisco, CA 94105.
    Instructions: All comments 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 Confidential Business Information (CBI) or 
other information whose disclosure is restricted by statute. 
Information that you consider CBI or otherwise protected should be 
clearly identified as such and should not be submitted through 
www.regulations.gov or e-mail. www.regulations.gov is an ``anonymous 
access'' system, and EPA will not know your identity or contact 
information unless you provide it in the body of your comment. If you 
send e-mail directly to EPA, your e-mail address will be automatically 
captured and included as part of the public comment. If EPA cannot read 
your comment due

[[Page 63697]]

to technical difficulties and cannot contact you for clarification, EPA 
may not be able to consider your comment.
    Docket: The index to the docket for this action is available 
electronically at http://www.regulations.gov and in hard copy at EPA 
Region IX, 75 Hawthorne Street, San Francisco, California. While all 
documents in the docket are listed in the index, some information may 
be publicly available only at the hard copy location (e.g., copyrighted 
material), and some may not be publicly available in either location 
(e.g., CBI). To inspect the hard copy materials, please schedule an 
appointment during normal business hours with the contact listed in the 
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Al Petersen, EPA Region IX, (415) 947-
4118, petersen.alfred@epa.gov.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Throughout this document, ``we,'' ``us'' and 
``our'' refer to EPA.

Table of Contents

I. The State's Submittal
    A. What Rule Did the State Submit?
    B. Are There Other Versions of This Rule?
    C. What Is the Purpose of the Submitted Rule Revisions?
II. EPA's Evaluation and Action
    A. How Is EPA Evaluating the Rule?
    B. Do the Rule Revisions Meet the Evaluation Criteria?
    C. EPA Recommendation To Further Improve a Rule
    D. Public Comment and Final Action
III. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews

I. the State's Submittal

A. What Rule Did the State Submit?

    Table 1 lists the rule we are approving with the date that the 
amended rule was adopted by the local air agency and submitted by the 
California Air Resources Board (CARB).

                               Table 1.--Submitted Rule for Direct Final Approval
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
              Local agency                  Rule No.              Rule title              Amended     Submitted
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
AVAQMD..................................          442  Usage of Solvents..............     11/15/05     03/10/06
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    On March 30, 2006, the submittal of March 10, 2006 was determined 
to meet the completeness criteria in 40 CFR part 51, appendix V, which 
must be met before formal EPA review.

B. Are There Other Versions of This Rule?

    We approved a version of AVAQMD Rule 442 into the SIP on November 
16, 1983 (48 FR 52054).

C. What Is the Purpose of the Submitted Rule Revisions?

    VOCs help produce ground-level ozone and smog, which harm human 
health and the environment. Section 110(a) of the CAA requires states 
to submit regulations that control VOC emissions. This rule was 
developed as part of the local air district's programs to control these 
pollutants.
    The purposes of the AVAQMD Rule 442 revisions relative to the SIP 
rule are as follows:
     The rule is revised to conform to present AVAQMD rule 
format and to be consistent with other District rules.
     A section on purpose is added for clarity.
     A section on applicability is added to clarify that the 
rule is not applicable to other rules with VOC emission limits in 
Regulation IV (such as Rules 461, 462, 463, and 464) and Regulation XI 
(such as Rules 1102 and 1151).
     A section with definitions is added for clarity.
     A section with monitoring, recordkeeping, and reporting 
requirements is added to determine compliance.
     A section describing specific test methods is added to 
determine compliance.
     The current VOC emissions limit that allows disposal of up 
to 1.3 gallons per day of VOC by any means is made more stringent by 
prohibiting disposal of VOC in a manner that would allow evaporation of 
VOC into the atmosphere.
     The current emissions limit for VOC of 18 kg (39.6 pounds) 
per day is retained and converted to the equivalent monthly emission 
limit of 540 kg (1,190 pounds) per month.
     The current VOC emissions limit for organic materials that 
come in contact with a flame, are baked, are heat cured, or are heat 
polymerized of 195 kg (429 pounds) per month is removed; however, the 
VOC emissions limit for these processes are covered by other rules in 
Regulations IV and XI.
     The current VOC emissions limit deletes the 8,036 kg 
(18,000 pounds) per day limit for ``non-photochemically reactive'' 
solvents. A part of these solvents are covered by the ``VOC'' limit and 
a part do not have a limit because they are not precursors to ozone.
     A limit on VOC emissions from coating aerospace assemblies 
and a limit for tire manufacturers expired by their own terms.
     A limit on VOC emissions from primer or topcoat 
application to motor vehicles is covered by Rule 1151.
     An exemption for aerosol cans is added, because they are 
regulated by Rule 1102.
     Exemptions for high solid or ultra-high solid materials 
are removed due to a change in VOC terminology.
    EPA's technical support document (TSD) has more information about 
this rule.

II. EPA's Evaluation and Action

A. How Is EPA Evaluating the Rule?

    Generally, SIP rules must be enforceable (see section 110(a) of the 
CAA), must require Reasonably Available Control Technology (RACT) for 
major sources in nonattainment areas (see section 182(a)(2)(A)), and 
must not relax existing requirements (see sections 110(l) and 193). The 
AVAQMD regulates a 1-hour ozone nonattainment area (see 40 CFR part 
81). However, RACT is not required for Rule 442, because no major 
sources of VOC are expected to be covered by Rule 442. Major sources 
are covered by other rules in Regulations IV and XI.
    Guidance and policy documents that we use to help evaluate specific 
enforceability and RACT requirements consistently include the 
following:
     Requirements for Preparation, Adoption, and Submittal of 
Implementation Plans, U.S. EPA, 40 CFR part 51.
     Portions of the proposed post-1987 ozone and carbon 
monoxide policy that concern RACT, 52 FR 45044, November 24, 1987.
     Issues Relating to VOC Regulation Cutpoints, Deficiencies, 
and Deviations, EPA, May 25, 1988 (the Bluebook).
     Guidance Document for Correcting Common VOC & Other Rule 
Deficiencies, EPA Region 9, August 21, 2001 (the Little Bluebook).

B. Does the Rule Meet the Evaluation Criteria?

    We believe the rule is consistent with the relevant policy and 
guidance regarding enforceability, RACT, and SIP relaxations. The TSD 
has more information on our evaluation.

[[Page 63698]]

C. EPA Recommendation To Further Improve a Rule

    The TSD describes an additional revision to AVAQMD Rule 442 that 
does not affect EPA's current action but is recommended for the next 
time the local agency modifies the rule.

D. Public Comment and Final Action

    As authorized in section 110(k)(3) of the CAA, EPA is fully 
approving the submitted AVAQMD Rule 442 because we believe it fulfills 
all relevant requirements. We do not think anyone will object to this 
approval, so we are finalizing it without proposing it in advance. 
However, in the Proposed Rules section of this Federal Register, we are 
simultaneously proposing approval of the same submitted rule. If we 
receive adverse comments by November 30, 2006, we will publish a timely 
withdrawal in the Federal Register to notify the public that the direct 
final approval will not take effect and we will address the comments in 
a subsequent final action based on the proposal. If we do not receive 
timely adverse comments, the direct final approval will be effective 
without further notice on January 2, 2007. This will incorporate the 
rule into the federally enforceable SIP.

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 January 2, 2007.
    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, Intergovernmental relations, Ozone, Reporting and 
recordkeeping requirements, Volatile organic compounds.

    Dated: September 1, 2006.
Laura Yoshii,
Acting Regional Administrator, Region IX.

0
Part 52, 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 F--California

0
2. Section 52.220 is amended by adding paragraph (c)(344) to read as 
follows:


Sec.  52.220  Identification of plan.

* * * * *
    (c) * * *
    (344) New and amended regulations for the following APCDs were 
submitted on March 10, 2006, by the Governor's designee.
    (i) Incorporation by reference.
    (A) Antelope Valley Air Quality Management District.
    (1) Rule 442, adopted on May 7, 1976 and amended on November 15, 
2005.
* * * * *
 [FR Doc. E6-18173 Filed 10-30-06; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P