Revisions to the California State Implementation Plan, Monterey Bay Unified Air Pollution Control District, 73322-73324 [2012-29532]
Download as PDF
<![CDATA[
73322
Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 237 / Monday, December 10, 2012 / Rules and Regulations
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 CAA,
petitions for judicial review of this
action must be filed in the United States
Court of Appeals for the appropriate
circuit by February 8, 2013. 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. This action may not
be challenged later in proceedings to
enforce its requirements. (See CAA
section 307(b)(2).)
List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52
Air pollution control, Environmental
protection, Greenhouse gases,
Incorporation by reference,
Intergovernmental relations, Reporting
and recordkeeping requirements.
Authority: 42 U.S.C. 7401 et seq.
Dated: October 22, 2012.
Jared Blumenfeld,
Regional Administrator, Region IX.
(1) Rule 1714, ‘‘Prevention of
Significant Deterioration for Greenhouse
Gases,’’ adopted on November 5, 2010.
(ii) Additional materials.
(A) South Coast Air Quality
Management District (SCAQMD).
(1) Letter dated August 15, 2012 from
Mohsen Nazemi, SCAQMD, to Gerardo
Rios, EPA Region 9, regarding
Clarifications for Rule 1714—Prevention
of Significant Deterioration for
Greenhouse Gases.
■ 3. Section 52.270 is amended by
adding new paragraph (b)(10) to read as
follows:
§ 52.270
quality.
Significant deterioration of air
*
*
*
*
*
(b) * * *
(10) The PSD program for greenhouse
gases (GHGs) in Rule 1714 for the South
Coast Air Quality Management District
(SCAQMD), as incorporated by
reference in § 52.220(c)(421), is
approved under part C, Subpart 1, of the
Clean Air Act. This approval is limited
to sources subject to the PSD program
for GHGs. The provisions of § 52.21
(except paragraph (a)(1)) continue to
apply to the SCAQMD for all pollutants
subject to regulation, as defined in
§ 52.21, except for GHGs.
*
*
*
*
*
[FR Doc. 2012–29528 Filed 12–7–12; 8:45 am]
Part 52, chapter I, title 40 of the Code
of Federal Regulations is amended as
follows:
PART 52—APPROVAL AND
PROMULGATION OF
IMPLEMENTATION PLANS
BILLING CODE 6560–50–P
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION
AGENCY
40 CFR Part 52
[EPA–R09–OAR–2012–0808; FRL–9750–4]
1. The authority citation for part 52
continues to read as follows:
■
Revisions to the California State
Implementation Plan, Monterey Bay
Unified Air Pollution Control District
Authority: 42 U.S.C. 7401 et seq.
Subpart F—California
AGENCY:
2. Section 52.220 is amended by
adding new paragraph (c)(421) to read
as follows:
SUMMARY:
Environmental Protection
Agency (EPA).
ACTION: Direct final rule.
■
§ 52.220
Identification of plan.
srobinson on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with
*
*
*
*
*
(c) * * *
(421) New regulations were submitted
on December 30, 2010, by the
Governor’s designee. Final approval of
this regulation is based, in part, on the
clarifications contained in a August 15,
2012 letter from the South Coast Air
Quality Management District regarding
specific implementation of parts of the
Prevention of Significant Deterioration
program.
(i) Incorporation by reference.
(A) South Coast Air Quality
Management District.
VerDate Mar<15>2010
16:08 Dec 07, 2012
Jkt 229001
EPA is taking direct final
action to approve revisions to the
Monterey Bay Unified Air Pollution
Control District (MBUAPCD) portion of
the California State Implementation
Plan (SIP). These revisions concern
opacity standards related to multiple
pollutants, including particulate matter
(PM) emissions from several different
types of sources, ranging from fugitive
dust to gas turbines. We are approving
a local rule that regulates these emission
sources under the Clean Air Act (CAA
or the Act).
DATES: This rule is effective on February
8, 2013 without further notice, unless
EPA receives adverse comments by
PO 00000
Frm 00060
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
January 9, 2013. 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.
Submit comments,
identified by docket number EPA–R09–
OAR–2012–0808, 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.
Electronic files should avoid the use of
special characters, any form of
encryption, and be free of any defects or
viruses.
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.
ADDRESSES:
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
´
Idalia Perez, EPA Region IX, (415) 972–
3248, perez.idalia@epa.gov.
E:\FR\FM\10DER1.SGM
10DER1
Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 237 / Monday, December 10, 2012 / Rules and Regulations
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?
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
73323
III. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews
I. The State’s Submittal
A. What rule did the State submit?
Table 1 lists the rule we are approving
with the dates that it was adopted by the
local air agency and submitted by the
California Air Resources Board (CARB).
TABLE 1—SUBMITTED RULE
Local agency
Rule No.
Rule title
Revised
Submitted
MBUAPCD ......................................................
400
Visible Emissions ...........................................
08/15/12
09/20/12
On October 15, 2012, EPA determined
that the submittal for MBUAPCD Rule
400 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 400 into the SIP on August 11,
2005 (70 FR 46770). The MBUAPCD
adopted revisions to the SIP-approved
version on December 15, 2004 and
CARB submitted it to us on March 7,
2008. We disapproved the 12/15/04
version of the rule on June 30, 2010 (75
FR 37727)
C. What is the purpose of the submitted
rule?
Particulate matter (PM) contributes to
effects that are harmful to human health
and the environment, including
premature mortality, aggravation of
respiratory and cardiovascular disease,
decreased lung function, visibility
impairment, and damage to vegetation
and ecosystems. Section 110(a) of the
CAA requires States to submit
regulations that control PM and other
emissions. Rule 400 limits visible
emissions, generally by establishing
opacity limits, from a variety of sources
including gas turbines and drinking
water systems, among others. EPA’s
technical support document (TSD) has
more information about this rule.
II. EPA’s Evaluation and Action
srobinson on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with
A. How is EPA evaluating the rule?
Generally, SIP rules must be
enforceable (see section 110(a) of the
Act) and must not relax existing
requirements (see sections 110(l) and
193). In addition, SIP rules must
implement Reasonably Available
Control Measures (RACM), including
Reasonably Available Control
Technology (RACT), in moderate PM
nonattainment areas, and Best Available
Control Measures (BACM), including
Best Available Control Technology
(BACT), in serious PM nonattainment
VerDate Mar<15>2010
16:08 Dec 07, 2012
Jkt 229001
areas (see CAA sections 189(a)(1) and
189(b)(1)). The MBUAPCD regulates an
area that is in attainment for PM, so
Rule 400 is not required to implement
RACM or BACM per section 189.
Guidance and policy documents that
we use to evaluate Rule 400 include the
following:
1. ‘‘Issues Relating to VOC Regulation
Cutpoints, Deficiencies, and Deviations;
Clarification to Appendix D of November
24, 1987 Federal Register Notice,’’ (Blue
Book), notice of availability published in
the May 25, 1988 Federal Register.
2. ‘‘Guidance Document for Correcting
Common VOC & Other Rule Deficiencies,’’
EPA Region 9, August 21, 2001 (the Little
Bluebook).
3. ‘‘State Implementation Plans; General
Preamble for the Implementation of Title I
of the Clean Air Act Amendments of
1990,’’ 57 FR 13498 (April 16, 1992); 57 FR
18070 (April 28, 1992).
4. ‘‘State Implementation Plans (SIPs): Policy
Regarding Excess Emissions During
Malfunctions, Startup and Shutdown’’,
Memorandum from Steven A. Herman,
Assistant Administrator for Enforcement
and Compliance Assurance, and Robert
Perciasepe, Assistant Administrator for Air
and Radiation, September 20, 1999.
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
We do not at this point have
additional rule revisions that we
recommend for the next time the local
agency modifies the rule.
D. Public Comment and Final Action
As authorized in section 110(k)(3) of
the Act, EPA is fully approving the
submitted rule because we believe it
fulfills 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
PO 00000
Frm 00061
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
the Proposed Rules section of this
Federal Register, we are simultaneously
proposing approval of the same
submitted rule. If we receive adverse
comments by January 9, 2013, 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 February 8,
2013. This will incorporate this rule
into the federally enforceable SIP.
III. Statutory and Executive Order
Reviews
Under the Clean Air Act, the
Administrator is required to approve a
SIP submission that complies with the
provisions of the Act and applicable
Federal regulations. 42 U.S.C. 7410(k);
40 CFR 52.02(a). Thus, in reviewing SIP
submissions, EPA’s role is to approve
State choices, provided that they meet
the criteria of the Clean Air Act.
Accordingly, this action merely
approves State law as meeting Federal
requirements and does not impose
additional requirements beyond those
imposed by State law. For that reason,
this action:
• Is not a ‘‘significant regulatory
action’’ subject to review by the Office
of Management and Budget under
Executive Order 12866 (58 FR 51735,
October 4, 1993);
• Does not impose an information
collection burden under the provisions
of the Paperwork Reduction Act (44
U.S.C. 3501 et seq.);
• Is certified as not having a
significant economic impact on a
substantial number of small entities
under the Regulatory Flexibility Act (5
U.S.C. 601 et seq.);
• 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);
E:\FR\FM\10DER1.SGM
10DER1
srobinson on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with
73324
Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 237 / Monday, December 10, 2012 / Rules and Regulations
• Does not have Federalism
implications as specified in Executive
Order 13132 (64 FR 43255, August 10,
1999);
• Is not an economically significant
regulatory action based on health or
safety risks subject to Executive Order
13045 (62 FR 19885, April 23, 1997);
• Is not a significant regulatory action
subject to Executive Order 13211 (66 FR
28355, May 22, 2001);
• Is not subject to requirements of
Section 12(d) of the National
Technology Transfer and Advancement
Act of 1995 (15 U.S.C. 272 note) because
application of those requirements would
be inconsistent with the Clean Air Act;
and
• Does not provide EPA with the
discretionary authority to address
disproportionate human health or
environmental effects with practical,
appropriate, and legally permissible
methods under Executive Order 12898
(59 FR 7629, February 16, 1994).
In addition, this rule does not have
tribal implications as specified by
Executive Order 13175 (65 FR 67249,
November 9, 2000), because the SIP is
not approved to apply in Indian country
located in the State, and EPA notes that
it will not impose substantial direct
costs on tribal governments or preempt
tribal law.
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 February 8, 2013.
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
VerDate Mar<15>2010
16:08 Dec 07, 2012
Jkt 229001
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
and address the comment in the
proposed rulemaking. 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,
Particulate matter, Reporting and
recordkeeping requirements.
Dated: October 26, 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—APPROVAL AND
PROMULGATION OF
IMPLEMENTATION PLANS
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 paragraph (c)(422) to read as
follows:
■
§ 52.220
Identification of plan.
*
*
*
*
*
(c) * * *
(422) Amended regulations for the
following APCDs were submitted on
September 20, 2012 by the Governor’s
designee.
(i) Incorporation by reference.
(A) Monterey Bay Unified Air
Pollution Control District
(1) Rule 400, ‘‘Visible
Emissions,’’amended on August 15,
2012.
[FR Doc. 2012–29532 Filed 12–7–12; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560–50–P
PO 00000
Frm 00062
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND
SECURITY
Federal Emergency Management
Agency
44 CFR Part 67
[Docket ID FEMA–2012–0003]
Final Flood Elevation Determinations
Federal Emergency
Management Agency, DHS.
ACTION: Final rule.
AGENCY:
Base (1% annual-chance)
Flood Elevations (BFEs) and modified
BFEs are made final for the
communities listed below. The BFEs
and modified BFEs are the basis for the
floodplain management measures that
each community is required either to
adopt or to show evidence of being
already in effect in order to qualify or
remain qualified for participation in the
National Flood Insurance Program
(NFIP).
SUMMARY:
The date of issuance of the Flood
Insurance Rate Map (FIRM) showing
BFEs and modified BFEs for each
community. This date may be obtained
by contacting the office where the maps
are available for inspection as indicated
in the table below.
ADDRESSES: The final BFEs for each
community are available for inspection
at the office of the Chief Executive
Officer of each community. The
respective addresses are listed in the
table below.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Luis
Rodriguez, Chief, Engineering
Management Branch, Federal Insurance
and Mitigation Administration, Federal
Emergency Management Agency, 500 C
Street SW., Washington, DC 20472,
(202) 646–4064, or (email)
Luis.Rodriguez3@fema.dhs.gov.
DATES:
The
Federal Emergency Management Agency
(FEMA) makes the final determinations
listed below for the modified BFEs for
each community listed. These modified
elevations have been published in
newspapers of local circulation and
ninety (90) days have elapsed since that
publication. The Deputy Associate
Administrator for Mitigation has
resolved any appeals resulting from this
notification.
This final rule is issued in accordance
with section 110 of the Flood Disaster
Protection Act of 1973, 42 U.S.C. 4104,
and 44 CFR part 67. FEMA has
developed criteria for floodplain
management in floodprone areas in
accordance with 44 CFR part 60.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
E:\FR\FM\10DER1.SGM
10DER1
]]>Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 77, Number 237 (Monday, December 10, 2012)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 73322-73324]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2012-29532]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
40 CFR Part 52
[EPA-R09-OAR-2012-0808; FRL-9750-4]
Revisions to the California State Implementation Plan, Monterey
Bay Unified Air Pollution Control District
AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).
ACTION: Direct final rule.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: EPA is taking direct final action to approve revisions to the
Monterey Bay Unified Air Pollution Control District (MBUAPCD) portion
of the California State Implementation Plan (SIP). These revisions
concern opacity standards related to multiple pollutants, including
particulate matter (PM) emissions from several different types of
sources, ranging from fugitive dust to gas turbines. We are approving a
local rule that regulates these emission sources under the Clean Air
Act (CAA or the Act).
DATES: This rule is effective on February 8, 2013 without further
notice, unless EPA receives adverse comments by January 9, 2013. 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-
2012-0808, 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. Electronic files should avoid the use of
special characters, any form of encryption, and be free of any defects
or viruses.
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: Idalia P[eacute]rez, EPA Region IX,
(415) 972-3248, perez.idalia@epa.gov.
[[Page 73323]]
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?
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 we are approving with the dates that it was
adopted by the local air agency and submitted by the California Air
Resources Board (CARB).
Table 1--Submitted Rule
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Local agency Rule No. Rule title Revised Submitted
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
MBUAPCD............................. 400 Visible Emissions...... 08/15/12 09/20/12
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
On October 15, 2012, EPA determined that the submittal for MBUAPCD
Rule 400 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 400 into the SIP on August
11, 2005 (70 FR 46770). The MBUAPCD adopted revisions to the SIP-
approved version on December 15, 2004 and CARB submitted it to us on
March 7, 2008. We disapproved the 12/15/04 version of the rule on June
30, 2010 (75 FR 37727)
C. What is the purpose of the submitted rule?
Particulate matter (PM) contributes to effects that are harmful to
human health and the environment, including premature mortality,
aggravation of respiratory and cardiovascular disease, decreased lung
function, visibility impairment, and damage to vegetation and
ecosystems. Section 110(a) of the CAA requires States to submit
regulations that control PM and other emissions. Rule 400 limits
visible emissions, generally by establishing opacity limits, from a
variety of sources including gas turbines and drinking water systems,
among others. EPA's technical support document (TSD) has more
information about this rule.
II. EPA's Evaluation and Action
A. How is EPA evaluating the rule?
Generally, SIP rules must be enforceable (see section 110(a) of the
Act) and must not relax existing requirements (see sections 110(l) and
193). In addition, SIP rules must implement Reasonably Available
Control Measures (RACM), including Reasonably Available Control
Technology (RACT), in moderate PM nonattainment areas, and Best
Available Control Measures (BACM), including Best Available Control
Technology (BACT), in serious PM nonattainment areas (see CAA sections
189(a)(1) and 189(b)(1)). The MBUAPCD regulates an area that is in
attainment for PM, so Rule 400 is not required to implement RACM or
BACM per section 189.
Guidance and policy documents that we use to evaluate Rule 400
include the following:
1. ``Issues Relating to VOC Regulation Cutpoints, Deficiencies, and
Deviations; Clarification to Appendix D of November 24, 1987 Federal
Register Notice,'' (Blue Book), notice of availability published in
the May 25, 1988 Federal Register.
2. ``Guidance Document for Correcting Common VOC & Other Rule
Deficiencies,'' EPA Region 9, August 21, 2001 (the Little Bluebook).
3. ``State Implementation Plans; General Preamble for the
Implementation of Title I of the Clean Air Act Amendments of 1990,''
57 FR 13498 (April 16, 1992); 57 FR 18070 (April 28, 1992).
4. ``State Implementation Plans (SIPs): Policy Regarding Excess
Emissions During Malfunctions, Startup and Shutdown'', Memorandum
from Steven A. Herman, Assistant Administrator for Enforcement and
Compliance Assurance, and Robert Perciasepe, Assistant Administrator
for Air and Radiation, September 20, 1999.
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
We do not at this point have additional rule revisions that we
recommend for the next time the local agency modifies the rule.
D. Public Comment and Final Action
As authorized in section 110(k)(3) of the Act, EPA is fully
approving the submitted rule because we believe it fulfills 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 rule. If we
receive adverse comments by January 9, 2013, 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 February 8, 2013. This will incorporate this
rule into the federally enforceable SIP.
III. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews
Under the Clean Air Act, the Administrator is required to approve a
SIP submission that complies with the provisions of the Act and
applicable Federal regulations. 42 U.S.C. 7410(k); 40 CFR 52.02(a).
Thus, in reviewing SIP submissions, EPA's role is to approve State
choices, provided that they meet the criteria of the Clean Air Act.
Accordingly, this action merely approves State law as meeting Federal
requirements and does not impose additional requirements beyond those
imposed by State law. For that reason, this action:
Is not a ``significant regulatory action'' subject to
review by the Office of Management and Budget under Executive Order
12866 (58 FR 51735, October 4, 1993);
Does not impose an information collection burden under the
provisions of the Paperwork Reduction Act (44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.);
Is certified as not having a significant economic impact
on a substantial number of small entities under the Regulatory
Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 601 et seq.);
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);
[[Page 73324]]
Does not have Federalism implications as specified in
Executive Order 13132 (64 FR 43255, August 10, 1999);
Is not an economically significant regulatory action based
on health or safety risks subject to Executive Order 13045 (62 FR
19885, April 23, 1997);
Is not a significant regulatory action subject to
Executive Order 13211 (66 FR 28355, May 22, 2001);
Is not subject to requirements of Section 12(d) of the
National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act of 1995 (15 U.S.C. 272
note) because application of those requirements would be inconsistent
with the Clean Air Act; and
Does not provide EPA with the discretionary authority to
address disproportionate human health or environmental effects with
practical, appropriate, and legally permissible methods under Executive
Order 12898 (59 FR 7629, February 16, 1994).
In addition, this rule does not have tribal implications as specified
by Executive Order 13175 (65 FR 67249, November 9, 2000), because the
SIP is not approved to apply in Indian country located in the State,
and EPA notes that it will not impose substantial direct costs on
tribal governments or preempt tribal law.
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 February 8, 2013. 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 and address the comment in
the proposed rulemaking. 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, Particulate matter, Reporting
and recordkeeping requirements.
Dated: October 26, 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--APPROVAL AND PROMULGATION OF IMPLEMENTATION PLANS
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 paragraph (c)(422) to read as
follows:
Sec. 52.220 Identification of plan.
* * * * *
(c) * * *
(422) Amended regulations for the following APCDs were submitted on
September 20, 2012 by the Governor's designee.
(i) Incorporation by reference.
(A) Monterey Bay Unified Air Pollution Control District
(1) Rule 400, ``Visible Emissions,''amended on August 15, 2012.
[FR Doc. 2012-29532 Filed 12-7-12; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P
