Revisions to the California State Implementation Plan, Placer County Air Pollution Control District and Feather River Air Quality Management District, 44809-44811 [2011-18834]
Download as PDF
Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 144 / Wednesday, July 27, 2011 / Rules and Regulations
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION
AGENCY
40 CFR Part 52
[EPA–R09–OAR–2011–0461; FRL–9439–1]
Revisions to the California State
Implementation Plan, Placer County
Air Pollution Control District and
Feather River Air Quality Management
District
ACTION:
Final rule.
EPA is finalizing a limited
approval and limited disapproval of
permitting rules submitted for the Placer
County Air Pollution Control District
(PCAPCD) and Feather River Air Quality
Management District (FRAQMD)
portions of the California State
Implementation Plan (SIP). These
revisions were proposed in the Federal
Register on May 19, 2011 and concern
SUMMARY:
Local agency
Rule No.
PCAPCD .....................................
FRAQMD ....................................
1 The
502
10.1
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:
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. Proposed Action
II. Public Comments and EPA Responses
III. EPA Action
IV. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews
I. Proposed Action
On May 19, 2011 (76 FR 28944), EPA
proposed a limited approval and limited
disapproval of the following rules that
were submitted for incorporation into
the California SIP.
Rule title
Amended
New Source Review .......................................................................
New Source Review .......................................................................
1 2/11/10
10/5/09
Submitted
7/20/10
7/20/10
proposed notice incorrectly stated that the amended date was October 28, 2010.
We proposed a limited approval
because we determined that these rules
improve the SIP and are largely
consistent with the applicable CAA
requirements. We simultaneously
proposed a limited disapproval because
some rule provisions do not satisfy the
requirements of section 110 and part D
of the Act. Specifically:
• Both rules are missing definitions
for the terms ‘‘begin actual
construction,’’ ‘‘commence’’ and
‘‘necessary preconstruction approvals or
permits.’’
• Both rules are missing provisions
meeting the requirements of 40 CFR
51.165(a)(5)(ii).
• Placer Rule 502 is missing a
definition for the term ‘‘Federally
enforceable.’’
Our proposed rule and related
Technical Support Document (TSD)
contain more information on the basis
for this rulemaking and on our
evaluation of the submittal.
mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with RULES
New Source Review (NSR) permit
programs for new and modified major
stationary sources of air pollution. We
are approving local rules that regulate
these emission sources under the Clean
Air Act as amended in 1990 (CAA or the
Act).
DATES: Effective Date: This rule is
effective on August 26, 2011.
ADDRESSES: EPA has established docket
number EPA–R09–OAR–2011–0461 for
this action. Generally, documents in the
docket for this action are available
electronically at https://
www.regulations.gov or in hard copy at
EPA Region IX, 75 Hawthorne Street,
San Francisco, California. While all
documents 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, multi-volume
reports), and some may not be publicly
available in either location (e.g., CBI).
44809
II. Public Comments and EPA
Responses
EPA’s proposed action provided a 30day public comment period. During this
period, we received no comments.
III. EPA Action
No comments were submitted that
change our basis for proposing a limited
approval and limited disapproval of the
submitted rules. Therefore, under CAA
VerDate Mar<15>2010
16:06 Jul 26, 2011
Jkt 223001
sections 110(k)(3) and 301(a) and for the
reasons set forth in our May 19, 2011
proposed rule, we are finalizing a
limited approval and limited
disapproval of PCAPCD Rule 502 and
FRAQMD Rule 10.1. We are finalizing a
limited approval of the submitted rules
because we continue to believe that the
rules improve the SIP and are largely
consistent with applicable CAA
requirements. This action incorporates
the submitted rules into the District
portion of the California SIP, including
those provisions identified as deficient.
As authorized under sections 110(k)(3)
and 301(a), EPA is simultaneously
finalizing a limited disapproval of
PCAPCD Rule 502 and FRAQMD Rule
10.1. As a result, sanctions will be
imposed unless EPA approves
subsequent SIP revisions that correct the
rule deficiencies within 18 months of
the effective date of this action. These
sanctions will be imposed under section
179 of the Act according to 40 CFR
52.31. In addition, EPA must
promulgate a Federal implementation
plan (FIP) under section 110(c) unless
we approve subsequent SIP revisions
that correct the rule deficiencies within
24 months. Note that the submitted
rules have been adopted by the PCAPCD
and the FRAQMD, and EPA’s final
limited disapproval does not prevent
the local agency from enforcing it. The
limited disapproval also does not
PO 00000
Frm 00049
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
prevent any portion of the rule from
being incorporated by reference into the
Federally enforceable SIP, as discussed
in a July 9, 1992 EPA memo found at:
https://www.epa.gov/nsr/ttnnsr01/gen/
pdf/memo-s.pdf.
IV. Statutory and Executive Order
Reviews
A. Executive Order 12866, Regulatory
Planning and Review
The Office of Management and Budget
(OMB) has exempted this regulatory
action from Executive Order 12866,
entitled ‘‘Regulatory Planning and
Review.’’
B. Paperwork Reduction Act
This action does not impose an
information collection burden under the
provisions of the Paperwork Reduction
Act, 44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq. Burden is
defined at 5 CFR 1320.3(b).
C. Regulatory Flexibility Act
The Regulatory Flexibility Act (RFA)
generally requires an agency to conduct
a regulatory flexibility analysis of any
rule subject to notice and comment
rulemaking requirements unless the
agency certifies that the rule will not
have a significant economic impact on
a substantial number of small entities.
Small entities include small businesses,
small not-for-profit enterprises, and
small governmental jurisdictions.
E:\FR\FM\27JYR1.SGM
27JYR1
44810
Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 144 / Wednesday, July 27, 2011 / Rules and Regulations
mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with RULES
This rule will not have a significant
impact on a substantial number of small
entities because SIP approvals and
limited approvals/limited disapprovals
under section 110 and subchapter I, part
D of the Clean Air Act do not create any
new requirements but simply approve
requirements that the State is already
imposing. Therefore, because this
limited approval/limited disapproval
action does not create any new
requirements, I certify that this action
will not have a significant economic
impact on a substantial number of small
entities.
Moreover, due to the nature of the
Federal-State relationship under the
Clean Air Act, preparation of flexibility
analysis would constitute Federal
inquiry into the economic
reasonableness of State action. The
Clean Air Act forbids EPA to base its
actions concerning SIPs on such
grounds. Union Electric Co., v. U.S.
EPA, 427 U.S. 246, 255–66 (1976); 42
U.S.C. 7410(a)(2).
D. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act
Under sections 202 of the Unfunded
Mandates Reform Act of 1995
(‘‘Unfunded Mandates Act’’), signed
into law on March 22, 1995, EPA must
prepare a budgetary impact statement to
accompany any proposed or final rule
that includes a Federal mandate that
may result in estimated costs to State,
local, or Tribal governments in the
aggregate; or to the private sector, of
$100 million or more. Under section
205, EPA must select the most costeffective and least burdensome
alternative that achieves the objectives
of the rule and is consistent with
statutory requirements. Section 203
requires EPA to establish a plan for
informing and advising any small
governments that may be significantly
or uniquely impacted by the rule.
EPA has determined that the limited
approval/limited disapproval action
promulgated does not include a Federal
mandate that may result in estimated
costs of $100 million or more to either
State, local, or Tribal governments in
the aggregate, or to the private sector.
This Federal action approves preexisting requirements under State or
local law, and imposes no new
requirements. Accordingly, no
additional costs to State, local, or Tribal
governments, or to the private sector,
result from this action.
E. Executive Order 13132, Federalism
Federalism (64 FR 43255, August 10,
1999) revokes and replaces Executive
Orders 12612 (Federalism) and 12875
(Enhancing the Intergovernmental
Partnership). Executive Order 13132
VerDate Mar<15>2010
16:06 Jul 26, 2011
Jkt 223001
requires EPA to develop an accountable
process to ensure ‘‘meaningful and
timely input by State and local officials
in the development of regulatory
policies that have federalism
implications.’’ ‘‘Policies that have
federalism implications’’ is defined in
the Executive Order to include
regulations that 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.’’ Under
Executive Order 13132, EPA may not
issue a regulation that has federalism
implications, that imposes substantial
direct compliance costs, and that is not
required by statute, unless the Federal
government provides the funds
necessary to pay the direct compliance
costs incurred by State and local
governments, or EPA consults with
State and local officials early in the
process of developing the proposed
regulation. EPA also may not issue a
regulation that has federalism
implications and that preempts State
law unless the Agency consults with
State and local officials early in the
process of developing the proposed
regulation.
This rule will 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, because it
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. Thus, the requirements of
section 6 of the Executive Order do not
apply to this rule.
F. Executive Order 13175, Coordination
With Indian Tribal Governments
Executive Order 13175, entitled
‘‘Consultation and Coordination with
Indian Tribal Governments’’ (65 FR
67249, November 9, 2000), requires EPA
to develop an accountable process to
ensure ‘‘meaningful and timely input by
tribal officials in the development of
regulatory policies that have tribal
implications.’’ This final rule does not
have Tribal implications, as specified in
Executive Order 13175. It will not have
substantial direct effects on Tribal
governments, 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.
PO 00000
Frm 00050
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
Thus, Executive Order 13175 does not
apply to this rule.
G. Executive Order 13045, Protection of
Children From Environmental Health
Risks and Safety Risks
EPA interprets Executive Order 13045
(62 FR 19885, April 23, 1997) as
applying only to those regulatory
actions that concern health or safety
risks, such that the analysis required
under section 5–501 of the Executive
Order has the potential to influence the
regulation. This rule is not subject to
Executive Order 13045, because it
approves a State rule implementing a
Federal standard.
H. Executive Order 13211, Actions That
Significantly Affect Energy Supply,
Distribution, or Use
This rule is not subject to Executive
Order 13211, ‘‘Actions Concerning
Regulations That Significantly Affect
Energy Supply, Distribution, or Use’’ (66
FR 28355, May 22, 2001) because it is
not a significant regulatory action under
Executive Order 12866.
I. National Technology Transfer and
Advancement Act
Section 12 of the National Technology
Transfer and Advancement Act
(NTTAA) of 1995 requires Federal
agencies to evaluate existing technical
standards when developing a new
regulation. To comply with NTTAA,
EPA must consider and use ‘‘voluntary
consensus standards’’ (VCS) if available
and applicable when developing
programs and policies unless doing so
would be inconsistent with applicable
law or otherwise impractical.
The EPA believes that VCS are
inapplicable to this action. Today’s
action does not require the public to
perform activities conducive to the use
of VCS.
J. Executive Order 12898: Federal
Actions To Address Environmental
Justice in Minority Populations and
Low-Income Populations
Executive Order 12898 (59 FR 7629,
Feb. 16, 1994) establishes Federal
executive policy on environmental
justice. Its main provision directs
Federal agencies, to the greatest extent
practicable and permitted by law, to
make environmental justice part of their
mission by identifying and addressing,
as appropriate, disproportionately high
and adverse human health or
environmental effects of their programs,
policies, and activities on minority
populations and low-income
populations in the United States.
E:\FR\FM\27JYR1.SGM
27JYR1
Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 144 / Wednesday, July 27, 2011 / Rules and Regulations
EPA lacks the discretionary authority
to address environmental justice in this
rulemaking.
K. Congressional Review Act
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. section 804(2). This
rule will be effective on August 26,
2011.
L. Petitions for Judicial Review
List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52
Environmental protection, Air
pollution control, Incorporation by
reference, Intergovernmental relations,
Nitrogen dioxide, Ozone, Particulate
matter, Reporting and recordkeeping
requirements, Volatile organic
compounds.
mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with RULES
Dated: June 30, 2011.
Jared Blumenfeld,
Regional Administrator, Region IX.
Part 52, Chapter I, Title 40 of the Code
of Federal Regulations is amended as
follows:
PART 52—[AMENDED]
1. The authority citation for Part 52
continues to read as follows:
■
Authority: 42 U.S.C. 7401 et seq.
VerDate Mar<15>2010
16:06 Jul 26, 2011
Jkt 223001
2. Section 52.220 is amended by
adding paragraphs (c)(381)(i)(E) and (F)
to read as follows:
■
Identification of plan.
*
*
*
*
*
(c) * * *
(381) * * *
(i) * * *
(E) Placer County Air Pollution
Control District.
(1) Rule 502, ‘‘New Source Review,’’
as adopted on February 11, 2010.
(F) Feather River Air Quality
Management District.
(1) Rule 10.1, ‘‘New Source Review,’’
as amended on October 5, 2009, except
section C, as adopted on February 8,
1993.
*
*
*
*
*
[FR Doc. 2011–18834 Filed 7–26–11; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560–50–P
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION
AGENCY
40 CFR Part 180
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 September 26,
2011. 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)).
EPA has established a
docket for this action under docket
identification (ID) number EPA–HQ–
OPP–2011–0531 All documents in the
docket are listed in the docket index
available at https://www.regulations.gov.
Although listed in the index, some
information is not publicly available,
e.g., Confidential Business Information
(CBI) or other information whose
disclosure is restricted by statute.
Certain other material, such as
copyrighted material, is not placed on
the Internet and will be publicly
available only in hard copy form.
Publicly available docket materials are
available in the electronic docket at
https://www.regulations.gov, or, if only
available in hard copy, at the OPP
Regulatory Public Docket in Rm. S–
4400, One Potomac Yard (South Bldg.),
2777 S. Crystal Dr., Arlington, VA. The
Docket Facility is open from 8:30 a.m.
to 4 p.m., Monday through Friday,
excluding legal holidays. The Docket
Facility telephone number is (703) 305–
5805.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Alganesh Debesai, Registration Division
(7505P), Office of Pesticide Programs,
Environmental Protection Agency, 1200
Pennsylvania Ave., NW., Washington,
DC 20460–0001; telephone number:
(703) 308–8353; e-mail address:
debesai.alganesh@epa.gov.
ADDRESSES:
Subpart F—California
§ 52.220
44811
[EPA–HQ–OPP–2011–0531; FRL–8880–5]
Carboxymethyl Guar Gum Sodium Salt
and Carboxymethyl-Hydroxypropyl
Guar; Exemption From the
Requirement of a Tolerance
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Environmental Protection
Agency (EPA).
ACTION: Final rule.
I. General Information
This regulation establishes an
exemption from the requirement of a
tolerance for residues of carboxymethyl
guar gum sodium salt (CAS Reg. No.
39346–76–4) and carboxymethylhydroxypropyl guar (CAS Reg. No.
68130–15–4); when used as an inert
ingredient (thicker/drift reduction
agent) in pesticide formulations applied
to growing crops. SciReg Inc., on behalf
of Rhodia Inc., submitted a petition to
EPA under the Federal Food, Drug, and
Cosmetic Act (FFDCA), requesting
establishment of an exemption from the
requirement of a tolerance. This
regulation eliminates the need to
establish a maximum permissible level
for residues of carboxymethyl guar gum
sodium salt and carboxymethylhydroxypropyl guar.
DATES: This regulation is effective July
27, 2011. Objections and requests for
hearings must be received on or before
September 26, 2011, and must be filed
in accordance with the instructions
provided in 40 CFR part 178 (see also
Unit I.C. of the SUPPLEMENTARY
INFORMATION).
You may be potentially affected by
this action if you are an agricultural
producer, food manufacturer, or
pesticide manufacturer. Potentially
affected entities may include, but are
not limited to:
• Crop production (NAICS code 111).
• Animal production (NAICS code
112).
• Food manufacturing (NAICS code
311).
• Pesticide manufacturing (NAICS
code 32532).
This listing is not intended to be
exhaustive, but rather provides a guide
for readers regarding entities likely to be
affected by this action. Other types of
entities not listed in this unit could also
be affected. The North American
Industrial Classification System
(NAICS) codes have been provided to
assist you and others in determining
whether this action might apply to
certain entities. If you have any
questions regarding the applicability of
this action to a particular entity, consult
the person listed under FOR FURTHER
INFORMATION CONTACT.
AGENCY:
SUMMARY:
PO 00000
Frm 00051
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
A. Does this action apply to me?
E:\FR\FM\27JYR1.SGM
27JYR1
Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 76, Number 144 (Wednesday, July 27, 2011)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 44809-44811]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2011-18834]
[[Page 44809]]
=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
40 CFR Part 52
[EPA-R09-OAR-2011-0461; FRL-9439-1]
Revisions to the California State Implementation Plan, Placer
County Air Pollution Control District and Feather River Air Quality
Management District
ACTION: Final rule.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: EPA is finalizing a limited approval and limited disapproval
of permitting rules submitted for the Placer County Air Pollution
Control District (PCAPCD) and Feather River Air Quality Management
District (FRAQMD) portions of the California State Implementation Plan
(SIP). These revisions were proposed in the Federal Register on May 19,
2011 and concern New Source Review (NSR) permit programs for new and
modified major stationary sources of air pollution. We are approving
local rules that regulate these emission sources under the Clean Air
Act as amended in 1990 (CAA or the Act).
DATES: Effective Date: This rule is effective on August 26, 2011.
ADDRESSES: EPA has established docket number EPA-R09-OAR-2011-0461 for
this action. Generally, documents in the docket for this action are
available electronically at https://www.regulations.gov or in hard copy
at EPA Region IX, 75 Hawthorne Street, San Francisco, California. While
all documents 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, multi-volume reports), 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: 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. Proposed Action
II. Public Comments and EPA Responses
III. EPA Action
IV. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews
I. Proposed Action
On May 19, 2011 (76 FR 28944), EPA proposed a limited approval and
limited disapproval of the following rules that were submitted for
incorporation into the California SIP.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Local agency Rule No. Rule title Amended Submitted
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
PCAPCD.................................. 502 New Source Review.............. \1\ 2/11/10 7/20/10
FRAQMD.................................. 10.1 New Source Review.............. 10/5/09 7/20/10
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ The proposed notice incorrectly stated that the amended date was October 28, 2010.
We proposed a limited approval because we determined that these
rules improve the SIP and are largely consistent with the applicable
CAA requirements. We simultaneously proposed a limited disapproval
because some rule provisions do not satisfy the requirements of section
110 and part D of the Act. Specifically:
Both rules are missing definitions for the terms ``begin
actual construction,'' ``commence'' and ``necessary preconstruction
approvals or permits.''
Both rules are missing provisions meeting the requirements
of 40 CFR 51.165(a)(5)(ii).
Placer Rule 502 is missing a definition for the term
``Federally enforceable.''
Our proposed rule and related Technical Support Document (TSD)
contain more information on the basis for this rulemaking and on our
evaluation of the submittal.
II. Public Comments and EPA Responses
EPA's proposed action provided a 30-day public comment period.
During this period, we received no comments.
III. EPA Action
No comments were submitted that change our basis for proposing a
limited approval and limited disapproval of the submitted rules.
Therefore, under CAA sections 110(k)(3) and 301(a) and for the reasons
set forth in our May 19, 2011 proposed rule, we are finalizing a
limited approval and limited disapproval of PCAPCD Rule 502 and FRAQMD
Rule 10.1. We are finalizing a limited approval of the submitted rules
because we continue to believe that the rules improve the SIP and are
largely consistent with applicable CAA requirements. This action
incorporates the submitted rules into the District portion of the
California SIP, including those provisions identified as deficient. As
authorized under sections 110(k)(3) and 301(a), EPA is simultaneously
finalizing a limited disapproval of PCAPCD Rule 502 and FRAQMD Rule
10.1. As a result, sanctions will be imposed unless EPA approves
subsequent SIP revisions that correct the rule deficiencies within 18
months of the effective date of this action. These sanctions will be
imposed under section 179 of the Act according to 40 CFR 52.31. In
addition, EPA must promulgate a Federal implementation plan (FIP) under
section 110(c) unless we approve subsequent SIP revisions that correct
the rule deficiencies within 24 months. Note that the submitted rules
have been adopted by the PCAPCD and the FRAQMD, and EPA's final limited
disapproval does not prevent the local agency from enforcing it. The
limited disapproval also does not prevent any portion of the rule from
being incorporated by reference into the Federally enforceable SIP, as
discussed in a July 9, 1992 EPA memo found at: https://www.epa.gov/nsr/ttnnsr01/gen/pdf/memo-s.pdf.
IV. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews
A. Executive Order 12866, Regulatory Planning and Review
The Office of Management and Budget (OMB) has exempted this
regulatory action from Executive Order 12866, entitled ``Regulatory
Planning and Review.''
B. Paperwork Reduction Act
This action does not impose an information collection burden under
the provisions of the Paperwork Reduction Act, 44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.
Burden is defined at 5 CFR 1320.3(b).
C. Regulatory Flexibility Act
The Regulatory Flexibility Act (RFA) generally requires an agency
to conduct a regulatory flexibility analysis of any rule subject to
notice and comment rulemaking requirements unless the agency certifies
that the rule will not have a significant economic impact on a
substantial number of small entities. Small entities include small
businesses, small not-for-profit enterprises, and small governmental
jurisdictions.
[[Page 44810]]
This rule will not have a significant impact on a substantial
number of small entities because SIP approvals and limited approvals/
limited disapprovals under section 110 and subchapter I, part D of the
Clean Air Act do not create any new requirements but simply approve
requirements that the State is already imposing. Therefore, because
this limited approval/limited disapproval action does not create any
new requirements, I certify that this action will not have a
significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities.
Moreover, due to the nature of the Federal-State relationship under
the Clean Air Act, preparation of flexibility analysis would constitute
Federal inquiry into the economic reasonableness of State action. The
Clean Air Act forbids EPA to base its actions concerning SIPs on such
grounds. Union Electric Co., v. U.S. EPA, 427 U.S. 246, 255-66 (1976);
42 U.S.C. 7410(a)(2).
D. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act
Under sections 202 of the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995
(``Unfunded Mandates Act''), signed into law on March 22, 1995, EPA
must prepare a budgetary impact statement to accompany any proposed or
final rule that includes a Federal mandate that may result in estimated
costs to State, local, or Tribal governments in the aggregate; or to
the private sector, of $100 million or more. Under section 205, EPA
must select the most cost-effective and least burdensome alternative
that achieves the objectives of the rule and is consistent with
statutory requirements. Section 203 requires EPA to establish a plan
for informing and advising any small governments that may be
significantly or uniquely impacted by the rule.
EPA has determined that the limited approval/limited disapproval
action promulgated does not include a Federal mandate that may result
in estimated costs of $100 million or more to either State, local, or
Tribal governments in the aggregate, or to the private sector. This
Federal action approves pre-existing requirements under State or local
law, and imposes no new requirements. Accordingly, no additional costs
to State, local, or Tribal governments, or to the private sector,
result from this action.
E. Executive Order 13132, Federalism
Federalism (64 FR 43255, August 10, 1999) revokes and replaces
Executive Orders 12612 (Federalism) and 12875 (Enhancing the
Intergovernmental Partnership). Executive Order 13132 requires EPA to
develop an accountable process to ensure ``meaningful and timely input
by State and local officials in the development of regulatory policies
that have federalism implications.'' ``Policies that have federalism
implications'' is defined in the Executive Order to include regulations
that 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.'' Under Executive Order 13132, EPA may not issue a
regulation that has federalism implications, that imposes substantial
direct compliance costs, and that is not required by statute, unless
the Federal government provides the funds necessary to pay the direct
compliance costs incurred by State and local governments, or EPA
consults with State and local officials early in the process of
developing the proposed regulation. EPA also may not issue a regulation
that has federalism implications and that preempts State law unless the
Agency consults with State and local officials early in the process of
developing the proposed regulation.
This rule will 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, because it
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. Thus, the
requirements of section 6 of the Executive Order do not apply to this
rule.
F. Executive Order 13175, Coordination With Indian Tribal Governments
Executive Order 13175, entitled ``Consultation and Coordination
with Indian Tribal Governments'' (65 FR 67249, November 9, 2000),
requires EPA to develop an accountable process to ensure ``meaningful
and timely input by tribal officials in the development of regulatory
policies that have tribal implications.'' This final rule does not have
Tribal implications, as specified in Executive Order 13175. It will not
have substantial direct effects on Tribal governments, 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. Thus, Executive Order 13175 does not
apply to this rule.
G. Executive Order 13045, Protection of Children From Environmental
Health Risks and Safety Risks
EPA interprets Executive Order 13045 (62 FR 19885, April 23, 1997)
as applying only to those regulatory actions that concern health or
safety risks, such that the analysis required under section 5-501 of
the Executive Order has the potential to influence the regulation. This
rule is not subject to Executive Order 13045, because it approves a
State rule implementing a Federal standard.
H. Executive Order 13211, Actions That Significantly Affect Energy
Supply, Distribution, or Use
This rule is not subject to Executive Order 13211, ``Actions
Concerning Regulations That Significantly Affect Energy Supply,
Distribution, or Use'' (66 FR 28355, May 22, 2001) because it is not a
significant regulatory action under Executive Order 12866.
I. National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act
Section 12 of the National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act
(NTTAA) of 1995 requires Federal agencies to evaluate existing
technical standards when developing a new regulation. To comply with
NTTAA, EPA must consider and use ``voluntary consensus standards''
(VCS) if available and applicable when developing programs and policies
unless doing so would be inconsistent with applicable law or otherwise
impractical.
The EPA believes that VCS are inapplicable to this action. Today's
action does not require the public to perform activities conducive to
the use of VCS.
J. Executive Order 12898: Federal Actions To Address Environmental
Justice in Minority Populations and Low-Income Populations
Executive Order 12898 (59 FR 7629, Feb. 16, 1994) establishes
Federal executive policy on environmental justice. Its main provision
directs Federal agencies, to the greatest extent practicable and
permitted by law, to make environmental justice part of their mission
by identifying and addressing, as appropriate, disproportionately high
and adverse human health or environmental effects of their programs,
policies, and activities on minority populations and low-income
populations in the United States.
[[Page 44811]]
EPA lacks the discretionary authority to address environmental
justice in this rulemaking.
K. Congressional Review Act
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.
section 804(2). This rule will be effective on August 26, 2011.
L. Petitions for Judicial Review
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 September 26, 2011. 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, Nitrogen dioxide, Ozone,
Particulate matter, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements, Volatile
organic compounds.
Dated: June 30, 2011.
Jared Blumenfeld,
Regional Administrator, Region IX.
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)(381)(i)(E) and
(F) to read as follows:
Sec. 52.220 Identification of plan.
* * * * *
(c) * * *
(381) * * *
(i) * * *
(E) Placer County Air Pollution Control District.
(1) Rule 502, ``New Source Review,'' as adopted on February 11,
2010.
(F) Feather River Air Quality Management District.
(1) Rule 10.1, ``New Source Review,'' as amended on October 5,
2009, except section C, as adopted on February 8, 1993.
* * * * *
[FR Doc. 2011-18834 Filed 7-26-11; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P