Revisions to the California State Implementation Plan, San Diego Air Pollution Control District, 37130-37132 [2013-14511]
Download as PDF
37130
Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 119 / Thursday, June 20, 2013 / Rules and Regulations
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION
AGENCY
40 CFR Part 52
[EPA–R09–OAR–2013–0362; FRL–9815–5]
Revisions to the California State
Implementation Plan, San Diego Air
Pollution Control District
Environmental Protection
Agency (EPA).
ACTION: Direct final rule.
AGENCY:
EPA is taking direct final
action to approve a revision to the San
Diego Air Pollution Control District
(SDAPCD) portion of the California
State Implementation Plan (SIP). This
revision concerns volatile organic
compound (VOC) emissions from
architectural coatings. We are approving
a local rule that regulates this emission
source under the Clean Air Act (CAA or
the Act).
DATES: This rule is effective on August
19, 2013 without further notice, unless
EPA receives adverse comments by July
22, 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–2013–0362, by one of the
following methods:
1. Federal eRulemaking Portal:
www.regulations.gov. Follow the online instructions.
SUMMARY:
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 94105–3901. 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?
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 RULES
Local agency
Rule No.
Rule title
SDAPCD ..........................................
67.0
On April 17, 2008, EPA determined
that the submittal for SDAPCD Rule 67.0
met the completeness criteria in 40 CFR
part 51 Appendix V, which must be met
before formal EPA review.
C. What is the purpose of the submitted
rule?
mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with RULES
B. Are there other versions of this rule?
We approved an earlier version of
Rule 67.0 into the SIP on March 27,
1997 (62 FR 14639). The SDAPCD
adopted revisions to the SIP-approved
version on December 12, 2001 and
CARB submitted them to us on March
7, 2008. While we can act on only the
most recently submitted version, we
have reviewed materials provided with
previous submittals.
VerDate Mar<15>2010
16:04 Jun 19, 2013
Jkt 229001
Architectural Coatings ...................................................
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. SDAPCD Rule 67.0 adds
several new coating categories and
lowers existing VOC limits. 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), must require Reasonably Available
Control Technology (RACT) for each
category of sources covered by a Control
PO 00000
Adopted
Frm 00030
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
12/12/01
Submitted
03/07/08
Techniques Guidelines (CTG) document
as well as each VOC major stationary
source in ozone nonattainment areas
classified as moderate or above (see
sections 182(b)(2)), and must not relax
existing requirements (see sections
110(l) and 193). Because SDAPCD Rule
67.0 covers an area source and not a
stationary source and does not have a
CTG, it does not need to require RACT
controls.
Guidance and policy documents that
we use to evaluate enforceability and
stringency requirements consistently
include the following:
1. ‘‘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).
E:\FR\FM\20JNR1.SGM
20JNR1
Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 119 / Thursday, June 20, 2013 / Rules and Regulations
2. ‘‘Issues Relating to VOC Regulation
Cutpoints, Deficiencies, and
Deviations,’’ EPA, May 25, 1988 (the
Bluebook).
3. ‘‘Guidance Document for Correcting
Common VOC & Other Rule
Deficiencies,’’ EPA Region 9, August 21,
2001 (the Little Bluebook).
4. ‘‘Suggested Control Measure for
Architectural Coatings,’’ CARB, October
2007.
B. Does the rule meet the evaluation
criteria?
We believe this rule is consistent with
the relevant policy and guidance
regarding enforceability, stringency, 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.
mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with RULES
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 July 22, 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 August 19,
2013. This will incorporate the 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:
VerDate Mar<15>2010
16:04 Jun 19, 2013
Jkt 229001
• 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
PO 00000
Frm 00031
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
37131
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 August 19, 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,
Ozone, Reporting and recordkeeping
requirements, Volatile organic
compounds.
Dated: May 6, 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—[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 paragraph (c)(354)(i)(F)(3) to
read as follows:
■
§ 52.220
*
Identification of plan.
*
*
(c) * * *
(354) * * *
(i) * * *
(F) * * *
E:\FR\FM\20JNR1.SGM
20JNR1
*
*
37132
Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 119 / Thursday, June 20, 2013 / Rules and Regulations
(3) Rule 67.0, ‘‘Architectural
Coatings,’’ adopted on December 12,
2001.
*
*
*
*
*
[FR Doc. 2013–14511 Filed 6–19–13; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560–50–P
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION
AGENCY
40 CFR Part 52
[EPA–R04–OAR–2012–0385; FRL–9824–2]
Approval and Promulgation of
Implementation Plans; Revised Format
for Materials Being Incorporated by
Reference for Florida; Approval of
Recodification of the Florida
Administrative Code; Correcting
Amendments
Environmental Protection
Agency (EPA).
ACTION: Correcting amendments.
AGENCY:
On June 16, 1999, EPA
published a final rule in the Federal
Register approving a Florida State
Implementation Plan (SIP) revision,
submitted through the Florida
Department of Environmental Protection
(FDEP) on April 15, 1996. The
submission related to miscellaneous
changes and the recodification of the
Florida Administrative Code (F.A.C.). In
addition, the submittal also contained
several regulations that were supposed
to be removed from the SIP. EPA’s June
16, 1999, action approved the
miscellaneous rule revisions, repeals
and corrections; however, it failed to
ensure the regulatory text reflected all of
the repeals. This correcting amendment
corrects and clarifies errors in the
regulatory language in paragraph (c) of
EPA’s June 16, 1999, final rule.
DATES: Effective on June 20, 2013.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Kelly Sheckler, Air Quality Modeling
and Transportation Section, Air
Planning Branch, Air, Pesticides and
Toxics Management Division, U.S.
Environmental Protection Agency,
Region 4, 61 Forsyth Street SW.,
Atlanta, Georgia 30303–8960. The
telephone number is (404) 562–9222.
Ms. Sheckler can be reached via
electronic mail at
sheckler.kelly@epa.gov.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Today’s
action corrects inadvertent errors in
EPA’s June 16, 1999, final rulemaking.
Specifically, this correcting amendment
clarifies that EPA’s June 16, 1999, action
approved the State’s implementation
plan revision that repealed F.A.C. rules
62–297.411 (DEP Method 1), 62–297.412
mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with RULES
SUMMARY:
VerDate Mar<15>2010
16:04 Jun 19, 2013
Jkt 229001
(DEP Method 2), 62–297.413 (DEP
Method 3), 62–297.415 (DEP Method 5),
62–297.416 (DEP Method 5A), 62–
297.417 (DEP Method 6) and, 62–
297.423 (EPA Method 12-Determination
of Inorganic Lead Emissions from
Stationary Emission Units). The June 16,
1999, final rule approved the removal of
the test method rules from the SIP.
These rules were repealed because they
were obsolete. Another rule change
provided for the incorporation of the
federally approved American Society for
Testing and Materials (ASTM) methods.
However, EPA’s regulatory text did not
properly indicate that the rules were
repealed. This action corrects these
inadvertent errors.
EPA has determined that today’s
actions fall under the ‘‘good cause’’
exemption in section 553(b)(3)(B) of the
Administrative Procedure Act (APA)
which, upon finding ‘‘good cause,’’
authorizes agencies to dispense with
public participation where public notice
and comment procedures are
impracticable, unnecessary, or contrary
to the public interest. Public notice and
comment for this action is unnecessary
because today’s action to correct
inadvertent regulatory text errors
included with EPA’s June 16, 1999, final
rule are consistent with the substantive
revisions to the Florida SIP described in
the direct final rule addressing the
miscellaneous revisions and the
recodification of F.A.C. to make the SIP
less complex and correct typographical
errors. In addition, EPA can identify no
particular reason why the public would
be interested in being notified of the
correction, or in having the opportunity
to comment on the correction prior to
this action being finalized, since this
correction action does not change the
meaning of EPA’s analysis or action
addressing the recodification and
miscellaneous revisions to the Florida
SIP. EPA also finds that there is good
cause under APA section 553(d)(3) for
this correction to become effective on
the date of publication of this action.
Section 553(d)(3) of the APA allows an
effective date less than 30 days after
publication ‘‘as otherwise provided by
the agency for good cause found and
published with the rule.’’ 5 U.S.C.
553(d)(3). The purpose of the 30-day
waiting period prescribed in APA
section 553(d)(3) is to give affected
parties a reasonable time to adjust their
behavior and prepare before the final
rule takes effect. Today’s rule, however,
does not create any new regulatory
requirements such that affected parties
would need time to prepare before the
rule takes effect. Rather, today’s action
merely corrects inadvertent errors in the
PO 00000
Frm 00032
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
regulatory text of EPA’s prior
rulemaking for the Florida SIP. For
these reasons, EPA finds good cause
under APA section 553(d)(3) for this
correction to become effective on the
date of publication of this action.
Statutory and Executive Order Reviews
Under Executive Order 12866 (58 FR
51735, October 4, 1993), this action is
not a ‘‘significant regulatory action’’ and
therefore is not subject to review by the
Office of Management and Budget. For
this reason, this action is also not
subject to Executive Order 13211,
‘‘Actions Concerning Regulations That
Significantly Affect Energy Supply,
Distribution, or Use’’ (66 FR 28355, May
22, 2001). This action merely corrects an
inadvertent omission in the regulatory
text of EPA’s June 16, 1999, final rule
addressing the recodification of the
Florida SIP, and miscellaneous changes
and imposes no additional requirements
beyond those already imposed by state
law. Accordingly, the Administrator
certifies that this rule will not have a
significant economic impact on a
substantial number of small entities
under the Regulatory Flexibility Act (5
U.S.C. 601 et seq.). Because this rule
merely corrects an inadvertent omission
in the regulatory text of EPA’s June 16,
1999, final rules addressing
miscellaneous revisions and the
recodification of F.A.C. to make the SIP
less complex and to correct
typographical errors, and does not
impose any additional enforceable duty
beyond that already required by state
law, it does not contain any unfunded
mandate or significantly or uniquely
affect small governments, as described
in the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act
of 1995 (Public Law 104–4).
This rule also does not have tribal
implications because it will not have a
substantial direct effect on one or more
Indian tribes, on the relationship
between the Federal Government and
Indian tribes, or on the distribution of
power and responsibilities between the
Federal Government and Indian tribes,
as specified by Executive Order 13175
(65 FR 67249, November 9, 2000). This
rule also does not have Federalism
implications because it does not have
substantial direct effects on the states,
on the relationship between the national
government and the states, or on the
distribution of power and
responsibilities among the various
levels of government, as specified in
Executive Order 13132 (64 FR 43255,
August 10, 1999). This rule merely
corrects inadvertent errors in the
regulatory text of EPA’s June 16, 1999,
final rule by removing certain repealed
rules from the regulatory text, and does
E:\FR\FM\20JNR1.SGM
20JNR1
Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 78, Number 119 (Thursday, June 20, 2013)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 37130-37132]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2013-14511]
[[Page 37130]]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
40 CFR Part 52
[EPA-R09-OAR-2013-0362; FRL-9815-5]
Revisions to the California State Implementation Plan, San Diego
Air Pollution Control District
AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).
ACTION: Direct final rule.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: EPA is taking direct final action to approve a revision to the
San Diego Air Pollution Control District (SDAPCD) portion of the
California State Implementation Plan (SIP). This revision concerns
volatile organic compound (VOC) emissions from architectural coatings.
We are approving a local rule that regulates this emission source under
the Clean Air Act (CAA or the Act).
DATES: This rule is effective on August 19, 2013 without further
notice, unless EPA receives adverse comments by July 22, 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-
2013-0362, 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 94105-3901.
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?
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 Rules
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Local agency Rule No. Rule title Adopted Submitted
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
SDAPCD................................ 67.0 Architectural Coatings.. 12/12/01 03/07/08
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
On April 17, 2008, EPA determined that the submittal for SDAPCD
Rule 67.0 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 67.0 into the SIP on March
27, 1997 (62 FR 14639). The SDAPCD adopted revisions to the SIP-
approved version on December 12, 2001 and CARB submitted them to us on
March 7, 2008. 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?
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. SDAPCD Rule 67.0 adds
several new coating categories and lowers existing VOC limits. 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), must require Reasonably Available Control Technology (RACT) for
each category of sources covered by a Control Techniques Guidelines
(CTG) document as well as each VOC major stationary source in ozone
nonattainment areas classified as moderate or above (see sections
182(b)(2)), and must not relax existing requirements (see sections
110(l) and 193). Because SDAPCD Rule 67.0 covers an area source and not
a stationary source and does not have a CTG, it does not need to
require RACT controls.
Guidance and policy documents that we use to evaluate
enforceability and stringency requirements consistently include the
following:
1. ``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).
[[Page 37131]]
2. ``Issues Relating to VOC Regulation Cutpoints, Deficiencies, and
Deviations,'' EPA, May 25, 1988 (the Bluebook).
3. ``Guidance Document for Correcting Common VOC & Other Rule
Deficiencies,'' EPA Region 9, August 21, 2001 (the Little Bluebook).
4. ``Suggested Control Measure for Architectural Coatings,'' CARB,
October 2007.
B. Does the rule meet the evaluation criteria?
We believe this rule is consistent with the relevant policy and
guidance regarding enforceability, stringency, 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.
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 July 22, 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 August 19, 2013. This will incorporate the
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);
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 August 19, 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, Ozone, Reporting and
recordkeeping requirements, Volatile organic compounds.
Dated: May 6, 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--[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 paragraph (c)(354)(i)(F)(3) to
read as follows:
Sec. 52.220 Identification of plan.
* * * * *
(c) * * *
(354) * * *
(i) * * *
(F) * * *
[[Page 37132]]
(3) Rule 67.0, ``Architectural Coatings,'' adopted on December 12,
2001.
* * * * *
[FR Doc. 2013-14511 Filed 6-19-13; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P