Revisions to the California State Implementation Plan, San Joaquin Valley Unified Air Pollution Control District (SJVUAPCD), 35167-35169 [2011-15000]
Download as PDF
<![CDATA[
emcdonald on DSK2BSOYB1PROD with PROPOSALS
Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 116 / Thursday, June 16, 2011 / Proposed Rules
mobility includes but is not limited to
a traumatic brain injury that
compromises a veteran’s ability to make
appropriate decisions based on
environmental cues (i.e., traffic lights or
dangerous obstacles) or a seizure
disorder that causes a veteran to become
immobile during and after a seizure
event.
(c) Recognized service dogs. VA will
recognize, for the purpose of paying
benefits under this section, the
following service dogs:
(1) The dog and veteran must have
successfully completed a training
program offered by an organization
accredited by Assistance Dogs
International or the International Guide
Dog Federation, or both (for dogs that
perform both service- and guide-dog
assistance). The veteran must provide to
VA a certificate showing successful
completion issued by the accredited
organization that provided such
program.
(2) Dogs obtained before [date of
publication of final rule in the Federal
Register] will be recognized if a guide
or service dog training organization in
existence before [date of publication of
final rule in the Federal Register]
certifies that the veteran and dog, as a
team, successfully completed, no later
than [date 1 year after date of
publication of final rule in the Federal
Register], a training program offered by
that training organization. The veteran
must provide to VA a certificate
showing successful completion issued
by the organization that provided such
program. Alternatively, the veteran and
dog will be recognized if they comply
with paragraph (c)(1) of this section.
(d) Authorized benefits. VA will
provide to a veteran enrolled under 38
U.S.C. 1705 only the following benefits
for one service dog at any given time in
accordance with this section:
(1) A commercially available
insurance policy that meets the
following minimum requirements:
(i) VA, and not the veteran, will be
billed for any premiums, copayments, or
deductibles associated with the policy;
however, the veteran will be responsible
for any cost of care that exceeds the
maximum amount authorized by the
policy for a particular procedure, course
of treatment, or policy year. If a dog
requires care that may exceed the
policy’s limit, the insurer will,
whenever reasonably possible under the
circumstances, provide advance notice
to the veteran.
(ii) The policy will guarantee coverage
for all treatment (and associated
prescription medications), subject to
premiums, copayments, deductibles or
annual caps, determined to be medically
VerDate Mar<15>2010
18:36 Jun 15, 2011
Jkt 223001
necessary, including euthanasia, by any
veterinarian who meets the
requirements of the insurer.
(iii) The policy will not exclude dogs
with preexisting conditions that do not
prevent the dog from being a service
dog.
(2) Hardware, or repairs or
replacements for hardware, that are
clinically determined to be required by
the dog to perform the tasks necessary
to assist the veteran with his or her
impairment. To obtain such devices, the
veteran must contact the Prosthetic and
Sensory Aids Service at his or her local
VA medical facility and request the
items needed.
(3) Payments for travel expenses
associated with obtaining a dog under
paragraph (c)(1) of this section. Travel
costs will be provided only to a veteran
who has been prescribed a service dog
by a VA clinician under paragraph (b)
of this section. Payments will be made
as if the veteran is an eligible
beneficiary under 38 U.S.C. 111 and 38
CFR part 70, without regard to whether
the veteran meets the eligibility criteria
as set for in 38 CFR part 70.
(4) The veteran is responsible for
procuring and paying for any items or
expenses not authorized by this section.
This means that VA will not pay for
items such as license tags, nonprescription food, grooming, insurance
for personal injury, non-sedated dental
cleanings, nail trimming, boarding, petsitting or dog-walking services, over-thecounter medications, or other goods and
services not covered by the policy. The
dog is not the property of VA; VA will
never assume responsibility for, or take
possession of, any service dog.
(e) Dog must maintain ability to
function as a service dog. To continue
to receive benefits under this section,
the service dog must maintain its ability
to function as a service dog. If at any
time VA learns from any source that the
dog is medically unable to maintain that
role, or VA makes a clinical
determination that the veteran no longer
requires the dog, VA will provide at
least 30 days notice to the veteran before
benefits will no longer be authorized.
(Authority 38 U.S.C. 501, 1714)
3. Revise § 17.154 to read as follows:
§ 17.154
Equipment for blind veterans.
VA may furnish mechanical and/or
electronic equipment considered
necessary as aids to overcoming the
handicap of blindness to blind exmembers of the Armed Forces entitled
to disability compensation for a serviceconnected disability.
PO 00000
Frm 00031
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
35167
(Authority: 38 U.S.C. 1714)
[FR Doc. 2011–14933 Filed 6–15–11; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 8320–01–P
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION
AGENCY
40 CFR Part 52
[EPA–R09–OAR–2011–0312; FRL–9319–8]
Revisions to the California State
Implementation Plan, San Joaquin
Valley Unified Air Pollution Control
District (SJVUAPCD)
Environmental Protection
Agency (EPA).
ACTION: Proposed rule.
AGENCY:
EPA is proposing to approve
revisions to the SJVUAPCD portion of
the California State Implementation
Plan (SIP). These revisions concern
volatile organic compounds (VOCs)
from architectural coatings. We are
approving a local rule that regulates
these emission sources 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
July 18, 2011.
ADDRESSES: Submit comments,
identified by docket number EPA–R09–
OAR–2011–0312, 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
SUMMARY:
E:\FR\FM\16JNP1.SGM
16JNP1
35168
Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 116 / Thursday, June 16, 2011 / Proposed Rules
comment due to technical difficulties
and cannot contact you for clarification,
EPA may not be able to consider your
comment.
Docket: Generally, documents in the
docket for this action are 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 at
https://www.regulations.gov, some
information may be publicly available
only at the hard copy location (e.g.,
copyrighted material, large maps), 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:
David Grounds, EPA Region IX, (415)
972–3019, grounds.david@epa.gov.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Throughout this document, ‘‘we,’’ ‘‘us’’
and ‘‘our’’ refer to EPA.
Table of Contents
I. The State’s Submittal
A. What rule did the State submit?
B. Are there other versions of this rule?
C. What is the purpose of the submitted
rule revision?
II. EPA’s Evaluation and Action
A. How is EPA evaluating the rule?
B. Does the rule meet the evaluation
criteria?
C. EPA Recommendations To Further
Improve the Rule
D. Public Comment and Final Action
III. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews
I. The State’s Submittal
A. What rule did the State submit?
Table 1 lists the rule addressed by this
proposal with the dates that it was
adopted by the local air agency and
submitted by the California Air
Resources Board (CARB).
TABLE 1—SUBMITTED RULES
Local agency
Rule No.
SJVUAPCD .........
4601
Rule title
Architectural Coatings ................................................................................
On June 8, 2010, EPA determined that
the submittal for SJVUAPCD Rule 4601
met the completeness criteria in 40 CFR
part 51, Appendix V, which must be
met before formal EPA review.
B. Are there other versions of this rule?
We finalized a limited approval/
limited disapproval on an earlier
version of Rule 4601 into the SIP on
1/2/04 (69 FR 34). No versions were
adopted since then besides the 12/17/09
version.
C. What is the purpose of the submitted
rule revision?
VOCs help produce ground-level
ozone and smog, which harm human
health and the environment. Section
110(a) of the CAA requires States to
submit regulations that control VOC
emissions. Rule 4601 limits VOC
emissions during architectural coating,
storage and clean-up operations. EPA’s
technical support document (TSD) has
more information about this rule.
emcdonald on DSK2BSOYB1PROD with PROPOSALS
II. EPA’s Evaluation and Action
A. How is EPA evaluating the rule?
Generally, SIP rules must be
enforceable (see section 110(a) of the
Act), must require Reasonably Available
Control Technology (RACT) for each
category of sources covered by a Control
Techniques Guidelines (CTG) document
as well as each major source in
nonattainment areas (see sections
182(a)(2) and (b)(2)), and must not relax
existing requirements (see sections
110(l) and 193). The SJVUAPCD
regulates an ozone nonattainment area
(see 40 CFR part 81), but Rule 4601 does
not regulate major sources, so Rule 4601
need not fulfill RACT.
VerDate Mar<15>2010
17:12 Jun 15, 2011
Adopted
Jkt 223001
Guidance and policy documents that
we use to evaluate enforceability and
other requirements consistently include
the following:
1. ‘‘Issues Relating to VOC Regulation
Cutpoints, Deficiencies, and
Deviations,’’ EPA, May 25, 1988 (the
Bluebook).
2. ‘‘Guidance Document for Correcting
Common VOC & Other Rule
Deficiencies,’’ EPA Region 9, August 21,
2001 (the Little Bluebook).
3. Control of Volatile Organic
Emissions from Existing Stationary
Sources, Volume I: Control Methods for
Surface Coating Operations (EPA–450/
2–76–028, 11/76, NTIS PB–260–386).
4. National VOC Emission Standards
for Architectural Coatings (40 CFR 59
Subpart D, 9/11/98).
5. Technical Review Group’s
Proposed Architectural Coatings SCM
(CARB, 1989).
6. Suggested Control Measure for
Architectural Coatings (CARB, 2000).
B. Does the rule meet the evaluation
criteria?
We believe this rule is consistent with
the relevant policy and guidance
regarding enforceability, RACT, and SIP
relaxations. The TSD has more
information on our evaluation.
C. EPA Recommendations To Further
Improve the Rule
The TSD describes one additional rule
revision that we recommend for the next
time the local agency modifies the rule
but is not currently the basis for rule
disapproval.
PO 00000
Frm 00032
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
12/17/09
Submitted
5/17/10
D. Public Comment and Final Action
Because EPA believes the submitted
rule fulfills all relevant requirements,
we are proposing to fully approve it as
described in section 110(k)(3) of the Act.
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 this rule
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.);
E:\FR\FM\16JNP1.SGM
16JNP1
Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 116 / Thursday, June 16, 2011 / Proposed Rules
• 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
disproportionate human health or
environmental effects with practical,
appropriate, 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, Volatile organic
compounds.
Authority: 42 U.S.C. 7401 et seq.
Dated: May 19, 2011.
Jared Blumenfeld,
Regional Administrator, Region IX.
[FR Doc. 2011–15000 Filed 6–15–11; 8:45 am]
emcdonald on DSK2BSOYB1PROD with PROPOSALS
BILLING CODE 6560–50–P
DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND
SECURITY
Coast Guard
46 CFR Part 10
[Docket No. USCG–2004–17455]
RIN 1625–AA85
Validation of Merchant Mariners’ Vital
Information and Issuance of Coast
Guard Merchant Mariner’s Licenses
and Certificates of Registry (MMLs)
Coast Guard, DHS.
Notice of intent with request for
comments.
AGENCY:
ACTION:
The Coast Guard is advising
the public of its intent to finalize
regulations previously published as an
interim rule on January 13, 2006. The IR
was published to amend the maritime
personnel licensing rules to include
new security requirements when
mariners apply for original, renewal,
and raise-of-grade licenses and
certificates of registry, but was never
published as a final rule. Because of the
lapse in time since the interim rule
publication, the Coast Guard is seeking
comments from the public on one
remaining section of the interim rule
that has remained unfinalized. The
Coast Guard intends to finalize this one
section of the interim rule.
DATES: Comments must be received on
or before August 15, 2011.
ADDRESSES: You may submit comments
identified by docket number USCG–
2004–17455 using any one of the
following methods:
(1) Federal eRulemaking Portal:
https://www.regulations.gov.
(2) Fax: 202–493–2251.
(3) Mail: Docket Management Facility
(M–30), U.S. Department of
Transportation, West Building Ground
Floor, Room W12–140, 1200 New Jersey
Avenue, SE., Washington, DC 20590–
0001.
(4) Hand delivery: Same as mail
address above, between 9 a.m. and
5 p.m., Monday through Friday, except
Federal holidays. The telephone number
is 202–366–9329. To avoid duplication,
please use only one of these four
methods. See the ‘‘Public Participation
and Request for Comments’’ portion of
the SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION section
below for instructions on submitting
comments.
SUMMARY:
If
you have questions on this proposed
rule, call or e-mail Mr. Gerald Miante,
Maritime Personnel Qualifications
Division, Coast Guard; telephone 202–
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
VerDate Mar<15>2010
17:12 Jun 15, 2011
Jkt 223001
PO 00000
Frm 00033
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
35169
372–1407, e-mail
Gerald.P.Miante@uscg.mil. If you have
questions on viewing or submitting
material to the docket, call Renee V.
Wright, Program Manager, Docket
Operations, telephone 202–366–9826.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Request for Comments
If you submit a comment, please
include the docket number for this
rulemaking (USCG–2004–17455),
indicate the specific section of this
document to which each comment
applies, and provide a reason for each
suggestion or recommendation. You
may submit your comments and
material online (via https://
www.regulations.gov) or by fax, mail, or
hand delivery, but please use only one
of these means. If you submit a
comment online via https://
www.regulations.gov, it will be
considered received by the Coast Guard
when you successfully transmit the
comment. If you fax, hand deliver, or
mail your comment, it will be
considered as having been received by
the Coast Guard when it is received at
the Docket Management Facility. We
recommend that you include your name
and a mailing address, an e-mail
address, or a phone number in the body
of your document so that we can contact
you if we have questions regarding your
submission.
To submit your comment online, go to
https://www.regulations.gov, click on the
‘‘submit a comment’’ box, which will
then become highlighted in blue. In the
‘‘Select Document Type’’ drop down
menu select ‘‘Proposed Rule’’ and insert
‘‘USCG–2004–17455’’ in the ‘‘Enter
Keyword or ID’’ box. Click ‘‘Search’’
then click on the balloon shape in the
‘‘Actions’’ column. If you submit your
comments by mail or hand delivery,
submit them in an unbound format, no
larger than 81⁄2 by 11 inches, suitable for
copying and electronic filing. If you
submit comments by mail and would
like to know that they reached the
Facility, please enclose a stamped, selfaddressed postcard or envelope.
We will consider all comments and
material received during the comment
period and may change this proposed
rule based on your comments.
Viewing Comments and Documents
To view comments, as well as
documents mentioned in this preamble
as being available in the docket, go to
https://www.regulations.gov, click on the
‘‘read comments’’ box, which will then
become highlighted in blue. In the
‘‘Enter Keyword or ID’’ box insert
‘‘USCG–2004–17455’’ and click
‘‘Search.’’ Click the ‘‘Open Docket
E:\FR\FM\16JNP1.SGM
16JNP1
]]>Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 76, Number 116 (Thursday, June 16, 2011)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 35167-35169]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2011-15000]
=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
40 CFR Part 52
[EPA-R09-OAR-2011-0312; FRL-9319-8]
Revisions to the California State Implementation Plan, San
Joaquin Valley Unified Air Pollution Control District (SJVUAPCD)
AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).
ACTION: Proposed rule.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: EPA is proposing to approve revisions to the SJVUAPCD portion
of the California State Implementation Plan (SIP). These revisions
concern volatile organic compounds (VOCs) from architectural coatings.
We are approving a local rule that regulates these emission sources
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 July 18, 2011.
ADDRESSES: Submit comments, identified by docket number EPA-R09-OAR-
2011-0312, 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
[[Page 35168]]
comment due to technical difficulties and cannot contact you for
clarification, EPA may not be able to consider your comment.
Docket: Generally, documents in the docket for this action are
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 at https://www.regulations.gov,
some information may be publicly available only at the hard copy
location (e.g., copyrighted material, large maps), 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: David Grounds, EPA Region IX, (415)
972-3019, grounds.david@epa.gov.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Throughout this document, ``we,'' ``us'' and
``our'' refer to EPA.
Table of Contents
I. The State's Submittal
A. What rule did the State submit?
B. Are there other versions of this rule?
C. What is the purpose of the submitted rule revision?
II. EPA's Evaluation and Action
A. How is EPA evaluating the rule?
B. Does the rule meet the evaluation criteria?
C. EPA Recommendations To Further Improve the Rule
D. Public Comment and Final Action
III. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews
I. The State's Submittal
A. What rule did the State submit?
Table 1 lists the rule addressed by this proposal with the dates
that it was adopted by the local air agency and submitted by the
California Air Resources Board (CARB).
Table 1--Submitted Rules
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Local agency Rule No. Rule title Adopted Submitted
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
SJVUAPCD........................... 4601 Architectural Coatings..... 12/17/09 5/17/10
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
On June 8, 2010, EPA determined that the submittal for SJVUAPCD
Rule 4601 met the completeness criteria in 40 CFR part 51, Appendix V,
which must be met before formal EPA review.
B. Are there other versions of this rule?
We finalized a limited approval/limited disapproval on an earlier
version of Rule 4601 into the SIP on 1/2/04 (69 FR 34). No versions
were adopted since then besides the 12/17/09 version.
C. What is the purpose of the submitted rule revision?
VOCs help produce ground-level ozone and smog, which harm human
health and the environment. Section 110(a) of the CAA requires States
to submit regulations that control VOC emissions. Rule 4601 limits VOC
emissions during architectural coating, storage and clean-up
operations. EPA's technical support document (TSD) has more information
about this rule.
II. EPA's Evaluation and Action
A. How is EPA evaluating the rule?
Generally, SIP rules must be enforceable (see section 110(a) of the
Act), must require Reasonably Available Control Technology (RACT) for
each category of sources covered by a Control Techniques Guidelines
(CTG) document as well as each major source in nonattainment areas (see
sections 182(a)(2) and (b)(2)), and must not relax existing
requirements (see sections 110(l) and 193). The SJVUAPCD regulates an
ozone nonattainment area (see 40 CFR part 81), but Rule 4601 does not
regulate major sources, so Rule 4601 need not fulfill RACT.
Guidance and policy documents that we use to evaluate
enforceability and other requirements consistently include the
following:
1. ``Issues Relating to VOC Regulation Cutpoints, Deficiencies, and
Deviations,'' EPA, May 25, 1988 (the Bluebook).
2. ``Guidance Document for Correcting Common VOC & Other Rule
Deficiencies,'' EPA Region 9, August 21, 2001 (the Little Bluebook).
3. Control of Volatile Organic Emissions from Existing Stationary
Sources, Volume I: Control Methods for Surface Coating Operations (EPA-
450/2-76-028, 11/76, NTIS PB-260-386).
4. National VOC Emission Standards for Architectural Coatings (40
CFR 59 Subpart D, 9/11/98).
5. Technical Review Group's Proposed Architectural Coatings SCM
(CARB, 1989).
6. Suggested Control Measure for Architectural Coatings (CARB,
2000).
B. Does the rule meet the evaluation criteria?
We believe this rule is consistent with the relevant policy and
guidance regarding enforceability, RACT, and SIP relaxations. The TSD
has more information on our evaluation.
C. EPA Recommendations To Further Improve the Rule
The TSD describes one additional rule revision that we recommend
for the next time the local agency modifies the rule but is not
currently the basis for rule disapproval.
D. Public Comment and Final Action
Because EPA believes the submitted rule fulfills all relevant
requirements, we are proposing to fully approve it as described in
section 110(k)(3) of the Act. 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 this rule 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.);
[[Page 35169]]
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 disproportionate human health or environmental effects with
practical, appropriate, 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, Volatile organic
compounds.
Authority: 42 U.S.C. 7401 et seq.
Dated: May 19, 2011.
Jared Blumenfeld,
Regional Administrator, Region IX.
[FR Doc. 2011-15000 Filed 6-15-11; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P
