Revisions to the California State Implementation Plan, Placer County Air Pollution Control District, Sacramento Metropolitan Air Quality Management District, San Joaquin Valley Unified Air Pollution Control District, and South Coast Air Quality Management District, 24544-24545 [2010-10401]
Download as PDF
24544
Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 86 / Wednesday, May 5, 2010 / Proposed Rules
1-Hour NAAQS Obligations That No
Longer Apply in This Area
Two additional amendments to
Ecology’s existing 1-hour maintenance
plan have also been submitted for
approval pursuant to 40 CFR
51.905(e)(1). In this submission, Ecology
has submitted a maintenance SIP for the
8 hour NAAQS for this area that meets
the requirements of CAA section 110(l)
and section 193 of the CAA. Therefore,
EPA proposes to approve these two
amendments to the existing 1-hour
ozone maintenance plan:
1. Removal of the obligation to submit
a maintenance plan for the 1-hour
NAAQS eight years after approval of the
initial 1-hour maintenance plan; and
2. Removal of the State’s obligation to
implement contingency measures upon
a violation of the 1-hour NAAQS.
Washington’s SIP submittal meets the
CAA requirements for SIP submittals
with respect to these two changes.
III. Proposed Action
EPA is proposing to approve the
section 110(a)(1) ozone maintenance
plan, including its correlating
implementing regulations, for
Vancouver, Washington, submitted on
January 17, 2007, as revisions to the
federally enforceable Washington SIP.
EPA is proposing to approve the
maintenance plan and supporting rules
for the Vancouver portion of the
Portland-Vancouver AQMA because
they meet the requirements of section
110(a)(1) and section 110(l) of the CAA.
EPA is soliciting public comments on
this proposed approval. EPA will
consider these comments and address
them before taking final action.
erowe on DSK5CLS3C1PROD with PROPOSALS-1
IV. Washington Notice Provision
Washington’s Regulatory Reform Act
of 1995, codified at Chapter 43.05
Revised Code of Washington (RCW),
precludes ‘‘regulatory agencies’’, as
defined in RCW 43.05.010, from
assessing civil penalties under certain
circumstances. EPA has determined that
Chapter 43.05 of the RCW, often referred
to as ‘‘House Bill 1010,’’ conflicts with
the requirements of CAA section
110(a)(2)(A) and (C) and 40 CFR
51.230(b) and (e). Based on this
determination, Ecology has determined
that Chapter 43.05 RCW does not apply
to the requirements of Chapter 173–422
WAC. See 66 FR 35115, 35120 (July 3,
2001). The restriction on the issuance of
civil penalties in Chapter 43.05 RCW
does not apply to local air pollution
control authorities in Washington
because local air pollution control
authorities are not ‘‘regulatory agencies’’
VerDate Mar<15>2010
15:17 May 04, 2010
Jkt 220001
within the meaning of that statute. See
66 FR 35115, 35120 (July 3, 2001).
In addition, EPA is relying on the
State’s interpretation of another
technical assistance law, RCW
43.21A.085 and .087, to conclude that
the law does not impinge on the State’s
authority to administer Federal Clean
Air Act programs. The Washington
Attorney Generals’ Office has concluded
that RCW 43.21A.085 and .087 do not
conflict with Federal authorization
requirements because these provisions
implement a discretionary program.
EPA understands from the State’s
interpretation that technical assistance
visits conducted by the State will not be
conducted under the authority of RCW
43.21A.085 and .087. See 66 FR 16, 20
(January 2, 2001); 59 FR 42552, 42555
(August 18, 1994).
V. 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, the EPA’s role is to
approve state choices, provided that
they meet the criteria of the Clean Air
Act. Accordingly, this proposed 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 proposed 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);
PO 00000
Frm 00051
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
• 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, Carbon monoxide,
Hydrocarbons, Incorporation by
reference, Intergovernmental relations,
Nitrogen dioxide, Ozone, Reporting and
recordkeeping requirements, Sulfur
oxides, Volatile organic compounds.
Dated: March 3, 2010.
Dennis J. McLerran,
Regional Administrator, Region 10.
[FR Doc. 2010–10644 Filed 5–4–10; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560–50–P
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION
AGENCY
40 CFR Part 52
[EPA–R09–OAR–2010–0218; FRL–9135–4]
Revisions to the California State
Implementation Plan, Placer County
Air Pollution Control District,
Sacramento Metropolitan Air Quality
Management District, San Joaquin
Valley Unified Air Pollution Control
District, and South Coast Air Quality
Management District
AGENCY: Environmental Protection
Agency (EPA).
ACTION: Proposed rule.
SUMMARY: EPA is proposing to approve
revisions to the Placer County Air
Pollution Control District (PCAPCD),
Sacramento Metropolitan Air Quality
Management District (SMAQMD), San
Joaquin Valley Unified Air Pollution
Control District (SJVUAPCD), and South
Coast Air Quality Management District
(SCAQMD) portions of the California
State Implementation Plan (SIP). These
revisions concern volatile organic
E:\FR\FM\05MYP1.SGM
05MYP1
erowe on DSK5CLS3C1PROD with PROPOSALS-1
Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 86 / Wednesday, May 5, 2010 / Proposed Rules
compound (VOC) emissions from
petroleum facilities, chemical plants,
and facilities which use organic
solvents. We are proposing to approve
local rules to regulate these emission
sources under the Clean Air Act as
amended in 1990 (CAA or the Act).
DATES: Any comments on this proposal
must arrive by June 4, 2010.
ADDRESSES: Submit comments,
identified by docket number [EPA–R09–
OAR–2010–0218], 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
https://www.regulations.gov or e-mail.
https://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 email 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. Electronic files should avoid
the use of special characters, any form
of encryption, and be free of any defects
or viruses.
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:
Nicole Law, EPA Region IX, (415) 947–
4126, law.nicole@epa.gov.
VerDate Mar<15>2010
15:17 May 04, 2010
Jkt 220001
This
proposal addresses the following local
rules: PCAPCD Rule 216 Organic
Solvent Cleaning and Degreasing
Operations, SMAQMD Rule 466 Solvent
Cleaning, SJVUAPCD Rule 4661 Organic
Solvents, SCAQMD Rule 1173 Control
of Volatile Organic Compound Leaks
and Releases from Components at
Petroleum Facilities and Chemical
Plants. In the Rules and Regulations
section of this Federal Register, we are
approving these local rules in a direct
final action without prior proposal
because we believe these SIP revisions
are not controversial. If we receive
adverse comments, however, we will
publish a timely withdrawal of the
direct final rule and address the
comments in subsequent action based
on this proposed rule. Please note that
if we receive adverse comment on an
amendment, paragraph, or section of
this rule and if that provision may be
severed from the remainder of the rule,
we may adopt as final those provisions
of the rule that are not the subject of an
adverse comment.
We do not plan to open a second
comment period, so anyone interested
in commenting should do so at this
time. If we do not receive adverse
comments, no further activity is
planned. For further information, please
see the direct final action.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Dated: March 18, 2010.
Jared Blumenfeld,
Regional Administrator, Region IX.
[FR Doc. 2010–10401 Filed 5–4–10; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560–50–P
DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR
Fish and Wildlife Service
50 CFR Part 17
[Docket No. FWS–R7–ES–2009–0042;
92210–1117–0000–B4]
RIN 1018–AW56
Endangered and Threatened Wildlife
and Plants; Designation of Critical
Habitat for the Polar Bear in the United
States
AGENCY: Fish and Wildlife Service,
Interior.
ACTION: Proposed rule; reopening of
comment period, and announcement of
public hearings.
SUMMARY: We, the U.S. Fish and
Wildlife Service, announce the
reopening of the public comment period
on the proposed designation of critical
habitat for the polar bear (Ursus
maritimus) under the Endangered
PO 00000
Frm 00052
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
24545
Species Act of 1973, as amended (Act).
We also announce the availability of a
draft economic analysis (DEA),
corrections to our proposed boundaries
for sea-ice critical habitat, our intention
to hold two public hearings to provide
the public with an opportunity to
submit testimony on the proposed
designation of critical habitat for the
polar bear and on the DEA, and an
amended required determinations
section of the proposal. We are
reopening the comment period to allow
all interested parties an opportunity to
provide additional comment on the
proposed rule, the associated DEA,
corrections to our proposed boundaries
for sea-ice critical habitat, and the
amended required determinations
section. If you submitted comments
previously, you do not need to resubmit
them because we have already
incorporated them into the public
record and will fully consider them in
preparation of the final rule.
DATES: Written Comments: We will
consider comments we receive on or
before July 6, 2010.
Public Hearings: We will hold two
public hearings, one on June 15, 2010,
from 7–10 p.m. in Anchorage, Alaska,
and another on June 17, 2010, from 7–
10 p.m. in Barrow, Alaska. During the
first hour of these meetings (from 7–8
p.m.), we will present information on
the DEA and proposed critical habitat.
Public comments will be taken from 8–
10 p.m.
ADDRESSES: Written Comments: You
may submit comments by one of the
following methods:
• Federal eRulemaking Portal: https://
www.regulations.gov. Please follow the
instructions for submitting comments
on Docket No. FWS–R7–ES–2009–0042.
• U.S. mail or hand-delivery: Public
Comments Processing, Attn: FWS–R7–
ES–2009–0042; Division of Policy and
Directives Management; U.S. Fish and
Wildlife Service; 4401 N. Fairfax Drive,
Suite 222; Arlington, VA 22203.
Public Hearings:
• The Barrow, Alaska, public hearing
˜
will be held at Inupiat Heritage Center,
5421 North Star Street, Barrow, Alaska.
• The Anchorage, Alaska, public
hearing will be held at Z.J. Loussac
Public Library, 3600 Denali Street,
Anchorage, Alaska.
For more information on the public
hearings, see the Public Hearings
section below.
We will post all comments, and
transcripts of the public hearings on
https://www.regulations.gov. This
generally means that we will post any
personal information you provide to us
(see the Public Comments section below
for more information).
E:\FR\FM\05MYP1.SGM
05MYP1
Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 75, Number 86 (Wednesday, May 5, 2010)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 24544-24545]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2010-10401]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
40 CFR Part 52
[EPA-R09-OAR-2010-0218; FRL-9135-4]
Revisions to the California State Implementation Plan, Placer
County Air Pollution Control District, Sacramento Metropolitan Air
Quality Management District, San Joaquin Valley Unified Air Pollution
Control District, and South Coast Air Quality Management District
AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).
ACTION: Proposed rule.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: EPA is proposing to approve revisions to the Placer County Air
Pollution Control District (PCAPCD), Sacramento Metropolitan Air
Quality Management District (SMAQMD), San Joaquin Valley Unified Air
Pollution Control District (SJVUAPCD), and South Coast Air Quality
Management District (SCAQMD) portions of the California State
Implementation Plan (SIP). These revisions concern volatile organic
[[Page 24545]]
compound (VOC) emissions from petroleum facilities, chemical plants,
and facilities which use organic solvents. We are proposing to approve
local rules to regulate these emission sources under the Clean Air Act
as amended in 1990 (CAA or the Act).
DATES: Any comments on this proposal must arrive by June 4, 2010.
ADDRESSES: Submit comments, identified by docket number [EPA-R09-OAR-
2010-0218], 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 https://www.regulations.gov or e-mail. https://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. Electronic files should avoid the use of special characters,
any form of encryption, and be free of any defects or viruses.
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: Nicole Law, EPA Region IX, (415) 947-
4126, law.nicole@epa.gov.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: This proposal addresses the following local
rules: PCAPCD Rule 216 Organic Solvent Cleaning and Degreasing
Operations, SMAQMD Rule 466 Solvent Cleaning, SJVUAPCD Rule 4661
Organic Solvents, SCAQMD Rule 1173 Control of Volatile Organic Compound
Leaks and Releases from Components at Petroleum Facilities and Chemical
Plants. In the Rules and Regulations section of this Federal Register,
we are approving these local rules in a direct final action without
prior proposal because we believe these SIP revisions are not
controversial. If we receive adverse comments, however, we will publish
a timely withdrawal of the direct final rule and address the comments
in subsequent action based on this proposed rule. Please note that if
we receive adverse comment on an amendment, paragraph, or section of
this rule and if that provision may be severed from the remainder of
the rule, we may adopt as final those provisions of the rule that are
not the subject of an adverse comment.
We do not plan to open a second comment period, so anyone
interested in commenting should do so at this time. If we do not
receive adverse comments, no further activity is planned. For further
information, please see the direct final action.
Dated: March 18, 2010.
Jared Blumenfeld,
Regional Administrator, Region IX.
[FR Doc. 2010-10401 Filed 5-4-10; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P