Revisions to the California State Implementation Plan, Antelope Valley Air Quality Management District and Eastern Kern and Santa Barbara County; Air Pollution Control Districts, 26448-26450 [2012-10734]

Download as PDF 26448 Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 87 / Friday, May 4, 2012 / Rules and Regulations (SO2) from the Portland Generating Station in Northampton County, Upper Mount Bethel Township, Pennsylvania (Portland) significantly contribute to nonattainment and interfere with maintenance of the 1-hour SO2 national ambient air quality standard (NAAQS) in New Jersey. The owners and operators of Portland shall comply with the requirements in paragraphs (a) through (d) of this section. * * * * * [FR Doc. 2012–10718 Filed 5–3–12; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6560–50–P ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY 40 CFR Part 52 [EPA–R09–OAR–2011–0643; FRL–9652–4] Revisions to the California State Implementation Plan, Antelope Valley Air Quality Management District and Eastern Kern and Santa Barbara County; Air Pollution Control Districts Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). ACTION: Direct final rule. AGENCY: EPA is taking direct final action to approve revisions to the Antelope Valley Air Quality Management District (AVAQMD), Eastern Kern Air Pollution Control District (EKAPCD), and Santa Barbara County Air Pollution Control District (SBCAPCD) portions of the California State Implementation Plan (SIP). Under authority of the Clean Air Act as amended in 1990 (CAA or the Act), we are approving local rules that define terms used in other air pollution regulation in these areas and approving a rule rescission that addresses SUMMARY: Petroleum Coke Calcining Operations— Oxides of Sulfur. This rule is effective on July 3, 2012 without further notice, unless EPA receives adverse comments by June 4, 2012. If we receive such comments, we will publish a timely withdrawal in the Federal Register to notify the public that this direct final rule will not take effect. DATES: Submit comments, identified by docket number EPA–R09– OAR–2011–0643, by one of the following methods: 1. Federal eRulemaking Portal: www.regulations.gov. Follow the on-line instructions. 2. Email: 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 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 email. 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 email 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 ADDRESSES: 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 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 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: Cynthia Allen, EPA Region IX, (415) 947–4120, allen.cynthia@epa.gov SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Throughout this document, ‘‘we,’’ ‘‘us’’ and ‘‘our’’ refer to EPA. Table of Contents I. The State’s Submittal A. What rules did the State submit? B. Are there other versions of these rules? C. What is the purpose of the submitted rules? II. EPA’s Evaluation and Action A. How is EPA evaluating the rules? B. Do the rules meet the evaluation criteria? C. Public Comment and Final Action III. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews I. The State’s Submittal A. What rules did the State submit? Table 1 lists the rule we are rescinding and the rules we are approving with the dates that they were adopted by the local air agencies and submitted by the California Air Resources Board (CARB). TABLE 1—SUBMITTED RULES Local agency erowe on DSK2VPTVN1PROD with RULES AVAQMD .............. EKAPCD ............... SBCAPCD ............ Rule No. 1119 102 102 Rule title Petroleum Coke Calcining Operations—Oxides of Sulfur (rescinded) .................. Definitions ............................................................................................................... Definitions ............................................................................................................... On July 15, 2011, EPA determined that the submittal for AVAQMD Rule 1119, EKAPCD Rule 102, and SBCAPCD Rule 102 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 these rules? We approved earlier versions of these rules into the SIP on the dates listed: AVAQMD Rule 1119 on September 28, VerDate Mar<15>2010 15:04 May 03, 2012 Adopted Jkt 226001 1981 (46 FR 47451), EKAPCD Rule 102 on March 7, 2011 (76 FR 12280), and SBCAPCD Rule 102 on May 6, 2009 (74 FR 20872). The SBCAPCD amended revisions to the SIP-approved version on September 20, 2010 and CARB submitted them to us on April 5, 2011. While we can act on only the most recently submitted version, we have reviewed materials provided with previous submittals. PO 00000 Frm 00032 Fmt 4700 Sfmt 4700 01/18/11 01/13/11 01/20/11 Submitted 06/21/11 06/21/11 06/21/11 C. What is the purpose of the submitted rule revisions? Section 110(a) of the CAA requires states to submit regulations that control volatile organic compounds, oxides of nitrogen, particulate matter, and other air pollutants which harm human health and the environment. These rules were developed as part of the local agency’s program to control these pollutants. Antelope Valley AQMD Rule 1119 applies to the operation of petroleum E:\FR\FM\04MYR1.SGM 04MYR1 Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 87 / Friday, May 4, 2012 / Rules and Regulations coke calcining equipment. The AVAQMD has determined that there are no petroleum coke calcining operations located within the District and none are anticipated in the future. The AVAQMD has rescinded this rule and has certified that there are no sources covered by this rule in the jurisdiction of the AVAQMD. Since this rule is currently part of the SIP for AVAQMD, a resolution certifying that no sources exist in the AVAQMD is required by section 182(b)(2). Eastern Kern APCD Rule 102, Definitions, is being amended to define a number of terms that are used in other District rules. The amendments include updating the name of the District, adding ten new definitions, revising language in three definitions, and adding one compound to the Exempt Compounds list. Minor formatting issues are also being corrected. Santa Barbara County Rule 102, is amended by adding a new definition for ‘‘greenhouse gas or greenhouse gases.’’ In addition, the definition of ‘‘attainment pollutant’’ has been clarified to exclude greenhouse gases. EPA’s technical support documents (TSDs) have more information about these rules. II. EPA’s Evaluation and Action A. How is EPA evaluating the rules? These rules describe administrative provisions and definitions that support emission controls found in other local agency requirements. In combination with the other requirements, these rules must be enforceable (see section 110(a) of the Act) and must not relax existing requirements (see sections 110(l) and 193). EPA policy that we used to evaluate enforceability requirements consistently includes the Bluebook (‘‘Issues Relating to VOC Regulation Cutpoints, Deficiencies, and Deviations,’’ EPA, May 25, 1988) and the Little Bluebook (‘‘Guidance Document for Correcting Common VOC & Other Rule Deficiencies,’’ EPA Region 9, August 21, 2001). B. Do the rules meet the evaluation criteria? erowe on DSK2VPTVN1PROD with RULES We believe these rules are consistent with the relevant policy and guidance regarding enforceability and SIP relaxations. The TSDs have more information on our evaluation. C. Public Comment and Final Action As authorized in section 110(k)(3) of the Act, EPA is fully approving the submitted rules because we believe they fulfill all relevant requirements. We do not think anyone will object to this VerDate Mar<15>2010 15:04 May 03, 2012 Jkt 226001 approval, so we are finalizing it without proposing it in advance. However, in the Proposed Rules section of this Federal Register, we are simultaneously proposing approval of the same submitted rules. If we receive adverse comments by June 4, 2012, we will publish a timely withdrawal in the Federal Register to notify the public that the direct final approval will not take effect and we will address the comments in a subsequent final action based on the proposal. If we do not receive timely adverse comments, the direct final approval will be effective without further notice on July 3, 2012. This will incorporate these rules into the federally enforceable SIP. Please note that if EPA receives adverse comment on an amendment, paragraph, or section of this rule and if that provision may be severed from the remainder of the rule, EPA may adopt as final those provisions of the rule that are not the subject of an adverse comment. III. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews Under 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 PO 00000 Frm 00033 Fmt 4700 Sfmt 4700 26449 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, these rules do 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 it will not impose substantial direct costs on tribal governments or preempt tribal law. 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 action and other required information to the U.S. Senate, the U.S. House of Representatives, and the Comptroller General of the United States prior to publication of the rule in the Federal Register. A major rule cannot take effect until 60 days after it is published in the Federal Register. This action is not a ‘‘major rule’’ as defined by 5 U.S.C. 804(2). Under section 307(b)(1) of the Clean Air Act, petitions for judicial review of this action must be filed in the United States Court of Appeals for the appropriate circuit by July 3, 2012. Filing a petition for reconsideration by the Administrator of this final rule does not affect the finality of this action 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. Parties with objections to this direct final rule are encouraged to file a comment in response to the parallel notice of proposed rulemaking for this action published in the Proposed Rules section of today’s Federal Register, rather than file an immediate petition for judicial review of this direct final rule, so that EPA can withdraw this direct final rule E:\FR\FM\04MYR1.SGM 04MYR1 26450 Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 87 / Friday, May 4, 2012 / Rules and Regulations and address the comment in the proposed rulemaking. This action may not be challenged in later proceedings to enforce its requirements (see section 307(b)(2)). ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52 Metconazole; Pesticide Tolerances Environmental protection, Air pollution control, Incorporation by reference, Intergovernmental relations, Ozone, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements, Volatile organic compounds. AGENCY: Dated: March 8, 2012. 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. Subpart F—California 2. Section 52.220 is amended by adding paragraphs (c)(88)(iii)(C) and (c)(391) to read as follows: ■ § 52.220 Identification of plan. erowe on DSK2VPTVN1PROD with RULES * * * * * (c) * * * (88) * * * (iii) * * * (C) In Resolution 11–04 dated January 18, 2011, Antelope Valley Air Quality Management District certified that no sources which would be subject to Rule 1119, ‘‘Petroleum Coke Calcining Operations,’’ exist in the AVAQMD. Therefore, Rule 1119 has been rescinded and is removed from the SIP. * * * * * (391) New and amended regulations were submitted on June 21, 2011 by the Governor’s designee. (i) Incorporation by reference. (A) Eastern Kern Air Pollution Control District. (1) Rule 102, ‘‘Definitions,’’ amended on January 13, 2011. (B) Santa Barbara County Air Pollution Control District. (1) Rule 102, ‘‘Definitions,’’ revised on January 20, 2011. * * * * * [FR Doc. 2012–10734 Filed 5–3–12; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6560–50–P VerDate Mar<15>2010 15:04 May 03, 2012 Jkt 226001 40 CFR Part 180 [EPA–HQ–OPP–2011–0179; FRL–9345–6] Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). ACTION: Final rule. This regulation establishes a tolerance for residues of Metconazole, including its metabolites and degradates in or on sugarcane, cane. BASF Corporation requested the tolerance under the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act (FFDCA). DATES: This regulation is effective May 4, 2012. Objections and requests for hearings must be received on or before July 3, 2012, and must be filed in accordance with the instructions provided in 40 CFR part 178 (see also Unit I.C. of the SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION). ADDRESSES: EPA has established a docket for this action under docket identification (ID) number EPA–HQ– OPP–2011–0179. 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: Tamue L. Gibson, Registration Division (7505P), Office of Pesticide Programs, Environmental Protection Agency, 1200 Pennsylvania Ave. NW., Washington, DC 20460–0001; telephone number: (703) 305–9096; email address: gibson.tamue@epa.gov. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: SUMMARY: I. General Information A. Does this action apply to me? You may be potentially affected by this action if you are an agricultural PO 00000 Frm 00034 Fmt 4700 Sfmt 4700 producer, food manufacturer, or pesticide manufacturer. Potentially affected entities may include, but are not limited to those engaged in the following activities: • 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 to provide 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. B. How can I get electronic access to other related information? You may access a frequently updated electronic version of EPA’s tolerance regulations at 40 CFR part 180 through the Government Printing Office’s e-CFR site at https://ecfr.gpoaccess.gov/cgi/t/ text/text-idx?&c=ecfr&tpl=/ecfrbrowse/ Title40/40tab_02.tpl. C. How can I file an objection or hearing request? Under FFDCA section 408(g), 21 U.S.C. 346a, any person may file an objection to any aspect of this regulation and may also request a hearing on those objections. You must file your objection or request a hearing on this regulation in accordance with the instructions provided in 40 CFR part 178. To ensure proper receipt by EPA, you must identify docket ID number EPA–HQ– OPP–2011–0179 in the subject line on the first page of your submission. All objections and requests for a hearing must be in writing, and must be received by the Hearing Clerk on or before July 3, 2012. Addresses for mail and hand delivery of objections and hearing requests are provided in 40 CFR 178.25(b). In addition to filing an objection or hearing request with the Hearing Clerk as described in 40 CFR part 178, please submit a copy of the filing that does not contain any CBI for inclusion in the public docket. Information not marked confidential pursuant to 40 CFR part 2 may be disclosed publicly by EPA without prior notice. Submit a copy of your non-CBI objection or hearing E:\FR\FM\04MYR1.SGM 04MYR1

Agencies

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

[Federal Register Volume 77, Number 87 (Friday, May 4, 2012)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 26448-26450]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2012-10734]

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

40 CFR Part 52

[EPA-R09-OAR-2011-0643; FRL-9652-4]

Revisions to the California State Implementation Plan, Antelope
Valley Air Quality Management District and Eastern Kern and Santa
Barbara County; Air Pollution Control Districts

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Direct final rule.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

SUMMARY: EPA is taking direct final action to approve revisions to the
Antelope Valley Air Quality Management District (AVAQMD), Eastern Kern
Air Pollution Control District (EKAPCD), and Santa Barbara County Air
Pollution Control District (SBCAPCD) portions of the California State
Implementation Plan (SIP). Under authority of the Clean Air Act as
amended in 1990 (CAA or the Act), we are approving local rules that
define terms used in other air pollution regulation in these areas and
approving a rule rescission that addresses Petroleum Coke Calcining
Operations--Oxides of Sulfur.

DATES: This rule is effective on July 3, 2012 without further notice,
unless EPA receives adverse comments by June 4, 2012. If we receive
such comments, we will publish a timely withdrawal in the Federal
Register to notify the public that this direct final rule will not take
effect.

ADDRESSES: Submit comments, identified by docket number EPA-R09-OAR-
2011-0643, by one of the following methods:
1. Federal eRulemaking Portal: www.regulations.gov. Follow the on-
line instructions.
2. Email: 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 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 email.
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 email
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: Generally, documents in the docket for this action are
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 at 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: Cynthia Allen, EPA Region IX, (415)
947-4120, allen.cynthia@epa.gov

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Throughout this document, ``we,'' ``us'' and
``our'' refer to EPA.

Table of Contents

I. The State's Submittal
A. What rules did the State submit?
B. Are there other versions of these rules?
C. What is the purpose of the submitted rules?
II. EPA's Evaluation and Action
A. How is EPA evaluating the rules?
B. Do the rules meet the evaluation criteria?
C. Public Comment and Final Action
III. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews

I. The State's Submittal

A. What rules did the State submit?

Table 1 lists the rule we are rescinding and the rules we are
approving with the dates that they were adopted by the local air
agencies and submitted by the California Air Resources Board (CARB).

Table 1--Submitted Rules
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Local agency Rule No. Rule title Adopted Submitted
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
AVAQMD................................ 1119 Petroleum Coke Calcining 01/18/11 06/21/11
Operations--Oxides of Sulfur
(rescinded).
EKAPCD................................ 102 Definitions....................... 01/13/11 06/21/11
SBCAPCD............................... 102 Definitions....................... 01/20/11 06/21/11
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

On July 15, 2011, EPA determined that the submittal for AVAQMD Rule
1119, EKAPCD Rule 102, and SBCAPCD Rule 102 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 these rules?

We approved earlier versions of these rules into the SIP on the
dates listed: AVAQMD Rule 1119 on September 28, 1981 (46 FR 47451),
EKAPCD Rule 102 on March 7, 2011 (76 FR 12280), and SBCAPCD Rule 102 on
May 6, 2009 (74 FR 20872). The SBCAPCD amended revisions to the SIP-
approved version on September 20, 2010 and CARB submitted them to us on
April 5, 2011. While we can act on only the most recently submitted
version, we have reviewed materials provided with previous submittals.

C. What is the purpose of the submitted rule revisions?

Section 110(a) of the CAA requires states to submit regulations
that control volatile organic compounds, oxides of nitrogen,
particulate matter, and other air pollutants which harm human health
and the environment. These rules were developed as part of the local
agency's program to control these pollutants.
Antelope Valley AQMD Rule 1119 applies to the operation of
petroleum

[[Page 26449]]

coke calcining equipment. The AVAQMD has determined that there are no
petroleum coke calcining operations located within the District and
none are anticipated in the future. The AVAQMD has rescinded this rule
and has certified that there are no sources covered by this rule in the
jurisdiction of the AVAQMD. Since this rule is currently part of the
SIP for AVAQMD, a resolution certifying that no sources exist in the
AVAQMD is required by section 182(b)(2).
Eastern Kern APCD Rule 102, Definitions, is being amended to define
a number of terms that are used in other District rules. The amendments
include updating the name of the District, adding ten new definitions,
revising language in three definitions, and adding one compound to the
Exempt Compounds list. Minor formatting issues are also being
corrected.
Santa Barbara County Rule 102, is amended by adding a new
definition for ``greenhouse gas or greenhouse gases.'' In addition, the
definition of ``attainment pollutant'' has been clarified to exclude
greenhouse gases.
EPA's technical support documents (TSDs) have more information
about these rules.

II. EPA's Evaluation and Action

A. How is EPA evaluating the rules?

These rules describe administrative provisions and definitions that
support emission controls found in other local agency requirements. In
combination with the other requirements, these rules must be
enforceable (see section 110(a) of the Act) and must not relax existing
requirements (see sections 110(l) and 193). EPA policy that we used to
evaluate enforceability requirements consistently includes the Bluebook
(``Issues Relating to VOC Regulation Cutpoints, Deficiencies, and
Deviations,'' EPA, May 25, 1988) and the Little Bluebook (``Guidance
Document for Correcting Common VOC & Other Rule Deficiencies,'' EPA
Region 9, August 21, 2001).

B. Do the rules meet the evaluation criteria?

We believe these rules are consistent with the relevant policy and
guidance regarding enforceability and SIP relaxations. The TSDs have
more information on our evaluation.

C. Public Comment and Final Action

As authorized in section 110(k)(3) of the Act, EPA is fully
approving the submitted rules because we believe they fulfill all
relevant requirements. We do not think anyone will object to this
approval, so we are finalizing it without proposing it in advance.
However, in the Proposed Rules section of this Federal Register, we are
simultaneously proposing approval of the same submitted rules. If we
receive adverse comments by June 4, 2012, we will publish a timely
withdrawal in the Federal Register to notify the public that the direct
final approval will not take effect and we will address the comments in
a subsequent final action based on the proposal. If we do not receive
timely adverse comments, the direct final approval will be effective
without further notice on July 3, 2012. This will incorporate these
rules into the federally enforceable SIP.
Please note that if EPA receives adverse comment on an amendment,
paragraph, or section of this rule and if that provision may be severed
from the remainder of the rule, EPA may adopt as final those provisions
of the rule that are not the subject of an adverse comment.

III. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews

Under 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 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, these rules do 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 it will not impose substantial direct costs on tribal
governments or preempt tribal law.
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 action and
other required information to the U.S. Senate, the U.S. House of
Representatives, and the Comptroller General of the United States prior
to publication of the rule in the Federal Register. A major rule cannot
take effect until 60 days after it is published in the Federal
Register. This action is not a ``major rule'' as defined by 5 U.S.C.
804(2).
Under section 307(b)(1) of the Clean Air Act, petitions for
judicial review of this action must be filed in the United States Court
of Appeals for the appropriate circuit by July 3, 2012. Filing a
petition for reconsideration by the Administrator of this final rule
does not affect the finality of this action 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. Parties with objections to this direct final
rule are encouraged to file a comment in response to the parallel
notice of proposed rulemaking for this action published in the Proposed
Rules section of today's Federal Register, rather than file an
immediate petition for judicial review of this direct final rule, so
that EPA can withdraw this direct final rule

[[Page 26450]]

and address the comment in the proposed rulemaking. This action may not
be challenged in later 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, Ozone, Reporting and
recordkeeping requirements, Volatile organic compounds.

Dated: March 8, 2012.
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)(88)(iii)(C) and
(c)(391) to read as follows:

Sec. 52.220 Identification of plan.

* * * * *
(c) * * *
(88) * * *
(iii) * * *
(C) In Resolution 11-04 dated January 18, 2011, Antelope Valley Air
Quality Management District certified that no sources which would be
subject to Rule 1119, ``Petroleum Coke Calcining Operations,'' exist in
the AVAQMD. Therefore, Rule 1119 has been rescinded and is removed from
the SIP.
* * * * *
(391) New and amended regulations were submitted on June 21, 2011
by the Governor's designee.
(i) Incorporation by reference.
(A) Eastern Kern Air Pollution Control District.
(1) Rule 102, ``Definitions,'' amended on January 13, 2011.
(B) Santa Barbara County Air Pollution Control District.
(1) Rule 102, ``Definitions,'' revised on January 20, 2011.
* * * * *

[FR Doc. 2012-10734 Filed 5-3-12; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P

This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.