Revisions to the California State Implementation Plan, Lake County Air Quality Management District, Monterey Bay Unified Air Pollution Control District, San Joaquin Valley Unified Air Pollution Control District, and Ventura County Air Pollution Control District, 65740-65743 [E6-18874]
Download as PDF
65740
Federal Register / Vol. 71, No. 217 / Thursday, November 9, 2006 / Rules and Regulations
Postal Service to carry out its duties and
purposes.
(13) To transmit to a Postage
Evidencing System provider all
applicant and system information
pertaining to that provider’s customers
and systems that may be necessary to
permit such provider to synchronize its
computer databases with information
contained in the computer files of the
Postal Service.
(14) Subject to the conditions stated
herein, to communicate in oral or
written form with any or all applicants
any information that the Postal Service
views as necessary to enable the Postal
Service to carry out its duties and
purposes under part 501.
§ 501.19
Intellectual property.
Providers submitting Postage
Evidencing Systems to the Postal
Service for approval are responsible for
obtaining all intellectual property
licenses that may be required to
distribute their product in commerce
and to allow the Postal Service to
process mail bearing the indicia
produced by the Postage Evidencing
System. To the extent approval is
granted and the Postage Evidencing
System is capable of being used in
commerce, the provider shall indemnify
the Postal Service for use of such
intellectual property in both the use of
the Postage Evidencing System and the
processing of mail bearing indicia
produced by the Postage Evidencing
System.
Neva R. Watson,
Attorney, Legislative.
[FR Doc. E6–18949 Filed 11–8–06; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 7710–12–P
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION
AGENCY
40 CFR Part 52
[EPA–R09–OAR–2006–0829, FRL–8234–9]
Revisions to the California State
Implementation Plan, Lake County Air
Quality Management District, Monterey
Bay Unified Air Pollution Control
District, San Joaquin Valley Unified Air
Pollution Control District, and Ventura
County Air Pollution Control District
Environmental Protection
Agency (EPA).
AGENCY:
ACTION:
Direct final rule.
SUMMARY: EPA is taking direct final
action to approve revisions to the Lake
County Air Quality Management District
(LCAQMD), Monterey Bay Unified Air
Pollution Control District (MBUAPCD),
San Joaquin Valley Unified Air
Pollution Control District (SJVUAPCD),
and Ventura County Air Pollution
Control District (VCAPCD) portions of
the California State Implementation
Plan (SIP). Under authority of the Clean
Air Act as amended in 1990 (CAA or the
Act), we are approving local rules that
address particulate matter (PM–10)
emissions from open burning, general
area sources, cotton gins, incinerators,
and fuel burning equipment.
DATES: This rule is effective on January
8, 2007, without further notice, unless
EPA receives adverse comments by
December 11, 2006. If we receive such
comment, we will publish a timely
withdrawal in the Federal Register to
notify the public that this rule will not
take effect.
ADDRESSES: Submit comments,
identified by docket number EPA–R09–
OAR–2006–0829, by one of the
following methods:
1. Federal eRulemaking Portal: https://
www.regulations.gov. Follow the on-line
instructions.
2. E-mail: steckel.andrew@epa.gov.
3. Mail or deliver: Andrew Steckel
(Air-4), U.S. Environmental Protection
Agency Region IX, 75 Hawthorne Street,
San Francisco, CA 94105–3901.
Instructions: All comments will be
included in the public docket without
change and may be made available
online at https://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
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
https://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.
Al
Petersen, EPA Region IX, (415) 947–
4118, petersen.alfred@epa.gov.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Throughout this document, ‘‘we,’’ ‘‘us’’
and ‘‘our’’ refer to EPA.
Table of Contents
I. The State’s Submittal
A. What rules did the State submit?
B. Are there other versions of these rules?
C. What is the purpose of the submitted
rules?
II. EPA’s Evaluation and Action
A. How is EPA evaluating the rules?
B. Do the rules 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 rules did the State submit?
Table 1 lists the rules we are
approving with the date that they were
adopted by the local air agency and
submitted by the California Air
Resources Board (CARB).
hsrobinson on PROD1PC76 with RULES
TABLE 1.—SUBMITTED RULES FOR FULL APPROVAL
Local agency
Rule #
Rule title
Amended, tevised, or
adopted
LCAQMD ..........
LCAQMD ..........
Chapter VIII Section 1002
Chapter VIII Table 8 ........
Agencies Authorized to Issue Burning Permits ........
Agencies Designated to Issue Burning Permits .......
08/09/05 Amended ..........
08/09/05 Amended ..........
VerDate Aug<31>2005
15:39 Nov 08, 2006
Jkt 211001
PO 00000
Frm 00030
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
E:\FR\FM\09NOR1.SGM
09NOR1
Submitted
03/10/06
03/10/06
65741
Federal Register / Vol. 71, No. 217 / Thursday, November 9, 2006 / Rules and Regulations
TABLE 1.—SUBMITTED RULES FOR FULL APPROVAL—Continued
Amended, tevised, or
adopted
Local agency
Rule #
Rule title
MBUAPCD ........
SJVUAPCD .......
VCAPCD ...........
VCAPCD ...........
403 ..................................
4204 ................................
57 ....................................
57.1 .................................
Particulate Matter ......................................................
Cotton Gins ...............................................................
Incinerators ...............................................................
Particulate Matter Emissions form Fuel Burning
Equipment.
On August 18, 2005, the submittal of
March 10, 2006 was found to meet the
completeness criteria in 40 CFR part 51,
appendix V, which must be met before
formal EPA review. On August 18, 2005,
the submittal of July 15, 2005 was found
to meet the completeness criteria.
B. Are there other versions of these
rules?
We approved a version of LCAQMD
Section 1002 and Table 8 into the SIP
on May 18, 1999 (64 FR 26876). We
approved a version of MBUAPCD Rule
403 into the SIP on July 11, 2001 (66 FR
36170) and approved a version of
VCAPCD Rule 57 into the SIP on August
6, 2001 (66 FR 40898).
hsrobinson on PROD1PC76 with RULES
C. What is the purpose of the submitted
rules?
Section 110(a) of the CAA requires
states to submit regulations that control
volatile organic compounds, oxides of
nitrogen, particulate matter, and other
air pollutants which harm human health
and the environment. These rules were
developed as part of the local agency’s
program to control these pollutants.
The purposes of the LCAQMD Section
1002 and Table 8 revisions relative to
the SIP are as follows:
• Section 1002: The rule adds
authority for agencies designated to
issue burn permits in Table 8 to collect
and retain burn permit fees.
• Table 8 is revised to clarify which
agencies are designated to issue burn
permits. The purposes of new
SJVUAPCD Rule 4204 are as follows:
• 4204.4.1: The rule exempts cotton
ginning facilities used for research
purposes and for throughputs to 4,000
pounds of seed cotton per day.
• 4204.5.0: The rule requires the
control of all emission points in cotton
ginning with 1D3D cyclones or rotary
drum filters on compliance dates
ranging between 07/01/06 and 07/01/08.
• 4204.5.2: The rule requires air
velocity entering 1D3D cyclones to be
2,800 to 3,600 feet per minute.
• 4204.5.3: The rule requires new
cyclones or replacement parts of
existing cyclones 1D3D cyclones to have
the dimensional characteristics of the
enhanced 1D3D cyclone (figure 1) or the
VerDate Aug<31>2005
15:39 Nov 08, 2006
Jkt 211001
1D3D cyclone with expansion chamber
(figure 2).
• 4204.5.6: The rule provides
requirements for preventing fugitive
dust emission during load-out into
hoppers or trailers.
• 4204.5.7: The rule provides
requirements for preventing fugitive
dust emission during load-out onto a
pile.
• 4204.6.0: The rule provides
requirements for recordkeeping, source
testing, and test methods.
The purpose of new VCAPCD Rule
57.1 is as follows:
• 57.1: This new rule acquires the
section regulating fuel burning
equipment being moved from Rule 57.
The purposes of revisions of
MBUAPCD Rule 403 relative to the SIP
rule are as follows:
• 403.1.3.4: The rule deletes the
exemption for agricultural operations
necessary for the growing of crops or
raising of fowl or animals.
• 403: The rule is reformatted.
The purposes of revisions to VCAPCD
Rule 57 relative to the SIP Rule 57,
Combustion Contaminants–Specific, are
as follows:
• 57.A: This section on incinerators is
retained in Rule 57, Incinerators, except
that the requirements are changed from
numerical standards limiting particulate
matter emissions and requiring
minimums of temperature of
combustion and contact time in the SIP
rule to a new non-numerical standard of
requiring a multiple-combustionchamber incinerator with at least three
chambers and no numerical temperature
of combustion or time of contact
standard.
• 57.B: This section on fuel burning
equipment is removed from Rule 57 and
put into new Rule 57.1, Particulate
Matter Emissions from Fuel Burning
Equipment, except that the requirement
for limiting particulate matter emissions
is changed from 0.1 grains/dry standard
cubic foot (gr/dscf) at 12% carbon
dioxide to a new standard of 0.12
pounds/million BTU at 12% carbon
dioxide.
The TSD has more information about
these rules.
PO 00000
Frm 00031
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
02/16/05
02/17/05
01/11/05
01/11/05
Revised
Adopted
Revised
Adopted
Submitted
............
............
............
............
07/15/05
07/15/05
07/15/05
07/15/05
II. EPA’s Evaluation and Action
A. How is EPA evaluating the rules?
Generally, SIP rules must be
enforceable (see section 110(a) of the
CAA) and must not relax existing
requirements (see sections 110(l) and
193).
SIP rules must require for major
sources reasonably available control
measures (RACM), including RACT in
moderate PM–10 nonattainment areas
(see section 189(a)) or must require for
major sources best available control
measures (BACM), including best
available control technology (BACT) in
serious PM–10 nonattainment areas (see
section 189(b). LCAQMD, MBUAPCD
and VCAPCD regulate PM–10
attainment areas, so need not fulfill the
requirements of RACM/RACT or BACM/
BACT. SJVUAPCD regulates a serious
PM–10 nonattainment area (see 40 CFR
part 81), so SJVUAPCD Rule 4204 must
fulfill the requirements of BACM/BACT.
Guidance and policy documents that
we use to help evaluate the rules
include the following:
• Requirements for Preparation,
Adoption, and Submittal of
Implementation Plans, U.S. EPA, 40
CFR part 51.
• PM–10 Guideline Document (EPA–
452/R–93–008).
B. Do the rules meet the evaluation
criteria?
We believe that LCAQMD Section
1002 and Table 8, MBUAPCD Rule 403,
SJVUAPCD Rule 4204, and VCAPCD
Rules 57 and 57.1 are consistent with
the relevant policy and guidance
regarding enforceability, SIP relaxations,
and fulfilling the requirements of
RACM/RACT or BACM/BACT.
The TSD has more information on our
evaluation.
C. EPA Recommendation to Further
Improve a Rule
The TSD describes an additional
revision to SJVUAPCD Rule 4204 that
does not affect EPA’s current action but
is recommended for the next time the
local agency modifies the rule.
E:\FR\FM\09NOR1.SGM
09NOR1
65742
Federal Register / Vol. 71, No. 217 / Thursday, November 9, 2006 / Rules and Regulations
D. Public Comment and Final Action
As authorized in section 110(k)(3) of
the CAA, EPA is fully approving the
submitted rules because we believe they
fulfill 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 rules. If we receive adverse
comments by December 11, 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 8,
2007. This will incorporate these rules
into the federally enforceable SIP.
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.
hsrobinson on PROD1PC76 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
(Public Law 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
VerDate Aug<31>2005
15:39 Nov 08, 2006
Jkt 211001
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).
PO 00000
Frm 00032
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
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 8, 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,
Particulate matter, Reporting and
recordkeeping requirements.
Dated: October 12, 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 paragraphs (c)(337)(i)(A)(3),
(c)(337)(i)(B)(2), (c)(337)(i)(D), and
(c)(344)(i)(B) to read as follows:
I
§ 52.220
Identification of plan.
*
*
*
*
*
(c) * * *
(337) * * *
(i) * * *
(A) * * *
(3) Rule 4204, adopted on February
17, 2005.
(B) * * *
(2) Rule 57, adopted on July 2, 1968
and revised on January 11, 2005 and
Rule 57.1, adopted on January 11, 2005.
*
*
*
*
*
(D) Monterey Bay Unified Air
Pollution Control District.
(1) Rule 403, adopted on September 1,
1974 and revised on February 16, 2005.
*
*
*
*
*
(344) * * *
(i) * * *
(B) Lake County Air Quality
Management District.
E:\FR\FM\09NOR1.SGM
09NOR1
Federal Register / Vol. 71, No. 217 / Thursday, November 9, 2006 / Rules and Regulations
(1) Chapter VIII, Section 1002 and
Table 8, adopted on March 19, 1996 and
amended on August 9, 2005.
[FR Doc. E6–18874 Filed 11–8–06; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560–50–P
FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS
COMMISSION
47 CFR Parts 36, 51, 52, 53, 54, 63, 64
and 69
[WC Docket No. 02–313; FCC 06–86]
Biennial Regulatory Review of
Regulations Administered by the
Wireline Competition Bureau
Federal Communications
Commission.
ACTION: Final rule.
AGENCY:
SUMMARY: In this document, the Federal
Communications Commission
(Commission or FCC) reviews rules that
apply to the operations and activities of
providers of telecommunications
services and repeals or modifies
previous regulations no longer
necessary in the public interest,
obsolete, outdated, expired of their
terms, or containing drafting or
typographical errors.
DATES: Effective December 11, 2006.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Carrie-Lee Early, Wireline Competition
Bureau, (202) 418–2776 or
carrielee.early@fcc.gov.
This is a
summary of the Commission’s Report
and Order in WC Docket No. 02–313,
adopted June 20, 2006 and released
August 21, 2006. The complete text of
this document is available for
inspection and copying during normal
business hours in the FCC Reference
Information Center, Portals H, 445 12th
Street, SW., Room CY–A257,
Washington DC 20554. This document
may also be purchased from the
Commission’s duplicating contractor,
Best Copy and Printing, Inc., 445 12th
Street, SW., Room CY–B402,
Washington, DC 20554, telephone (800)
378–3160 or (202) 863–2893, facsimile
(202) 863–2989, or via e-mail at
FCC@BIWEB.com. It is also available on
the Commission’s Web site at https://
www.fcc.gov. The Notice of Proposed
Rule Making which initiated the rule
changes set forth in the Report and
Order was published at 69 FR 12814,
March 18, 2004. The rule changes do
not cause any new information
collection requirements subject to the
PRA of 1995, Public Law 104–13. They
also do not create any new or modified
hsrobinson on PROD1PC76 with RULES
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
VerDate Aug<31>2005
15:39 Nov 08, 2006
Jkt 211001
‘‘information collection burden for
small business concerns with fewer than
25 employees,’’ pursuant to the Small
Business Paperwork Relief Act of 2002,
Public Law 107–198, see 44 U.S.C.
3506(c)(4).
Synopsis of the Report and Order
1. Background. Section 11 of the
Communications Act of 1934, as
amended (Act), requires the
Commission to review biennially its
regulations that apply to the operations
and activities of providers of
telecommunications service and to
determine whether the regulations are
‘‘no longer necessary as the result of
meaningful economic competition
between providers of such service.’’ See
47 U.S.C. 161(a).
2. Discussion. In this Order, we
impose no new rules; rather, we repeal
or modify regulations that are no longer
necessary in the public interest,
obsolete, outdated, have expired of their
terms, or contain drafting or
typographical errors. The revisions
reduce regulatory compliance burdens
by eliminating the requirements and
uncertainties described below.
3. Part 36—Jurisdictional Separations
Procedures: With respect to the
fundamental principles underlying
jurisdictional separations procedures,
the Commission clarifies in
§ 36.2(b)(3)(ii) that holding-timeminutes is the measurement unit for
apportioning both local and toll
switching plant. The Commission also
clarifies, in § 36.2(b)(3)(iv), that
subscriber plant is to be apportioned
using the 25 percent Gross Allocator.
4. The Commission clarifies, in
§ 36.125(f), application of the weighting
factor in apportioning to interstate
jurisdiction certain Category 3
telecommunication property
investments for study areas with fewer
than 50,000 access lines. The
Commission also repeals §§ 36.154(d)
through (f) because those sections are no
longer in effect, and deletes references
to those provisions. Because their
termination dates have passed, the
Commission also repeals §§ 36.631(a)
and (b) and 36.641. The Commission
also clarifies the application of
§ 36.631(d) to apply only non-rural
telephone companies serving study
areas reporting more than 200,000
working loops. With respect to the
universal service fund rules, the
Commission clarifies that § 36.631(d)
applies only to non-rural telephone
companies serving study areas reporting
more than 200,000 working loops.
5. In addition, because they reference
payphone services that are no longer
regulated, the Commission eliminates
PO 00000
Frm 00033
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
65743
the last sentence of § 36.142(a)
addressing coinless pay telephone
equipment and the last sentence of
§ 36.377(a)(7) addressing expenses
related to coin collection and
administration.
6. The Commission also corrects three
instances of transposed wording in
§ 36.377(a)(5): in subparagraphs (i) and
(v), ‘‘interstate’’ is corrected to ‘‘State,’’
and in subparagraph (vi), ‘‘State’’ is
changed to ‘‘Interstate.’’ Similarly, the
Commission eliminates, as obsolete, all
references to Teletypwriter Exchange
Service (TWX) in part 36 because no
carrier has reported data through the
Automated Reporting Management
System (ARMIS) system since it was
established in 1988.
7. Part 42—Preservation of Records of
Communications Carriers: The United
States Telecom Association (USTA)
filed comments recommending the
elimination of §§ 42.1 through 42.9
asserting that these regulations are
outdated and unnecessary. USTA,
however, did not offer any support for
its assertions, nor did USTA make
proposals regarding less costly and more
efficient ways to collect, preserve and
maintain carrier records and reports.
Neither USTA’s brief comment nor its
incorporation of arguments from
previous Biennial Review dockets,
convince us that elimination or
modification of part 42 is warranted at
this time. Accordingly, we conclude
that current part 42 record retention
requirements assist the Commission to
carry out its regulatory responsibilities
and therefore continue to be necessary
in the public interest at this time.
8. Part 51—Interconnection: The
Commission eliminates §§ 51.211(a)–(f),
51.213(c)–(d), which imposed deadlines
on Local Exchange Carriers (LECs) and
Bell Operating Companies to implement
toll dialing parity or to notify the
Commission of their failure to do so.
The provisions no longer are relevant as
the compliance deadlines have expired.
Similarly, because their effective dates
have expired, the Commission
eliminates §§ 51.515(b) and (c) which
permitted incumbent LECs to assess
certain interstate access charges and
intrastate access charges on purchasers
of unbundled elements until June 30,
1997.
9. The Commission also eliminates, as
no longer necessary in the public
interest, § 51.329(c)(3) which required
incumbent LECs to send paper and
diskette copies of network change
public notices or certifications to the
Chief of the Wireline Competition
Bureau.
10. Part 52—Numbering: With respect
to the scope and authority of the
E:\FR\FM\09NOR1.SGM
09NOR1
Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 71, Number 217 (Thursday, November 9, 2006)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 65740-65743]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: E6-18874]
=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
40 CFR Part 52
[EPA-R09-OAR-2006-0829, FRL-8234-9]
Revisions to the California State Implementation Plan, Lake
County Air Quality Management District, Monterey Bay Unified Air
Pollution Control District, San Joaquin Valley Unified Air Pollution
Control District, and Ventura County Air Pollution Control District
AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).
ACTION: Direct final rule.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: EPA is taking direct final action to approve revisions to the
Lake County Air Quality Management District (LCAQMD), Monterey Bay
Unified Air Pollution Control District (MBUAPCD), San Joaquin Valley
Unified Air Pollution Control District (SJVUAPCD), and Ventura County
Air Pollution Control District (VCAPCD) portions of the California
State Implementation Plan (SIP). Under authority of the Clean Air Act
as amended in 1990 (CAA or the Act), we are approving local rules that
address particulate matter (PM-10) emissions from open burning, general
area sources, cotton gins, incinerators, and fuel burning equipment.
DATES: This rule is effective on January 8, 2007, without further
notice, unless EPA receives adverse comments by December 11, 2006. If
we receive such comment, we will publish a timely withdrawal in the
Federal Register to notify the public that this rule will not take
effect.
ADDRESSES: Submit comments, identified by docket number EPA-R09-OAR-
2006-0829, by one of the following methods:
1. Federal eRulemaking Portal: https://
www.regulations.gov. Follow the on-line instructions.
2. E-mail: steckel.andrew@epa.gov.
3. Mail or deliver: Andrew Steckel (Air-4), U.S. Environmental
Protection Agency Region IX, 75 Hawthorne Street, San Francisco, CA
94105-3901.
Instructions: All comments will be included in the public docket
without change and may be made available online at https://
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 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 https://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 rules did the State submit?
B. Are there other versions of these rules?
C. What is the purpose of the submitted rules?
II. EPA's Evaluation and Action
A. How is EPA evaluating the rules?
B. Do the rules 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 rules did the State submit?
Table 1 lists the rules we are approving with the date that they
were adopted by the local air agency and submitted by the California
Air Resources Board (CARB).
Table 1.--Submitted Rules for Full Approval
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Amended, tevised, or
Local agency Rule Rule title adopted Submitted
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
LCAQMD................... Chapter VIII Section Agencies Authorized to 08/09/05 Amended.... 03/10/06
1002. Issue Burning Permits.
LCAQMD................... Chapter VIII Table 8 Agencies Designated to 08/09/05 Amended.... 03/10/06
Issue Burning Permits.
[[Page 65741]]
MBUAPCD.................. 403................. Particulate Matter....... 02/16/05 Revised.... 07/15/05
SJVUAPCD................. 4204................ Cotton Gins.............. 02/17/05 Adopted.... 07/15/05
VCAPCD................... 57.................. Incinerators............. 01/11/05 Revised.... 07/15/05
VCAPCD................... 57.1................ Particulate Matter 01/11/05 Adopted.... 07/15/05
Emissions form Fuel
Burning Equipment.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
On August 18, 2005, the submittal of March 10, 2006 was found to
meet the completeness criteria in 40 CFR part 51, appendix V, which
must be met before formal EPA review. On August 18, 2005, the submittal
of July 15, 2005 was found to meet the completeness criteria.
B. Are there other versions of these rules?
We approved a version of LCAQMD Section 1002 and Table 8 into the
SIP on May 18, 1999 (64 FR 26876). We approved a version of MBUAPCD
Rule 403 into the SIP on July 11, 2001 (66 FR 36170) and approved a
version of VCAPCD Rule 57 into the SIP on August 6, 2001 (66 FR 40898).
C. What is the purpose of the submitted rules?
Section 110(a) of the CAA requires states to submit regulations
that control volatile organic compounds, oxides of nitrogen,
particulate matter, and other air pollutants which harm human health
and the environment. These rules were developed as part of the local
agency's program to control these pollutants.
The purposes of the LCAQMD Section 1002 and Table 8 revisions
relative to the SIP are as follows:
Section 1002: The rule adds authority for agencies
designated to issue burn permits in Table 8 to collect and retain burn
permit fees.
Table 8 is revised to clarify which agencies are
designated to issue burn permits. The purposes of new SJVUAPCD Rule
4204 are as follows:
4204.4.1: The rule exempts cotton ginning facilities used
for research purposes and for throughputs to 4,000 pounds of seed
cotton per day.
4204.5.0: The rule requires the control of all emission
points in cotton ginning with 1D3D cyclones or rotary drum filters on
compliance dates ranging between 07/01/06 and 07/01/08.
4204.5.2: The rule requires air velocity entering 1D3D
cyclones to be 2,800 to 3,600 feet per minute.
4204.5.3: The rule requires new cyclones or replacement
parts of existing cyclones 1D3D cyclones to have the dimensional
characteristics of the enhanced 1D3D cyclone (figure 1) or the 1D3D
cyclone with expansion chamber (figure 2).
4204.5.6: The rule provides requirements for preventing
fugitive dust emission during load-out into hoppers or trailers.
4204.5.7: The rule provides requirements for preventing
fugitive dust emission during load-out onto a pile.
4204.6.0: The rule provides requirements for
recordkeeping, source testing, and test methods.
The purpose of new VCAPCD Rule 57.1 is as follows:
57.1: This new rule acquires the section regulating fuel
burning equipment being moved from Rule 57.
The purposes of revisions of MBUAPCD Rule 403 relative to the SIP
rule are as follows:
403.1.3.4: The rule deletes the exemption for agricultural
operations necessary for the growing of crops or raising of fowl or
animals.
403: The rule is reformatted.
The purposes of revisions to VCAPCD Rule 57 relative to the SIP
Rule 57, Combustion Contaminants-Specific, are as follows:
57.A: This section on incinerators is retained in Rule 57,
Incinerators, except that the requirements are changed from numerical
standards limiting particulate matter emissions and requiring minimums
of temperature of combustion and contact time in the SIP rule to a new
non-numerical standard of requiring a multiple-combustion-chamber
incinerator with at least three chambers and no numerical temperature
of combustion or time of contact standard.
57.B: This section on fuel burning equipment is removed
from Rule 57 and put into new Rule 57.1, Particulate Matter Emissions
from Fuel Burning Equipment, except that the requirement for limiting
particulate matter emissions is changed from 0.1 grains/dry standard
cubic foot (gr/dscf) at 12% carbon dioxide to a new standard of 0.12
pounds/million BTU at 12% carbon dioxide.
The TSD has more information about these rules.
II. EPA's Evaluation and Action
A. How is EPA evaluating the rules?
Generally, SIP rules must be enforceable (see section 110(a) of the
CAA) and must not relax existing requirements (see sections 110(l) and
193).
SIP rules must require for major sources reasonably available
control measures (RACM), including RACT in moderate PM-10 nonattainment
areas (see section 189(a)) or must require for major sources best
available control measures (BACM), including best available control
technology (BACT) in serious PM-10 nonattainment areas (see section
189(b). LCAQMD, MBUAPCD and VCAPCD regulate PM-10 attainment areas, so
need not fulfill the requirements of RACM/RACT or BACM/BACT. SJVUAPCD
regulates a serious PM-10 nonattainment area (see 40 CFR part 81), so
SJVUAPCD Rule 4204 must fulfill the requirements of BACM/BACT.
Guidance and policy documents that we use to help evaluate the
rules include the following:
Requirements for Preparation, Adoption, and Submittal of
Implementation Plans, U.S. EPA, 40 CFR part 51.
PM-10 Guideline Document (EPA-452/R-93-008).
B. Do the rules meet the evaluation criteria?
We believe that LCAQMD Section 1002 and Table 8, MBUAPCD Rule 403,
SJVUAPCD Rule 4204, and VCAPCD Rules 57 and 57.1 are consistent with
the relevant policy and guidance regarding enforceability, SIP
relaxations, and fulfilling the requirements of RACM/RACT or BACM/BACT.
The TSD has more information on our evaluation.
C. EPA Recommendation to Further Improve a Rule
The TSD describes an additional revision to SJVUAPCD Rule 4204 that
does not affect EPA's current action but is recommended for the next
time the local agency modifies the rule.
[[Page 65742]]
D. Public Comment and Final Action
As authorized in section 110(k)(3) of the CAA, EPA is fully
approving the submitted rules because we believe they fulfill 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 rules. If we
receive adverse comments by December 11, 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 8, 2007. This will incorporate these
rules into the federally enforceable SIP.
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. 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 (Public Law 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 8, 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, Particulate matter, Reporting
and recordkeeping requirements.
Dated: October 12, 2006.
Alexis Strauss,
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 paragraphs (c)(337)(i)(A)(3),
(c)(337)(i)(B)(2), (c)(337)(i)(D), and (c)(344)(i)(B) to read as
follows:
Sec. 52.220 Identification of plan.
* * * * *
(c) * * *
(337) * * *
(i) * * *
(A) * * *
(3) Rule 4204, adopted on February 17, 2005.
(B) * * *
(2) Rule 57, adopted on July 2, 1968 and revised on January 11,
2005 and Rule 57.1, adopted on January 11, 2005.
* * * * *
(D) Monterey Bay Unified Air Pollution Control District.
(1) Rule 403, adopted on September 1, 1974 and revised on February
16, 2005.
* * * * *
(344) * * *
(i) * * *
(B) Lake County Air Quality Management District.
[[Page 65743]]
(1) Chapter VIII, Section 1002 and Table 8, adopted on March 19,
1996 and amended on August 9, 2005.
[FR Doc. E6-18874 Filed 11-8-06; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P