Revisions to the California State Implementation Plan, Ventura County Air Pollution Control District, 69593-69595 [E8-27484]
Download as PDF
Federal Register / Vol. 73, No. 224 / Wednesday, November 19, 2008 / Proposed Rules
board.gov/vguidedraft2.htm). Copies
may also be obtained by contacting the
Access Board at (202) 272–0080.
Persons using a TTY should call (202)
272–0082. The documents are available
in alternate formats upon request.
Persons who want a copy in an alternate
format should specify the type of format
(cassette tape, Braille, large print, or
ASCII disk).
David M. Capozzi,
Acting Executive Director.
[FR Doc. E8–27477 Filed 11–18–08; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 8150–01–P
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION
AGENCY
40 CFR Part 52
[EPA–R09–OAR–2008–0341; FRL–8741–9]
Revisions to the California State
Implementation Plan, Ventura County
Air Pollution Control District
Environmental Protection
Agency (EPA).
ACTION: Proposed rule.
AGENCY:
SUMMARY: EPA is proposing to approve
revisions to the Ventura County Air
Pollution Control District (VCAPCD)
portion of the California State
Implementation Plan (SIP). These
revisions concern the permitting of new
or modified sources. We are proposing
to approve local rules to regulate these
procedures under the Clean Air Act as
amended in 1990 (CAA or the Act). We
are taking comments on this proposal
and plan to follow with a final action.
Any comments must arrive by
December 19, 2008.
ADDRESSES: Submit comments,
identified by docket number EPA–R09–
OAR–2008–0341, by one of the
following methods:
• Federal eRulemaking Portal:
www.regulations.gov. Follow the on-line
instructions.
• E-mail: R9airpermits@epa.gov.
• Mail or deliver: Gerardo Rios (Air3), 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 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
www.regulations.gov and in hard copy
DATES:
69593
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
below.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Laura Yannayon, EPA Region IX, (415)
972–3534, yannayon.laura@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 the 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. Proposed Action and Public Comment
III. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews
I. The State’s Submittal
A. What rules did the State submit?
Table 1 lists the rules addressed by
this proposal with the dates that they
were adopted by local air agency and
submitted by the California Air
Resources Board (CARB).
TABLE 1—SUBMITTED RULES
Local agency
Rule title
...........
...........
...........
...........
...........
...........
26
26.1
26.2
26.3
26.4
26.5
VCAPCD ...........
cprice-sewell on PROD1PC64 with PROPOSALS-1
VCAPCD
VCAPCD
VCAPCD
VCAPCD
VCAPCD
VCAPCD
Rule No.
26.6
New Source Review—General ........................
New Source Review—Definitions ....................
New Source Review—Requirements ..............
New Source Review—Exemptions ..................
New Source Review—Emissions Banking ......
New Source Review—Essential Public Service Bank.
New Source Review—Calculations .................
On July 21, 2006, the rule submittal
of June 16, 2006 was found to meet the
completeness criteria in 40 CFR part 51,
appendix V, which must be met before
formal EPA review. On July 23, 2007,
the rule submittal of May 8, 2007 was
found to meet the completeness criteria.
B. Are there other versions of the rules?
We approved a version of VCAPCD
Rules 26 and 26.5 on December 7, 2000
(65 FR 76567). We approved a version
VerDate Aug<31>2005
14:44 Nov 18, 2008
Amended or revised
Jkt 217001
03/14/06,
11/14/06,
03/14/06,
03/14/06,
03/14/06,
03/14/06,
Amended ..........................................
Revised ............................................
Revised ............................................
Revised ............................................
Revised ............................................
Revised ............................................
06/16/06
05/08/07
06/16/06
06/16/06
06/16/06
06/16/06
03/14/06, Revised ............................................
06/16/06
of VCAPCD Rules 26.1, 26.2, 26.3, 26.4,
and 26.6 on February 28, 2003 (68 FR
9561). We did not act on a version of
VCAPCD Rule 26.1, revised on March
14, 2006 and submitted to us by CARB
on June 16, 2006. While we can act on
only the most recently submitted
version, we have reviewed materials
provided with the previous submittal.
PO 00000
Frm 00006
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
Submitted
C. What is the purpose of the submitted
rules?
The purposes of revisions relative to
the SIP rule are as follows:
• VCAPCD Rule 26: A reference to the
new Rule 26.11 is added, along with the
purposes of Rule 26.11, including (a) the
process by which the APCO determines
if Emission Reduction Credits (ERCs)
are surplus at the time of use and (b) the
implementation of an annual
E:\FR\FM\19NOP1.SGM
19NOP1
cprice-sewell on PROD1PC64 with PROPOSALS-1
69594
Federal Register / Vol. 73, No. 224 / Wednesday, November 19, 2008 / Proposed Rules
equivalency demonstration program, are
added to the rule.
• VCAPCD Rule 26.1: Four
definitions relating to bio-solids, public
service ERCs, and public service
banking are added to the rule, and the
definition for Community Bank is
removed from the rule.
• VCAPCD Rule 26.2: The District
name is added to the rule.
• VCAPCD Rule 26.3: The exemption
from offset requirements for gasoline
dispensing facilities that dispense into
motor vehicles or marine pleasure craft,
is removed.
• VCAPCD Rule 26.4.B.5: The
banking of ERCs for gasoline dispensing
facilities that dispense into motor
vehicles or marine pleasure craft, shall
be allowed for no more than the amount
of ERCs provided by the applicant after
10/22/91. Previously these ERCs were
not eligible for banking.
• VCAPCD Rule 26.4.B.7: The
provisions are added that (a) after 10/
22/91, any ROC or NOX emission
increase calculated pursuant to Rule
26.6.D but not offset with ERCs shall be
ineligible for banking and (b) an
emission increase offset with a credit
from the Community Bank between 10/
13/91 and 03/14/06 shall be ineligible
for banking.
• VCAPCD Rule 26.4.F.2: The
provisions are added that (a) the District
shall contact the owner of an ERC
certificate annually to determine if the
owner will renew the certificate and (b)
if not renewed, the certificate will be
deemed inactive and transferred to the
Essential Public Service Bank.
• VCAPCD Rule 26.5: The title of this
rule is changed from ‘‘New Source
Review—Community Service Bank’’ to
‘‘New Source Review—Essential Public
Service Bank.’’
• VCAPCD Rule 26.5.A: The
applicability of this banking section is
changed to ‘‘essential public service
credits’’ instead of ‘‘community ERCs.’’
• VCAPCD Rule 26.5.C: The
applicability of this disbursement
section is also changed to ‘‘essential
public service credits.’’ Other former
community ERC transactions described
in SIP Rule 25.5.C.2, such as disbursing
community ERCs to sources not
required to provide offsets on the date
the Authority-to-Construct is issued, are
deleted.
• VCAPCD Rule 26.5.E: Requirements
for tracking community ERCs by the
District are deleted from the rule. These
provisions already exist in the SIPapproved version of VCAPCD Rule
26.11.
• VCAPCD Rule 26.6: The District
name is added to the rule.
VerDate Aug<31>2005
14:44 Nov 18, 2008
Jkt 217001
II. EPA’s Evaluation and Action
A. How is EPA evaluating the rules?
These rules describe administrative
provisions and definitions that support
the review and permitting of new and
modified emission sources as required
by Title I, subpart D, of the Clean Air
Act for nonattainment areas. In
combination with the other
requirements, these rules must be
enforceable (see section 110(a) of the
CAA) and must not relax existing
requirements (see sections 110(l) and
193).
EPA guidance and policy documents
that we used to help evaluate
enforceability requirements consistently
include the following:
• Review of New Sources and
Modifications, U.S. EPA, 40 CFR part
51, subpart I.
• Guidance Document for Correcting
Common VOC & Other Rule
Deficiencies, EPA Region 9, (August 21,
2001). (The Little Bluebook)
B. Do the rules meet the evaluation
criteria?
We believe the rules are consistent
with the relevant policy and guidance
regarding enforceability and SIP
relaxations. The TSD has more
information on our evaluation.
C. EPA Recommendation To Further
Improve a Rule
The TSD describes an additional
revision to VCAPCD Rule 26.1 that does
not affect EPA’s current action but is
recommended for the next time the local
agency modifies the rule.
D. Proposed Action and Public
Comment
Because EPA believes the submitted
rules fulfill all relevant requirements,
we are proposing full approval as
described in section 110(k)(3) of the
CAA. We will accept comments from
the public on this proposal for the next
30 days. Unless we receive convincing
new information during the comment
period, we intend to publish a final
approval action that will incorporate
these rules into the federally enforceable
SIP.
III. Statutory and Executive Order
Reviews
Under the Clean Air Act, the
Administrator is required to approve a
SIP submission that complies with the
provisions of the Act and applicable
Federal regulations. 42 U.S.C. 7410(k);
40 CFR 52.02(a). Thus, in reviewing SIP
submissions, EPA’s role is to approve
state choices, provided that they meet
the criteria of the Clean Air Act.
PO 00000
Frm 00007
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
Accordingly, this action merely
approves state law as meeting Federal
requirements and does not impose
additional requirements beyond those
imposed by state law. For that reason,
this action:
• Is not a ‘‘significant regulatory
action’’ subject to review by the Office
of Management and Budget under
Executive Order 12866 (58 FR 51735,
October 4, 1993);
• Does not impose an information
collection burden under the provisions
of the Paperwork Reduction Act (44
U.S.C. 3501 et seq.);
• Is certified as not having a
significant economic impact on a
substantial number of small entities
under the Regulatory Flexibility Act (5
U.S.C. 601 et seq.);
• Does not contain any unfunded
mandate or significantly or uniquely
affect small governments, as described
in the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act
of 1995 (Pub. L. 104–4);
• Does not have Federalism
implications as specified in Executive
Order 13132 (64 FR 43255, August 10,
1999);
• Is not an economically significant
regulatory action based on health or
safety risks subject to Executive Order
13045 (62 FR 19885, April 23, 1997);
• Is not a significant regulatory action
subject to Executive Order 13211 (66 FR
28355, May 22, 2001);
• Is not subject to requirements of
Section 12(d) of the National
Technology Transfer and Advancement
Act of 1995 (15 U.S.C. 272 note) because
application of those requirements would
be inconsistent with the Clean Air Act;
and
• Does not provide EPA with the
discretionary authority to address, as
appropriate, disproportionate human
health or environmental effects, using
practicable and legally permissible
methods, under Executive Order 12898
(59 FR 7629, February 16, 1994).
In addition, this rule does not have
tribal implications as specified by
Executive Order 13175 (65 FR 67249,
November 9, 2000), because the SIP is
not approved to apply in Indian country
located in the state, and EPA notes that
it will not impose substantial direct
costs on tribal governments or preempt
tribal law.
List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52
Environmental protection, Air
pollution control, Intergovernmental
relations, Reporting and recordkeeping
requirements.
E:\FR\FM\19NOP1.SGM
19NOP1
Federal Register / Vol. 73, No. 224 / Wednesday, November 19, 2008 / Proposed Rules
Dated: October 24, 2008.
Alexis Strauss,
Acting Regional Administrator, Region IX.
[FR Doc. E8–27484 Filed 11–18–08; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560–50–P
DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND
SECURITY
Federal Emergency Management
Agency
44 CFR Part 67
[Docket No. FEMA–B–1020]
Proposed Flood Elevation
Determinations
Federal Emergency
Management Agency, DHS.
ACTION: Proposed rule.
AGENCY:
SUMMARY: Comments are requested on
the proposed Base (1 percent annualchance) Flood Elevations (BFEs) and
proposed BFE modifications for the
communities listed in the table below.
The purpose of this notice is to seek
general information and comment
regarding the proposed regulatory flood
elevations for the reach described by the
downstream and upstream locations in
the table below. The BFEs and modified
BFEs are a part of the floodplain
management measures that the
community is required either to adopt
or show evidence of having in effect in
order to qualify or remain qualified for
participation in the National Flood
Insurance Program (NFIP). In addition,
these elevations, once finalized, will be
used by insurance agents, and others to
calculate appropriate flood insurance
premium rates for new buildings and
the contents in those buildings.
DATES: Comments are to be submitted
on or before February 17, 2009.
ADDRESSES: The corresponding
preliminary Flood Insurance Rate Map
(FIRM) for the proposed BFEs for each
community are available for inspection
at the community’s map repository. The
respective addresses are listed in the
table below.
cprice-sewell on PROD1PC64 with PROPOSALS-1
Flooding source(s)
You may submit comments, identified
by Docket No. FEMA–B–1020, to
William R. Blanton, Jr., Chief,
Engineering Management Branch,
Mitigation Directorate, Federal
Emergency Management Agency, 500 C
Street, SW., Washington, DC 20472,
(202) 646–3151, or (e-mail)
bill.blanton@dhs.gov.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
William R. Blanton, Jr., Chief,
Engineering Management Branch,
Mitigation Directorate, Federal
Emergency Management Agency, 500 C
Street, SW., Washington, DC 20472,
(202) 646–3151 or (e-mail)
bill.blanton@dhs.gov.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The
Federal Emergency Management Agency
(FEMA) proposes to make
determinations of BFEs and modified
BFEs for each community listed below,
in accordance with section 110 of the
Flood Disaster Protection Act of 1973,
42 U.S.C. 4104, and 44 CFR 67.4(a).
These proposed BFEs and modified
BFEs, together with the floodplain
management criteria required by 44 CFR
60.3, are the minimum that are required.
They should not be construed to mean
that the community must change any
existing ordinances that are more
stringent in their floodplain
management requirements. The
community may at any time enact
stricter requirements of its own, or
pursuant to policies established by other
Federal, State, or regional entities.
These proposed elevations are used to
meet the floodplain management
requirements of the NFIP and are also
used to calculate the appropriate flood
insurance premium rates for new
buildings built after these elevations are
made final, and for the contents in these
buildings.
Comments on any aspect of the Flood
Insurance Study and FIRM, other than
the proposed BFEs, will be considered.
A letter acknowledging receipt of any
comments will not be sent.
Administrative Procedure Act
Statement. This matter is not a
rulemaking governed by the
Administrative Procedure Act (APA), 5
U.S.C. 553. FEMA publishes flood
elevation determinations for notice and
comment; however, they are governed
by the Flood Disaster Protection Act of
1973, 42 U.S.C. 4105, and the National
Flood Insurance Act of 1968, 42 U.S.C.
4001 et seq., and do not fall under the
APA.
National Environmental Policy Act.
This proposed rule is categorically
excluded from the requirements of 44
CFR part 10, Environmental
Consideration. An environmental
impact assessment has not been
prepared.
Regulatory Flexibility Act. As flood
elevation determinations are not within
the scope of the Regulatory Flexibility
Act, 5 U.S.C. 601–612, a regulatory
flexibility analysis is not required.
Executive Order 12866, Regulatory
Planning and Review. This proposed
rule is not a significant regulatory action
under the criteria of section 3(f) of
Executive Order 12866, as amended.
Executive Order 13132, Federalism.
This proposed rule involves no policies
that have federalism implications under
Executive Order 13132.
Executive Order 12988, Civil Justice
Reform. This proposed rule meets the
applicable standards of Executive Order
12988.
List of Subjects in 44 CFR Part 67
Administrative practice and
procedure, Flood insurance, Reporting
and recordkeeping requirements.
Accordingly, 44 CFR part 67 is
proposed to be amended as follows:
PART 67—[AMENDED]
1. The authority citation for part 67
continues to read as follows:
Authority: 42 U.S.C. 4001 et seq.;
Reorganization Plan No. 3 of 1978, 3 CFR,
1978 Comp., p. 329; E.O. 12127, 44 FR 19367,
3 CFR, 1979 Comp., p. 376.
§ 67.4
[Amended]
2. The tables published under the
authority of § 67.4 are proposed to be
amended as follows:
* Elevation in feet(NGVD)
+ Elevation in feet(NAVD)
# Depth in feet above
ground
Location of referenced elevation**
69595
Effective
Communities affected
Modified
St. Joseph County, Indiana, and Incorporated Areas
Baugo Creek .........................
14:44 Nov 18, 2008
+718
+719
Approximately 100 feet upstream of county boundary
with Elkhart County.
VerDate Aug<31>2005
Approximately 300 feet upstream of confluence with
St. Joseph River/Baugo Bay.
None
+726
Jkt 217001
PO 00000
Frm 00008
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
E:\FR\FM\19NOP1.SGM
19NOP1
Town of Osceola, Unincorporated Areas of St. Joseph County.
Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 73, Number 224 (Wednesday, November 19, 2008)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 69593-69595]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: E8-27484]
=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
40 CFR Part 52
[EPA-R09-OAR-2008-0341; FRL-8741-9]
Revisions to the California State Implementation Plan, Ventura
County Air Pollution Control District
AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).
ACTION: Proposed rule.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: EPA is proposing to approve revisions to the Ventura County
Air Pollution Control District (VCAPCD) portion of the California State
Implementation Plan (SIP). These revisions concern the permitting of
new or modified sources. We are proposing to approve local rules to
regulate these procedures under the Clean Air Act as amended in 1990
(CAA or the Act). We are taking comments on this proposal and plan to
follow with a final action.
DATES: Any comments must arrive by December 19, 2008.
ADDRESSES: Submit comments, identified by docket number EPA-R09-OAR-
2008-0341, by one of the following methods:
Federal eRulemaking Portal: www.regulations.gov. Follow
the on-line instructions.
E-mail: R9airpermits@epa.gov.
Mail or deliver: Gerardo Rios (Air-3), 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 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 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 below.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Laura Yannayon, EPA Region IX, (415)
972-3534, yannayon.laura@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 the 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. Proposed Action and Public Comment
III. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews
I. The State's Submittal
A. What rules did the State submit?
Table 1 lists the rules addressed by this proposal with the dates
that they were adopted by local air agency and submitted by the
California Air Resources Board (CARB).
Table 1--Submitted Rules
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Local agency Rule No. Rule title Amended or revised Submitted
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
VCAPCD......................... 26 New Source Review-- 03/14/06, Amended........ 06/16/06
General.
VCAPCD......................... 26.1 New Source Review-- 11/14/06, Revised........ 05/08/07
Definitions.
VCAPCD......................... 26.2 New Source Review-- 03/14/06, Revised........ 06/16/06
Requirements.
VCAPCD......................... 26.3 New Source Review-- 03/14/06, Revised........ 06/16/06
Exemptions.
VCAPCD......................... 26.4 New Source Review-- 03/14/06, Revised........ 06/16/06
Emissions Banking.
VCAPCD......................... 26.5 New Source Review-- 03/14/06, Revised........ 06/16/06
Essential Public Service
Bank.
VCAPCD......................... 26.6 New Source Review-- 03/14/06, Revised........ 06/16/06
Calculations.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
On July 21, 2006, the rule submittal of June 16, 2006 was found to
meet the completeness criteria in 40 CFR part 51, appendix V, which
must be met before formal EPA review. On July 23, 2007, the rule
submittal of May 8, 2007 was found to meet the completeness criteria.
B. Are there other versions of the rules?
We approved a version of VCAPCD Rules 26 and 26.5 on December 7,
2000 (65 FR 76567). We approved a version of VCAPCD Rules 26.1, 26.2,
26.3, 26.4, and 26.6 on February 28, 2003 (68 FR 9561). We did not act
on a version of VCAPCD Rule 26.1, revised on March 14, 2006 and
submitted to us by CARB on June 16, 2006. While we can act on only the
most recently submitted version, we have reviewed materials provided
with the previous submittal.
C. What is the purpose of the submitted rules?
The purposes of revisions relative to the SIP rule are as follows:
VCAPCD Rule 26: A reference to the new Rule 26.11 is
added, along with the purposes of Rule 26.11, including (a) the process
by which the APCO determines if Emission Reduction Credits (ERCs) are
surplus at the time of use and (b) the implementation of an annual
[[Page 69594]]
equivalency demonstration program, are added to the rule.
VCAPCD Rule 26.1: Four definitions relating to bio-solids,
public service ERCs, and public service banking are added to the rule,
and the definition for Community Bank is removed from the rule.
VCAPCD Rule 26.2: The District name is added to the rule.
VCAPCD Rule 26.3: The exemption from offset requirements
for gasoline dispensing facilities that dispense into motor vehicles or
marine pleasure craft, is removed.
VCAPCD Rule 26.4.B.5: The banking of ERCs for gasoline
dispensing facilities that dispense into motor vehicles or marine
pleasure craft, shall be allowed for no more than the amount of ERCs
provided by the applicant after 10/22/91. Previously these ERCs were
not eligible for banking.
VCAPCD Rule 26.4.B.7: The provisions are added that (a)
after 10/22/91, any ROC or NOX emission increase calculated
pursuant to Rule 26.6.D but not offset with ERCs shall be ineligible
for banking and (b) an emission increase offset with a credit from the
Community Bank between 10/13/91 and 03/14/06 shall be ineligible for
banking.
VCAPCD Rule 26.4.F.2: The provisions are added that (a)
the District shall contact the owner of an ERC certificate annually to
determine if the owner will renew the certificate and (b) if not
renewed, the certificate will be deemed inactive and transferred to the
Essential Public Service Bank.
VCAPCD Rule 26.5: The title of this rule is changed from
``New Source Review--Community Service Bank'' to ``New Source Review--
Essential Public Service Bank.''
VCAPCD Rule 26.5.A: The applicability of this banking
section is changed to ``essential public service credits'' instead of
``community ERCs.''
VCAPCD Rule 26.5.C: The applicability of this disbursement
section is also changed to ``essential public service credits.'' Other
former community ERC transactions described in SIP Rule 25.5.C.2, such
as disbursing community ERCs to sources not required to provide offsets
on the date the Authority-to-Construct is issued, are deleted.
VCAPCD Rule 26.5.E: Requirements for tracking community
ERCs by the District are deleted from the rule. These provisions
already exist in the SIP-approved version of VCAPCD Rule 26.11.
VCAPCD Rule 26.6: The District name is added to the rule.
II. EPA's Evaluation and Action
A. How is EPA evaluating the rules?
These rules describe administrative provisions and definitions that
support the review and permitting of new and modified emission sources
as required by Title I, subpart D, of the Clean Air Act for
nonattainment areas. In combination with the other requirements, these
rules must be enforceable (see section 110(a) of the CAA) and must not
relax existing requirements (see sections 110(l) and 193).
EPA guidance and policy documents that we used to help evaluate
enforceability requirements consistently include the following:
Review of New Sources and Modifications, U.S. EPA, 40 CFR
part 51, subpart I.
Guidance Document for Correcting Common VOC & Other Rule
Deficiencies, EPA Region 9, (August 21, 2001). (The Little Bluebook)
B. Do the rules meet the evaluation criteria?
We believe the rules are consistent with the relevant policy and
guidance regarding enforceability and SIP relaxations. The TSD has more
information on our evaluation.
C. EPA Recommendation To Further Improve a Rule
The TSD describes an additional revision to VCAPCD Rule 26.1 that
does not affect EPA's current action but is recommended for the next
time the local agency modifies the rule.
D. Proposed Action and Public Comment
Because EPA believes the submitted rules fulfill all relevant
requirements, we are proposing full approval as described in section
110(k)(3) of the CAA. We will accept comments from the public on this
proposal for the next 30 days. Unless we receive convincing new
information during the comment period, we intend to publish a final
approval action that will incorporate these rules into the federally
enforceable SIP.
III. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews
Under the Clean Air Act, the Administrator is required to approve a
SIP submission that complies with the provisions of the Act and
applicable Federal regulations. 42 U.S.C. 7410(k); 40 CFR 52.02(a).
Thus, in reviewing SIP submissions, EPA's role is to approve state
choices, provided that they meet the criteria of the Clean Air Act.
Accordingly, this action merely approves state law as meeting Federal
requirements and does not impose additional requirements beyond those
imposed by state law. For that reason, this action:
Is not a ``significant regulatory action'' subject to
review by the Office of Management and Budget under Executive Order
12866 (58 FR 51735, October 4, 1993);
Does not impose an information collection burden under the
provisions of the Paperwork Reduction Act (44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.);
Is certified as not having a significant economic impact
on a substantial number of small entities under the Regulatory
Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 601 et seq.);
Does not contain any unfunded mandate or significantly or
uniquely affect small governments, as described in the Unfunded
Mandates Reform Act of 1995 (Pub. L. 104-4);
Does not have Federalism implications as specified in
Executive Order 13132 (64 FR 43255, August 10, 1999);
Is not an economically significant regulatory action based
on health or safety risks subject to Executive Order 13045 (62 FR
19885, April 23, 1997);
Is not a significant regulatory action subject to
Executive Order 13211 (66 FR 28355, May 22, 2001);
Is not subject to requirements of Section 12(d) of the
National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act of 1995 (15 U.S.C. 272
note) because application of those requirements would be inconsistent
with the Clean Air Act; and
Does not provide EPA with the discretionary authority to
address, as appropriate, disproportionate human health or environmental
effects, using practicable and legally permissible methods, under
Executive Order 12898 (59 FR 7629, February 16, 1994).
In addition, this rule does not have tribal implications as
specified by Executive Order 13175 (65 FR 67249, November 9, 2000),
because the SIP is not approved to apply in Indian country located in
the state, and EPA notes that it will not impose substantial direct
costs on tribal governments or preempt tribal law.
List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52
Environmental protection, Air pollution control, Intergovernmental
relations, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements.
[[Page 69595]]
Dated: October 24, 2008.
Alexis Strauss,
Acting Regional Administrator, Region IX.
[FR Doc. E8-27484 Filed 11-18-08; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P