Revisions to California State Implementation Plan, Antelope Valley Air Quality Management District and Ventura County Air Pollution Control District, 49925-49927 [2013-19872]
Download as PDF
Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 159 / Friday, August 16, 2013 / Rules and Regulations
Interference with Constitutionally
Protected Property Rights.
9. Civil Justice Reform
This rule meets applicable standards
in sections 3(a) and 3(b)(2) of Executive
Order 12988, Civil Justice Reform, to
minimize litigation, eliminate
ambiguity, and reduce burden.
10. Protection of Children
We have analyzed this rule under
Executive Order 13045, Protection of
Children from Environmental Health
Risks and Safety Risks. This rule is not
an economically significant rule and
does not create an environmental risk to
health or risk to safety that may
disproportionately affect children.
11. Indian Tribal Governments
This rule does not have tribal
implications under Executive Order
13175, Consultation and Coordination
with Indian Tribal Governments,
because it does 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.
12. Energy Effects
This action is not a ‘‘significant
energy action’’ under Executive Order
13211, Actions Concerning Regulations
That Significantly Affect Energy Supply,
Distribution, or Use.
13. Technical Standards
This rule does not use technical
standards. Therefore, we did not
consider the use of voluntary consensus
standards.
tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with RULES
14. Environment
We have analyzed this rule under
Department of Homeland Security
Management Directive 023–01 and
Commandant Instruction M16475.lD,
which guide the Coast Guard in
complying with the National
Environmental Policy Act of 1969
(NEPA)(42 U.S.C. 4321–4370f), and
have determined that this action is one
of a category of actions that do not
individually or cumulatively have a
significant effect on the human
environment. This rule involves the
establishment of a safety zone and,
therefore it is categorically excluded
from further review under paragraph
34(g) of Figure 2–1 of the Commandant
Instruction. An environmental analysis
checklist supporting this determination
and a Categorical Exclusion
Determination are available in the
docket where indicated under
VerDate Mar<15>2010
17:24 Aug 15, 2013
Jkt 229001
ADDRESSES. We seek any comments or
information that may lead to the
discovery of a significant environmental
impact from this rule.
List of Subjects in 33 CFR Part 165
Harbors, Marine safety, Navigation
(water), Reporting and record keeping
requirements, Security measures,
Waterways.
For the reasons discussed in the
preamble, the Coast Guard amends 33
CFR parts 165 as follows:
PART 165—REGULATED NAVIGATION
AREAS AND LIMITED ACCESS AREAS
1. The authority citation for part 165
continues to read as follows:
49925
VHF Channel 16. Vessel operators given
permission to enter or operate in the
safety zone must comply with all
directions given to them by the Captain
of the Port Buffalo, or his on-scene
representative.
Dated: July 29, 2013.
B. W. Roche,
Captain, U.S. Coast Guard, Captain of the
Port Buffalo.
[FR Doc. 2013–19979 Filed 8–15–13; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 9110–04–P
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION
AGENCY
■
Authority: 33 U.S.C. 1231; 46 U.S.C.
Chapter 701, 3306, 3703; 50 U.S.C. 191, 195;
33 CFR 1.05–1, 6.04–1, 6.04–6, and 160.5;
Pub. L. 107–295, 116 Stat. 2064; Department
of Homeland Security Delegation No. 0170.1.
2. Add § 165.T09–0648 to read as
follows:
■
§ 165.T09–0648 Safety Zone; D-Day
Conneaut, Lake Erie, Conneaut, OH.
(a) Location. This zone will covers
those waters of Lake Erie near Conneaut,
OH encompassed by a line starting at
position 41°57.71′ N and 080°34.18′ W,
then to 41°58.36′ N and 080°34.17′ W,
then to 41°58.53′ N and 080°33.55′ W,
then to 41°58.03′ N and 080°33.72′ W
and returning to the point of origin
(NAD 83).
(b) Enforcement periods. This section
will be enforced from 3 p.m. to 5 p.m.
on August 16, 2013, and from 2 p.m. to
5 p.m. on August 17, 2013, or until all
vintage U.S. fighter planes leave the
area.
(c) Regulations. (1) In accordance with
the general regulations in section 165.23
of this part, entry into, transiting, or
anchoring within this safety zone is
prohibited unless authorized by the
Captain of the Port Buffalo or his
designated on-scene representative.
(2) This safety zone is closed to all
vessel traffic, except as may be
permitted by the Captain of the Port
Buffalo or his designated on-scene
representative.
(3) The ‘‘on-scene representative’’ of
the Captain of the Port Buffalo is any
Coast Guard commissioned, warrant or
petty officer who has been designated
by the Captain of the Port Buffalo to act
on his behalf.
(4) Vessel operators desiring to enter
or operate within the safety zone shall
contact the Captain of the Port Buffalo
or his on-scene representative to obtain
permission to do so. The Captain of the
Port Buffalo or his on-scene
representative may be contacted via
PO 00000
Frm 00023
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
40 CFR Part 52
[EPA–R09–OAR–2013–0394; FRL–9845–5]
Revisions to California State
Implementation Plan, Antelope Valley
Air Quality Management District and
Ventura County Air Pollution Control
District
Environmental Protection
Agency (EPA).
ACTION: Direct final rule.
AGENCY:
EPA is taking direct final
action to approve revisions to the
Antelope Valley Air Quality Air
Management District (AVAQMD) and
Ventura County Air Pollution Control
District (VCAPCD) portions of the
California State Implementation Plan
(SIP). Under authority of the Clean Air
Act (CAA or the Act), we are rescinding
local rules that concern sulfur oxide
emissions from lead smelters for
AVAQMD and volatile organic
compounds (VOC) emissions from the
data storage for VCAPCD and vacuum
producing device industries for
VCAPCD.
DATES: These rules are effective on
October 15, 2013 without further notice,
unless EPA receives adverse comments
by September 16, 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–2013–0394, 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
SUMMARY:
E:\FR\FM\16AUR1.SGM
16AUR1
49926
Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 159 / Friday, August 16, 2013 / Rules and Regulations
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:
Robert Marinaro, EPA Region IX, (415)
972–3019, marinaro.robert@epa.gov.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Throughout this document, ‘‘we,’’ ‘‘us’’
and ‘‘our’’ refer to EPA.
Table of Contents
I. The State’s Submittal
A. What rules did the State submit?
B. Are there other versions of these rules?
C. What is the purpose of the submitted
rules?
II. EPA’s Evaluation and Action
A. How is EPA evaluating the rules?
B. Do the rules meet the evaluation
criteria?
C. Public Comment and Final Action.
III. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews
I. The State’s Submittal
A. What rules did the State submit?
Table 1 lists the rule rescissions we
are approving with the dates that they
were rescinded by the local air agencies
and submitted by the California Air
Resources Board.
TABLE 1—SUBMITTED RULES
Local agency
AVAQMD ......
VCAPCD ......
VCAPCD ......
Rule #
1101
37
67
Secondary Lead Smelters/Sulfur Oxides (rescinded) ...............
Project XL (rescinded) ..............................................................
Vacuum Producing Devices (rescinded) ...................................
On April 9, 2013, EPA determined
that the submittal for AVAQMD Rule
1101, and VCAPCD Rules 37 and 67 met
the completeness criteria in 40 CFR Part
51 Appendix V, which must be met
before formal EPA review.
B. Are there other versions of these
rules?
We approved versions of AVAQMD
Rule 1101 into the SIP on September 2,
1981 (46 FR 43968), VCAPCD Rule 37
on December 13, 1999 (64 FR 69404),
and VCAPCD Rule 67 on April 17, 1987
(52 FR 12522).
tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with RULES
C. What is the purpose of the submitted
rules?
Section 110(a) of the CAA requires
States to submit regulations that control
volatile organic compounds, oxides of
nitrogen, particulate matter, and other
air pollutants which harm human health
and the environment. These rules were
developed as part of the local agency’s
program to control these pollutants.
AVAQMD Rule 1101, Secondary Lead
Smelters/Sulfur Oxides; VCAPCD Rule
37, Project XL; and VCAPCD Rule 67,
Vacuum Producing Devices were
originally adopted to help reduce these
various air pollutants but are being
rescinded because there are no longer
any sources in the Districts subject to
VerDate Mar<15>2010
17:24 Aug 15, 2013
Adopted/
revised
Rule title
Jkt 229001
them and none are anticipated in the
future.
II. EPA’s Evaluation and Action
A. How is EPA evaluating the rules?
These rules describe requirements
intended to help control emissions from
lead smelters in AVAQMD, data storage
in VCAPCD and vacuum producing
devices in VCAPCD. These rule
rescissions must not relax existing
requirements consistent with CAA
sections 110(l) and 193. EPA policy that
we used to evaluate these rule revisions
includes ‘‘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).
B. Do the rules meet the evaluation
criteria?
The Districts have requested
rescission because they no longer have
any sources subject to these rules, they
do not expect any new sources in the
future, and any new sources would be
subject to restrictive NSR permitting
requirements. The Districts have
reviewed permit databases, emission
inventories, and trade group contacts to
determine that they have no sources,
and we have reviewed their analysis
PO 00000
Frm 00024
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
10/07/77
09/14/99
07/05/83
Rescinded
2/21/12
6/12/12
6/12/12
Submitted
02/06/13
02/06/13
02/06/13
and have no basis to question their
analysis. Therefore, we believe these
rule rescissions are consistent with
relevant policy and guidance.
C. Public Comment and Final Action.
As authorized in section 110(k)(3) of
the Act, EPA is fully approving the
submitted rule rescissions because we
believe they fulfill all relevant
requirements. We do not think anyone
will object to this approval, so we are
finalizing it without proposing it in
advance. However, in the Proposed
Rules section of this Federal Register,
we are simultaneously proposing
approval of the same submitted rule
rescissions. If we receive adverse
comments by September 16, 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 October 15,
2013. This will remove these rules from
the federally enforceable SIP.
Please note that if EPA receives
adverse comment on an amendment,
paragraph, or section of this rule and if
that provision may be severed from the
E:\FR\FM\16AUR1.SGM
16AUR1
Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 159 / Friday, August 16, 2013 / Rules and Regulations
tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with RULES
remainder of the rule, EPA may adopt
as final those provisions of the rule that
are not the subject of an adverse
comment.
III. Statutory and Executive Order
Reviews
Under the Clean Air Act, the
Administrator is required to approve a
SIP submission that complies with the
provisions of the Act and applicable
Federal regulations. 42 U.S.C. 7410(k);
40 CFR 52.02(a). Thus, in reviewing SIP
submissions, EPA’s role is to approve
State choices, provided that they meet
the criteria of the Clean Air Act.
Accordingly, this action merely
approves State law as meeting Federal
requirements and does not impose
additional requirements beyond those
imposed by State law. For that reason,
this action:
• Is not a ‘‘significant regulatory
action’’ subject to review by the Office
of Management and Budget under
Executive Order 12866 (58 FR 51735,
October 4, 1993);
• Does not impose an information
collection burden under the provisions
of the Paperwork Reduction Act (44
U.S.C. 3501 et seq.);
• Is certified as not having a
significant economic impact on a
substantial number of small entities
under the Regulatory Flexibility Act (5
U.S.C. 601 et seq.);
• Does not contain any unfunded
mandate or significantly or uniquely
affect small governments, as described
in the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act
of 1995 (Pub. L. 104–4);
• Does not have Federalism
implications as specified in Executive
Order 13132 (64 FR 43255, August 10,
1999);
• Is not an economically significant
regulatory action based on health or
safety risks subject to Executive Order
13045 (62 FR 19885, April 23, 1997);
• Is not a significant regulatory action
subject to Executive Order 13211 (66 FR
28355, May 22, 2001);
• Is not subject to requirements of
Section 12(d) of the National
Technology Transfer and Advancement
Act of 1995 (15 U.S.C. 272 note) because
application of those requirements would
be inconsistent with the Clean Air Act;
and
• Does not provide EPA with the
discretionary authority to address
disproportionate human health or
environmental effects with practical,
appropriate, and legally permissible
methods under Executive Order 12898
(59 FR 7629, February 16, 1994).
In addition, this rule does not have
tribal implications as specified by
Executive Order 13175 (65 FR 67249,
VerDate Mar<15>2010
17:24 Aug 15, 2013
Jkt 229001
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 October 15, 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,
Nitrogen dioxide, Ozone, Reporting and
recordkeeping requirements, Volatile
organic compounds.
Dated: July 26, 2013.
Jared Blumenfeld,
Regional Administrator, Region IX.
Part 52, Chapter I, Title 40 of the Code
of Federal Regulations is amended as
follows:
PO 00000
Frm 00025
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
49927
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 paragraphs (c)(70)(i)(B)(1),
(c)(164)(i)(C)(5) and (c)(270)(i)(A)(2) to
read as follows:
■
§ 52.220
Identification of plan.
*
*
*
*
*
(c) * * *
(70) * * *
(i) * * *
(B) * * *
(1) Previously approved on September
2, 1981 in paragraph (c)(70)(i)(B) of this
section and now deleted without
replacement, for the Antelope Valley
area only, Antelope Valley Rule 1101,
previously South Coast Rule 1101.
South Coast Rule 1101 remains in effect
for the South Coast area.
*
*
*
*
*
(164) * * *
(i) * * *
(C) * * *
(5) Previously approved on April 17,
1987 in paragraph (c)(164)(i)(C)(1) of
this section and now deleted without
replacement, Ventura County Rule 67.
*
*
*
*
*
(270) * * *
(i) * * *
(A) * * *
(2) Previously approved on December
13, 1999 in paragraph (c)(270)(i)(A)(1) of
this section and now deleted without
replacement, Ventura County Rule 37.
*
*
*
*
*
[FR Doc. 2013–19872 Filed 8–15–13; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560–50–P
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION
AGENCY
40 CFR Part 180
[EPA–HQ–OPP–2012–0384; FRL–9394–8]
Imazapic; Pesticide Tolerances
Environmental Protection
Agency (EPA).
ACTION: Final rule.
AGENCY:
This regulation establishes a
tolerance for residues of imazapic in or
on sugarcane, cane. BASF Corporation
requested this tolerance under the
Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act
(FFDCA).
DATES: This regulation is effective
August 16, 2013. Objections and
SUMMARY:
E:\FR\FM\16AUR1.SGM
16AUR1
Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 78, Number 159 (Friday, August 16, 2013)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 49925-49927]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2013-19872]
=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
40 CFR Part 52
[EPA-R09-OAR-2013-0394; FRL-9845-5]
Revisions to California State Implementation Plan, Antelope
Valley Air Quality Management District and Ventura County 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
Antelope Valley Air Quality Air Management District (AVAQMD) and
Ventura County Air Pollution Control District (VCAPCD) portions of the
California State Implementation Plan (SIP). Under authority of the
Clean Air Act (CAA or the Act), we are rescinding local rules that
concern sulfur oxide emissions from lead smelters for AVAQMD and
volatile organic compounds (VOC) emissions from the data storage for
VCAPCD and vacuum producing device industries for VCAPCD.
DATES: These rules are effective on October 15, 2013 without further
notice, unless EPA receives adverse comments by September 16, 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-
2013-0394, 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
[[Page 49926]]
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: Robert Marinaro, EPA Region IX, (415)
972-3019, marinaro.robert@epa.gov.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Throughout this document, ``we,'' ``us'' and
``our'' refer to EPA.
Table of Contents
I. The State's Submittal
A. What rules did the State submit?
B. Are there other versions of these rules?
C. What is the purpose of the submitted rules?
II. EPA's Evaluation and Action
A. How is EPA evaluating the rules?
B. Do the rules meet the evaluation criteria?
C. Public Comment and Final Action.
III. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews
I. The State's Submittal
A. What rules did the State submit?
Table 1 lists the rule rescissions we are approving with the dates
that they were rescinded by the local air agencies and submitted by the
California Air Resources Board.
Table 1--Submitted Rules
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Rule Rule title revised Rescinded Submitted
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
AVAQMD................... 1101 Secondary Lead Smelters/ 10/07/77 2/21/12 02/06/13
Sulfur Oxides
(rescinded).
VCAPCD................... 37 Project XL (rescinded).. 09/14/99 6/12/12 02/06/13
VCAPCD................... 67 Vacuum Producing Devices 07/05/83 6/12/12 02/06/13
(rescinded).
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
On April 9, 2013, EPA determined that the submittal for AVAQMD Rule
1101, and VCAPCD Rules 37 and 67 met the completeness criteria in 40
CFR Part 51 Appendix V, which must be met before formal EPA review.
B. Are there other versions of these rules?
We approved versions of AVAQMD Rule 1101 into the SIP on September
2, 1981 (46 FR 43968), VCAPCD Rule 37 on December 13, 1999 (64 FR
69404), and VCAPCD Rule 67 on April 17, 1987 (52 FR 12522).
C. What is the purpose of the submitted rules?
Section 110(a) of the CAA requires States to submit regulations
that control volatile organic compounds, oxides of nitrogen,
particulate matter, and other air pollutants which harm human health
and the environment. These rules were developed as part of the local
agency's program to control these pollutants.
AVAQMD Rule 1101, Secondary Lead Smelters/Sulfur Oxides; VCAPCD
Rule 37, Project XL; and VCAPCD Rule 67, Vacuum Producing Devices were
originally adopted to help reduce these various air pollutants but are
being rescinded because there are no longer any sources in the
Districts subject to them and none are anticipated in the future.
II. EPA's Evaluation and Action
A. How is EPA evaluating the rules?
These rules describe requirements intended to help control
emissions from lead smelters in AVAQMD, data storage in VCAPCD and
vacuum producing devices in VCAPCD. These rule rescissions must not
relax existing requirements consistent with CAA sections 110(l) and
193. EPA policy that we used to evaluate these rule revisions includes
``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).
B. Do the rules meet the evaluation criteria?
The Districts have requested rescission because they no longer have
any sources subject to these rules, they do not expect any new sources
in the future, and any new sources would be subject to restrictive NSR
permitting requirements. The Districts have reviewed permit databases,
emission inventories, and trade group contacts to determine that they
have no sources, and we have reviewed their analysis and have no basis
to question their analysis. Therefore, we believe these rule
rescissions are consistent with relevant policy and guidance.
C. Public Comment and Final Action.
As authorized in section 110(k)(3) of the Act, EPA is fully
approving the submitted rule rescissions because we believe they
fulfill all relevant requirements. We do not think anyone will object
to this approval, so we are finalizing it without proposing it in
advance. However, in the Proposed Rules section of this Federal
Register, we are simultaneously proposing approval of the same
submitted rule rescissions. If we receive adverse comments by September
16, 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
October 15, 2013. This will remove these rules from the federally
enforceable SIP.
Please note that if EPA receives adverse comment on an amendment,
paragraph, or section of this rule and if that provision may be severed
from the
[[Page 49927]]
remainder of the rule, EPA may adopt as final those provisions of the
rule that are not the subject of an adverse comment.
III. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews
Under the Clean Air Act, the Administrator is required to approve a
SIP submission that complies with the provisions of the Act and
applicable Federal regulations. 42 U.S.C. 7410(k); 40 CFR 52.02(a).
Thus, in reviewing SIP submissions, EPA's role is to approve State
choices, provided that they meet the criteria of the Clean Air Act.
Accordingly, this action merely approves State law as meeting Federal
requirements and does not impose additional requirements beyond those
imposed by State law. For that reason, this action:
Is not a ``significant regulatory action'' subject to
review by the Office of Management and Budget under Executive Order
12866 (58 FR 51735, October 4, 1993);
Does not impose an information collection burden under the
provisions of the Paperwork Reduction Act (44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.);
Is certified as not having a significant economic impact
on a substantial number of small entities under the Regulatory
Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 601 et seq.);
Does not contain any unfunded mandate or significantly or
uniquely affect small governments, as described in the Unfunded
Mandates Reform Act of 1995 (Pub. L. 104-4);
Does not have Federalism implications as specified in
Executive Order 13132 (64 FR 43255, August 10, 1999);
Is not an economically significant regulatory action based
on health or safety risks subject to Executive Order 13045 (62 FR
19885, April 23, 1997);
Is not a significant regulatory action subject to
Executive Order 13211 (66 FR 28355, May 22, 2001);
Is not subject to requirements of Section 12(d) of the
National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act of 1995 (15 U.S.C. 272
note) because application of those requirements would be inconsistent
with the Clean Air Act; and
Does not provide EPA with the discretionary authority to
address disproportionate human health or environmental effects with
practical, appropriate, and legally permissible methods under Executive
Order 12898 (59 FR 7629, February 16, 1994).
In addition, 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 October 15, 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, Nitrogen dioxide, Ozone,
Reporting and recordkeeping requirements, Volatile organic compounds.
Dated: July 26, 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 paragraphs (c)(70)(i)(B)(1),
(c)(164)(i)(C)(5) and (c)(270)(i)(A)(2) to read as follows:
Sec. 52.220 Identification of plan.
* * * * *
(c) * * *
(70) * * *
(i) * * *
(B) * * *
(1) Previously approved on September 2, 1981 in paragraph
(c)(70)(i)(B) of this section and now deleted without replacement, for
the Antelope Valley area only, Antelope Valley Rule 1101, previously
South Coast Rule 1101. South Coast Rule 1101 remains in effect for the
South Coast area.
* * * * *
(164) * * *
(i) * * *
(C) * * *
(5) Previously approved on April 17, 1987 in paragraph
(c)(164)(i)(C)(1) of this section and now deleted without replacement,
Ventura County Rule 67.
* * * * *
(270) * * *
(i) * * *
(A) * * *
(2) Previously approved on December 13, 1999 in paragraph
(c)(270)(i)(A)(1) of this section and now deleted without replacement,
Ventura County Rule 37.
* * * * *
[FR Doc. 2013-19872 Filed 8-15-13; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P