Revisions to the California State Implementation Plan, South Coast Air Quality Management District, 18244-18245 [2013-06754]

Agencies

• ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

[Federal Register Volume 78, Number 58 (Tuesday, March 26, 2013)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 18244-18245]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2013-06754]


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

 ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

40 CFR Part 52

[EPA-R09-OAR-2012-0827; FRL-9785-6]


Revisions to the California State Implementation Plan, South 
Coast Air Quality Management District

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Final rule.

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

SUMMARY: EPA is finalizing approval of revisions to the South Coast Air 
Quality Management District (SCAQMD) portion of the California State 
Implementation Plan (SIP). This action was proposed in the Federal 
Register on November 7, 2012 and concerns 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).

DATES: This rule is effective on April 25, 2013.

ADDRESSES: EPA has established docket number EPA-R09-OAR-2012-0827 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 94105-
3901. While all documents in the docket are listed at https://www.regulations.gov, some information may be publicly available only at 
the hard copy location (e.g., copyrighted material, large maps, multi-
volume reports), and some may not be available in either location 
(e.g., confidential business information (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. Proposed Action
II. Public Comments and EPA Responses
III. EPA Action
IV. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews

I. Proposed Action

    On November 7, 2012 (77 FR 66780), EPA proposed to approve the 
following rule into the California SIP.

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                            Rule                 Rule title             Amended     Submitted
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
SCAQMD....................................         1113  Architectural Coatings.......     06/03/11     09/27/11
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------


[[Page 18245]]

    We proposed to approve this rule because we determined that it 
complied with the relevant CAA requirements. Our proposed action 
contains more information on the rule and our evaluation.

II. Public Comments and EPA Responses

    EPA's proposed action provided a 30-day public comment period. 
During this period, we received a comment through the anonymous access 
system.
    The comment and our response are summarized below.
    Comment: Rule changes of this type are only designed to hurt the 
local businesses that use architectural coatings with higher costs that 
only serve to bolster the EPA pocketbook. Please leave well enough 
alone. You have not provided a study to back up your regulations to 
start with and this further limits our businesses. Please clarify what 
the current rule is and what exactly you are proposing.
    Response: This rule is designed to help reduce significant public 
health impacts from ground-level ozone and smog. It has no financial 
impact on EPA. The local process for adopting the rule included 
development of a cost effectiveness analysis (included in the district 
staff report) which provides support for the revised architectural 
coating requirements.
    This action finalizes EPA approval of SCAQMD Rule 1113 as submitted 
to EPA on September 27, 2011. The current version in the SIP was 
approved on August 17, 2011 (76 FR 50891). A summary of the revisions 
from the last SIP approved rule can be found in our TSD. The comment 
does not provide any specific information to support its general 
concerns, while both SCAQMD's staff report and EPA's TSD provide 
specific rationale supporting the revised rule.

III. EPA Action

    No comments were submitted that change our assessment of the rule 
as described in our proposed action. Therefore, as authorized in 
section 110(k)(3) of the Act, EPA is fully approving this rule into the 
California SIP.

IV. 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, 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 May 28, 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 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: February 14, 2013.
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)(404) (i)(A)(3) to 
read as follows:


Sec.  52.220  Identification of plan.

* * * * *
    (c) * * *
    (404) * * *
    (i) * * *
    (A) * * *
    (3) Rule 1113, ``Architectural Coatings,'' amended on June 3, 2011.
* * * * *
[FR Doc. 2013-06754 Filed 3-25-13; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P