Revisions to the California State Implementation Plan, South Coast Air Quality Management District, 66780-66781 [2012-27226]
Download as PDF
<![CDATA[
66780
Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 216 / Wednesday, November 7, 2012 / Proposed Rules
have been disclosed to OEE on the date
of the initial notification for purposes of
paragraph (b)(3) of this section. The
Director of OEE may extend this 180day deadline upon a determination in
his or her discretion that U.S.
Government interests would be served
by an extension or that the person
making the initial notification has
shown that more than 180 days is
reasonably needed to complete the
narrative account. The Director of OEE
in his or her discretion may place
conditions on the approval of an
extension. For example, the Director of
OEE may require that the disclosing
person agree to toll the statute of
limitations with respect to violations
disclosed in the initial notification or
discovered during the review to prepare
the narrative account, and/or require the
disclosing person to undertake specified
interim remedial compliance measures.
Failure to meet the deadline (either the
initial 180-day deadline or an extended
deadline granted by the Director of OEE)
would not be an additional violation of
the EAR, but such failure may reduce or
eliminate the mitigating impact of the
voluntary disclosure under Supp. No. 1
to this part.
*
*
*
*
*
PART 766—[AMENDED]
3. The authority citation paragraph for
part 766 continues to read as follows:
Authority: 50 U.S.C. app. 2401 et seq.; 50
U.S.C. 1701 et seq.; E.O. 13222, 66 FR 44025,
3 CFR, 2001 Comp., p. 783; Notice of August
15, 2012, 77 FR 49699 (August 16, 2012).
4. Section 766.3 is amended by
revising paragraphs (b)(1) and (c) to read
as follows:
§ 766.3 Institution of administrative
enforcement proceedings.
pmangrum on DSK3VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS-1
*
*
*
*
*
(b) * * *
(1) By sending a copy by registered or
certified mail or by express mail or
commercial courier or delivery service
addressed to the respondent at the
respondent’s last known address; * * *
(c) The date of service of notice of the
issuance of a charging letter instituting
an administrative enforcement
proceeding, or service of notice of the
issuance of a supplement or amendment
to a charging letter, is the date of its
delivery, or of its attempted delivery by
any means described in paragraph (b)(1)
of this section.
Dated November 2, 2012.
Kevin J. Wolf,
Assistant Secretary for Export
Administration.
[FR Doc. 2012–27206 Filed 11–6–12; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3510–33–P
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION
AGENCY
40 CFR Part 52
[EPA–R09–OAR–2012–0827; FRL–9749–5]
Revisions to the California State
Implementation Plan, South Coast Air
Quality Management District
Environmental Protection
Agency (EPA).
ACTION: Proposed rule.
AGENCY:
EPA is proposing to approve
revisions to the South Coast Air Quality
Management District (SCAQMD) portion
of the California State Implementation
Plan (SIP). These revisions concern
volatile organic compound (VOC)
emissions from architectural coatings.
We are approving a local rule that
regulates these emission sources under
the Clean Air Act (CAA or the Act). We
are taking comments on this proposal
and plan to follow with a final action.
DATES: Any comments must arrive by
December 7, 2012.
ADDRESSES: Submit comments,
identified by docket number EPA–R09–
OAR–2012–0827, by one of the
following methods:
1. Federal eRulemaking Portal:
www.regulations.gov. Follow the online
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
SUMMARY:
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:
Nicole Law, EPA Region IX, (415) 947–
4126, law.nicole@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 revisions?
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
SCAQMD .............................
VerDate Mar<15>2010
15:18 Nov 06, 2012
Rule No.
1113
Jkt 229001
Rule title
Amended
Architectural Coatings ............................................................................
PO 00000
Frm 00033
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
E:\FR\FM\07NOP1.SGM
07NOP1
06/03/11
Submitted
09/27/11
Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 216 / Wednesday, November 7, 2012 / Proposed Rules
On October 24, 2011, EPA determined
that the submittal for SCAQMD Rule
1113 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 approved an earlier version of
Rule 1113 into the SIP on August 17,
2011 (76 FR 50891). The SCAQMD
adopted revisions to the SIP-approved
version on June 3, 2011 and CARB
submitted them to us on September 27,
2011.
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 1113 provides VOC
limits for architectural coatings. The
major revisions to the rule include
limiting and phasing out the averaging
compliance option and introducing
VOC limits for previously unregulated
colorants. EPA’s technical support
document (TSD) has more information
about these rules.
II. EPA’s Evaluation and Action
pmangrum on DSK3VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS-1
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).
Guidance and policy documents that
we use to evaluate 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. ‘‘Suggested Control Measure for
Architectural Coatings,’’ CARB, October
2007.
4. ‘‘Improving Air Quality with
Economic Incentive Programs,’’ EPA,
January 2001.
B. Does the rule meet the evaluation
criteria?
We believe this rule is consistent with
the relevant policy and guidance
regarding enforceability and SIP
VerDate Mar<15>2010
15:18 Nov 06, 2012
Jkt 229001
relaxations. The TSD has more
information on our evaluation.
C. EPA Recommendations To Further
Improve the Rule
The TSD describes additional rule
revisions that we recommend for the
next time the local agency modifies the
rule but are 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 proposed action
merely proposes to approve State law as
meeting Federal requirements and does
not impose additional requirements
beyond those imposed by State law. For
that reason, this proposed action:
• Is not a ‘‘significant regulatory
action’’ subject to review by the Office
of Management and Budget under
Executive Order 12866 (58 FR 51735,
October 4, 1993);
• does not impose an information
collection burden under the provisions
of the Paperwork Reduction Act (44
U.S.C. 3501 et seq.);
• is certified as not having a
significant economic impact on a
substantial number of small entities
under the Regulatory Flexibility Act (5
U.S.C. 601 et seq.);
• does not contain any unfunded
mandate or significantly or uniquely
affect small governments, as described
in the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act
of 1995 (Pub. L. 104–4);
• does not have Federalism
implications as specified in Executive
Order 13132 (64 FR 43255, August 10,
1999);
• is not an economically significant
regulatory action based on health or
safety risks subject to Executive Order
13045 (62 FR 19885, April 23, 1997);
PO 00000
Frm 00034
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
66781
• 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 proposed action 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, Incorporation by
reference, Intergovernmental relations,
Ozone, Reporting and recordkeeping
requirements, Volatile organic
compounds.
Authority: 42 U.S.C. 7401 et seq.
Dated: October 26, 2012.
Jared Blumenfeld,
Regional Administrator, Region IX.
[FR Doc. 2012–27226 Filed 11–6–12; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560–50–P
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION
AGENCY
40 CFR Parts 174 and 180
[EPA–HQ–OPP–2012–0001; FRL–9367–5]
Notice of Filing of Several Pesticide
Petitions Filed for Residues of
Pesticide Chemicals in or on Various
Commodities
Environmental Protection
Agency (EPA).
ACTION: Notice of filing of petitions and
request for comment.
AGENCY:
This document announces the
Agency’s receipt of several initial filings
of pesticide petitions requesting the
establishment or modification of
regulations for residues of pesticide
chemicals in or on various commodities.
DATES: Comments must be received on
or before December 7, 2012.
ADDRESSES: Submit your comments,
identified by docket identification (ID)
SUMMARY:
E:\FR\FM\07NOP1.SGM
07NOP1
]]>Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 77, Number 216 (Wednesday, November 7, 2012)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 66780-66781]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2012-27226]
=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
40 CFR Part 52
[EPA-R09-OAR-2012-0827; FRL-9749-5]
Revisions to the California State Implementation Plan, South
Coast Air Quality Management District
AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).
ACTION: Proposed rule.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: EPA is proposing to approve revisions to the South Coast Air
Quality Management District (SCAQMD) portion of the California State
Implementation Plan (SIP). These revisions concern volatile organic
compound (VOC) emissions from architectural coatings. We are approving
a local rule that regulates these emission sources under the Clean Air
Act (CAA or the Act). We are taking comments on this proposal and plan
to follow with a final action.
DATES: Any comments must arrive by December 7, 2012.
ADDRESSES: Submit comments, identified by docket number EPA-R09-OAR-
2012-0827, by one of the following methods:
1. Federal eRulemaking Portal: www.regulations.gov. Follow the
online 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: Nicole Law, EPA Region IX, (415) 947-
4126, law.nicole@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 revisions?
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 Amended Submitted
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
SCAQMD.................................. 1113 Architectural Coatings......... 06/03/11 09/27/11
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
[[Page 66781]]
On October 24, 2011, EPA determined that the submittal for SCAQMD
Rule 1113 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 approved an earlier version of Rule 1113 into the SIP on August
17, 2011 (76 FR 50891). The SCAQMD adopted revisions to the SIP-
approved version on June 3, 2011 and CARB submitted them to us on
September 27, 2011.
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 1113 provides
VOC limits for architectural coatings. The major revisions to the rule
include limiting and phasing out the averaging compliance option and
introducing VOC limits for previously unregulated colorants. EPA's
technical support document (TSD) has more information about these
rules.
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).
Guidance and policy documents that we use to evaluate 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. ``Suggested Control Measure for Architectural Coatings,'' CARB,
October 2007.
4. ``Improving Air Quality with Economic Incentive Programs,'' EPA,
January 2001.
B. Does the rule meet the evaluation criteria?
We believe this rule is consistent with the relevant policy and
guidance regarding enforceability and SIP relaxations. The TSD has more
information on our evaluation.
C. EPA Recommendations To Further Improve the Rule
The TSD describes additional rule revisions that we recommend for
the next time the local agency modifies the rule but are 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 proposed action merely proposes to approve State law
as meeting Federal requirements and does not impose additional
requirements beyond those imposed by State law. For that reason, this
proposed action:
Is not a ``significant regulatory action'' subject to
review by the Office of Management and Budget under Executive Order
12866 (58 FR 51735, October 4, 1993);
does not impose an information collection burden under the
provisions of the Paperwork Reduction Act (44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.);
is certified as not having a significant economic impact
on a substantial number of small entities under the Regulatory
Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 601 et seq.);
does not contain any unfunded mandate or significantly or
uniquely affect small governments, as described in the Unfunded
Mandates Reform Act of 1995 (Pub. L. 104-4);
does not have Federalism implications as specified in
Executive Order 13132 (64 FR 43255, August 10, 1999);
is not an economically significant regulatory action based
on health or safety risks subject to Executive Order 13045 (62 FR
19885, April 23, 1997);
is not a significant regulatory action subject to
Executive Order 13211 (66 FR 28355, May 22, 2001);
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 proposed action 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, Incorporation by
reference, Intergovernmental relations, Ozone, Reporting and
recordkeeping requirements, Volatile organic compounds.
Authority: 42 U.S.C. 7401 et seq.
Dated: October 26, 2012.
Jared Blumenfeld,
Regional Administrator, Region IX.
[FR Doc. 2012-27226 Filed 11-6-12; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P
