Revision of Air Quality Implementation Plan; California; Sacramento Metropolitan Air Quality Management District; Stationary Source Permits, 53270-53272 [2013-20920]
Download as PDF
53270
Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 168 / Thursday, August 29, 2013 / Rules and Regulations
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 28, 2013.
Filing a petition for reconsideration by
the Administrator of this final rule does
not affect the finality of this action for
the purposed 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, Nitrogen dioxide, Particulate
matter, Reporting and recordkeeping
requirements, Sulfur oxides, Volatile
organic compounds.
Dated: August 14, 2013.
William K. Honker,
Acting Regional Administrator, Region 6.
40 CFR part 52 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 E—Arkansas
2. The third table in § 52.170(e)
entitled ‘‘EPA-Approved Nonregulatory
Provisions and Quasi-Regulatory
Measures in the Arkansas SIP’’ is
amended by adding an entry at the end
for ‘‘Interstate transport for the 1997 and
2006 PM2.5 NAAQS’’ to read as follows:
■
§ 52.170
Identification of plan.
*
*
*
(e) * * *
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
EPA-APPROVED NON-REGULATORY PROVISIONS AND QUASI-REGULATORY MEASURES IN THE ARKANSAS SIP
Applicable
geographic or
nonattainment
area
Name of SIP provision
*
*
Interstate transport for the 1997 and
2006 PM2.5 NAAQS (contribute to nonattainment or interfere with maintenance).
*
Statewide ..........
BILLING CODE 6560–50–P
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION
AGENCY
40 CFR Part 52
[EPA–R09–OAR–2013–0064; FRL–9813–9]
Revision of Air Quality Implementation
Plan; California; Sacramento
Metropolitan Air Quality Management
District; Stationary Source Permits
Environmental Protection
Agency (EPA).
ACTION: Final rule and technical
amendments.
AGENCY:
mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with RULES
22:38 Aug 28, 2013
Jkt 229001
*
8/29/2013 [Insert FR page
where document begins].
Explanation
*
number
*
concern construction and modification
of stationary sources of air pollution
within Sacramento County. We are
approving local rules that regulate these
emission sources under the Clean Air
Act as amended in 1990 (CAA). Final
approval of these rules makes the rules
federally enforceable and corrects
program deficiencies identified in a
previous EPA rulemaking (76 FR 43183,
July 20, 2011). EPA is also making
technical amendments to the Code of
Federal Regulations (CFR) to reflect this
previous rulemaking, which removed an
obsolete provision from the California
SIP.
information may be publicly available
only at the hard copy location (e.g.,
copyrighted material, large maps, multivolume reports), 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:
Laura Yannayon, EPA Region IX, (415)
972–3534, yannayon.laura@epa.gov.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Throughout this document, ‘‘we,’’ ‘‘us’’
and ‘‘our’’ refer to EPA.
Table of Contents
EPA has established docket
number EPA–R09–OAR–2013–0064 for
this action. Generally, documents in the
docket for this action are available
electronically at www.regulations.gov or
in hard copy at EPA Region IX, 75
Hawthorne Street, San Francisco,
California. While all documents are
listed at www.regulations.gov, some
I. Proposed Action
DATES:
EPA is finalizing approval of
two permitting rules submitted by
California as a revision to the
Sacramento Metropolitan Air Quality
Management District (SMAQMD or
District) portion of the California State
Implementation Plan (SIP). These
revisions were proposed in the Federal
Register on February 14, 2013 and
VerDate Mar<15>2010
*
12/17/2007
9/16/2009
EPA approval date
Effective Date: This rule is
effective on September 30, 2013.
[FR Doc. 2013–21024 Filed 8–28–13; 8:45 am]
SUMMARY:
State
submittal/
effective date
ADDRESSES:
PO 00000
Frm 00034
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
I. Proposed Action
II. Public Comments and EPA Responses
III. EPA Action
IV. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews
On February 14, 2013 (78 FR 10589),
EPA proposed to fully approve the
following rules that were submitted for
incorporation into the California SIP.
E:\FR\FM\29AUR1.SGM
29AUR1
53271
Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 168 / Thursday, August 29, 2013 / Rules and Regulations
TABLE 1—SUBMITTED RULES
Local agency
SMAQMD ..........
SMAQMD ..........
Rule No.
214
217
Rule title
Amended/adopted
Federal New Source Review .......................................
Public Notice Requirements for Permits .....................
Amended 8/23/12 ...........................
Adopted 8/23/12 .............................
mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with RULES
We proposed to approve these rules
based on a conclusion that they satisfy
the applicable CAA requirements. Our
proposed rule and related Technical
Support Document (TSD) contain more
information on the basis for this
rulemaking and on our evaluation of the
submitted rules.
II. Public Comments and EPA
Responses
EPA’s proposed action provided a 30day public comment period. During this
period, we received one comment from
the SMAQMD. We summarize the
comment and provide our response
below.
Comment: The SMAQMD requested
confirmation that EPA’s final rule to
approve Rule 214 and Rule 217 into the
SIP will remove the 1984 version of
Rule 202 (‘‘New Source Review’’) from
the California SIP. The District stated
that, based on EPA’s statements in the
TSD for a previous rulemaking action on
SMAQMD permitting rules that were
intended to replace Rule 202 in the SIP
(76 FR 43183, July 20, 2011), the District
had expected that Rule 202 would be
removed from the SIP but that the
necessary language to amend the
California SIP in 40 CFR part 52 had not
been included in EPA’s final rule. The
SMAQMD stated that it supports EPA’s
proposed approvals and requests only
that the regulatory language to delete
Rule 202 from the SIP be included in
EPA’s final action on Rule 214 and Rule
217.
EPA Response: We agree with the
District that SMAQMD Rule 202 should
have been removed from the California
SIP as a result of the referenced July 20,
2011 final action on SMAQMD
permitting rules that were intended to
replace Rule 202. Specifically, on July
20, 2011, EPA finalized a full approval
of Rule 203 and limited approval/
limited disapproval of Rule 214. See 76
FR 43183 (July 20, 2011). EPA explained
in the proposal for this rulemaking that
‘‘[t]hese two new rules will replace in
its entirety, the existing SIP approved
NSR/PSD programs contained in Rule
202.’’ 76 FR 28942 at 28943 (May 19,
2011); see also U.S. EPA, Region IX,
Technical Support Document for EPA’s
Notice of Proposed Rulemaking for the
California SIP, Sacramento Metropolitan
Air Quality Management District, Rule
214 (Federal New Source Review), Rule
VerDate Mar<15>2010
22:38 Aug 28, 2013
Jkt 229001
203 (Prevention of Significant
Deterioration), May 6, 2011, at 1 (‘‘Upon
approval into the SIP, [Rules 214 and
203] will replace current SIP Rule 202—
New Source Review, which was
approved into the SIP by EPA on June
19, 1985 (50 FR 25417).’’ EPA received
no comments on this proposed rule and
finalized the rulemaking as proposed.
See 76 FR 43183 (July 20, 2011). In the
final regulatory text codifying this final
action, however, EPA incorporated Rule
214 and Rule 203 into the SIP but
neglected to remove Rule 202. See 76 FR
at 43185.
In response to SMAQMD’s comment,
we are making a technical amendment
to 40 CFR 52.220 to correct this error by
removing Rule 202 from the SMAQMD
portion of the California SIP. This
technical amendment makes no change
to the substance of our July 20, 2011
final action or to today’s final action to
fully approve Rule 214 and Rule 217
into the California SIP.
III. EPA Action
No comments were submitted that
change our assessment that submitted
Rule 214 and Rule 217 satisfy the
applicable CAA requirements.
Therefore, under CAA section 110(k)(3)
and for the reasons set forth in our
February 14, 2013 proposed rule, we are
fully approving Rule 214 and Rule 217.
This action incorporates the submitted
rules into the SMAQMD portion of the
California SIP and makes them federally
enforceable.
Simultaneously, we are making a
technical amendment to 40 CFR 52.220
to remove Rule 202 from the SIP,
consistent with the District’s intent and
EPA’s final rule at 76 FR 43183 (July 20,
2011).
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
PO 00000
Frm 00035
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
Submitted
9/26/12
9/26/12
imposed by State law. For that reason,
this final 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 final 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.
List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52
Air pollution control, Environmental
protection, Incorporation by reference,
Intergovernmental relations, Nitrogen
dioxide, Ozone, Particulate matter,
E:\FR\FM\29AUR1.SGM
29AUR1
53272
Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 168 / Thursday, August 29, 2013 / Rules and Regulations
Reporting and recordkeeping
requirements, Volatile organic
compounds.
Dated: April 25, 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
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)(159)(i)(B) and
(c)(427) to read as follows:
■
§ 52.220
Identification of plan.
*
*
*
*
*
(c) * * *
(159) * * *
(i) * * *
(A) * * *
(B) Previously approved on February
6, 1985 and now deleted without
replacement: Rule 202.
*
*
*
*
*
(427) New and amended regulations
for the following APCDs were
submitted on September 26, 2012, by
the Governor’s Designee.
(i) Incorporation by Reference.
(A) Sacramento Metropolitan Air
Quality Management District.
(1) Rule 214, ‘‘Federal New Source
Review,’’ amended on August 23, 2012.
(2) Rule 217, ‘‘Public Notice
Requirements for Permits,’’ adopted on
August 23, 2012.
[FR Doc. 2013–20920 Filed 8–28–13; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560–50–P
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION
AGENCY
40 CFR Parts 52 and 81
mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with RULES
[EPA–R05–OAR–2011–0673; FRL–9900–49–
Region5]
Approval and Promulgation of Air
Quality Implementation Plans;
Michigan; Redesignation of the DetroitAnn Arbor Area to Attainment of the
1997 Annual Standard and the 2006
24-Hour Standard for Fine Particulate
Matter
Environmental Protection
Agency (EPA).
ACTION: Final rule.
AGENCY:
VerDate Mar<15>2010
22:38 Aug 28, 2013
Jkt 229001
EPA is approving, under the
Clean Air Act (CAA), the state of
Michigan’s request to redesignate the
Detroit-Ann Arbor nonattainment area
(Livingston, Macomb, Monroe, Oakland,
St. Clair, Washtenaw, and Wayne
Counties) to attainment for the 1997
annual and 2006 24-hour national
ambient air quality standards (NAAQS
or standard) for fine particulate matter
(PM2.5). On July 5, 2011, the Michigan
Department of Environmental Quality
(MDEQ) submitted a request for EPA to
redesignate the Detroit-Ann Arbor
Michigan nonattainment area. EPA
determined that the Detroit-Ann Arbor
area has attained the 1997 annual and
2006 24-hour PM2.5 standard, and
proposed on July 2, 2013, to approve
Michigan’s request to redesignate the
area. EPA is taking final action today on
that proposal. EPA also is taking final
action in this rulemaking on several
related proposals. EPA is approving, as
a revision to the Michigan state
implementation plan (SIP), the state’s
plan for maintaining the 1997 annual
and 2006 24-hour PM2.5 NAAQS in the
area through 2023. Finally, EPA finds
adequate and is approving Michigan’s
nitrogen oxides (NOX) and PM2.5 Motor
Vehicle Emission Budgets (MVEBs) for
2023 for the Detroit-Ann Arbor area.
EPA, therefore, grants Michigan’s
request to redesignate the Detroit-Ann
Arbor area to attainment for the 1997
annual and 2006 24-hour PM2.5
standards.
DATES: Effective Date: This rule will be
effective August 29, 2013.
ADDRESSES: EPA has established a
docket for this action under Docket
Identification EPA–R05–OAR–2011–
0673. All documents in these dockets
are listed on the www.regulations.gov
Web site. Although listed in the index,
some information is not publicly
available, e.g., CBI or other information
whose disclosure is restricted by statute.
Certain other material, such as
copyrighted material, will be publicly
available only in hard copy. Publicly
available docket materials are available
either electronically in
www.regulations.gov or in hard copy at
the U.S. Environmental Protection
Agency, Region 5, Air and Radiation
Division, 77 West Jackson Boulevard,
Chicago, Illinois 60604. This facility is
open from 8:30 a.m. to 4:30 p.m.,
Monday through Friday, excluding
Federal holidays. We recommend that
you telephone Carolyn Persoon at (312)
353–8290 before visiting the Region 5
office.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Carolyn Persoon, Environmental
Engineer, Control Strategies Section, Air
SUMMARY:
PO 00000
Frm 00036
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
Programs Branch (AR–18J),
Environmental Protection Agency,
Region 5, 77 West Jackson Boulevard,
Chicago, Illinois 60604, (312) 353–8290,
persoon.carolyn@epa.gov.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Throughout this document whenever
‘‘we,’’ ‘‘us,’’ or ‘‘our’’ is used, we mean
EPA. This supplementary information
section is arranged as follows:
I. What is the background for the actions?
II. What actions is EPA taking?
III. What is EPA’s response to comments?
IV. Why is EPA taking these actions?
V. Final Action
VI. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews
I. What is the background for the
actions?
On July 5, 2011, MDEQ submitted its
request to redesignate the Detroit-Ann
Arbor nonattainment area to attainment
for the 1997 annual and 2006 24-hour
PM2.5 NAAQS, and for EPA approval of
the state’s SIP revision containing a
maintenance plan for the area. On July
2, 2013, (78 FR 39654), EPA proposed
approval of Michigan’s redesignation
request and plan for maintaining the
1997 annual and 2006 24-hour PM2.5
NAAQS. EPA also proposed approval of
Michigan’s MVEBs for PM2.5 and NOX
for 2023 for the area. Additional
background for today’s action is set
forth in EPA’s July 2, 2013, proposed
rulemaking.
II. What actions is EPA taking?
EPA has determined that the entire
Detroit-Ann Arbor area is attaining the
1997 annual and 2006 24-hour PM2.5
standards (78 FR 39654) and that the
Detroit-Ann Arbor area has met the
requirements for redesignation under
section 107(d)(3)(E) of the CAA. Thus,
EPA is approving the requests from the
state of Michigan to change the legal
designation of the Detroit-Ann Arbor
area from nonattainment to attainment
for the 1997 annual and 2006 24-hour
PM2.5 NAAQS. EPA is also taking
several additional actions related to
Michigan’s PM2.5 redesignation
requests, as discussed below.
EPA is approving Michigan’s PM2.5
maintenance plan for the Detroit-Ann
Arbor area as a revision to the Michigan
SIP (such approval being one of the
CAA criteria for redesignation to
attainment status). The maintenance
plan is designed to keep the Detroit-Ann
Arbor area in attainment of the 1997
annual and 2006 24-hour PM2.5 NAAQS
through 2023.
EPA also finds adequate and is
approving Michigan’s 2023 primary
PM2.5 and NOX MVEBs for the DetroitAnn Arbor area. These MVEBs will be
E:\FR\FM\29AUR1.SGM
29AUR1
Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 78, Number 168 (Thursday, August 29, 2013)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 53270-53272]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2013-20920]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
40 CFR Part 52
[EPA-R09-OAR-2013-0064; FRL-9813-9]
Revision of Air Quality Implementation Plan; California;
Sacramento Metropolitan Air Quality Management District; Stationary
Source Permits
AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).
ACTION: Final rule and technical amendments.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: EPA is finalizing approval of two permitting rules submitted
by California as a revision to the Sacramento Metropolitan Air Quality
Management District (SMAQMD or District) portion of the California
State Implementation Plan (SIP). These revisions were proposed in the
Federal Register on February 14, 2013 and concern construction and
modification of stationary sources of air pollution within Sacramento
County. We are approving local rules that regulate these emission
sources under the Clean Air Act as amended in 1990 (CAA). Final
approval of these rules makes the rules federally enforceable and
corrects program deficiencies identified in a previous EPA rulemaking
(76 FR 43183, July 20, 2011). EPA is also making technical amendments
to the Code of Federal Regulations (CFR) to reflect this previous
rulemaking, which removed an obsolete provision from the California
SIP.
DATES: Effective Date: This rule is effective on September 30, 2013.
ADDRESSES: EPA has established docket number EPA-R09-OAR-2013-0064 for
this action. Generally, documents in the docket for this action are
available electronically at www.regulations.gov or in hard copy at EPA
Region IX, 75 Hawthorne Street, San Francisco, California. While all
documents are listed at 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
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: Laura Yannayon, EPA Region IX, (415)
972-3534, yannayon.laura@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 February 14, 2013 (78 FR 10589), EPA proposed to fully approve
the following rules that were submitted for incorporation into the
California SIP.
[[Page 53271]]
Table 1--Submitted Rules
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Local agency Rule No. Rule title Amended/adopted Submitted
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
SMAQMD.................... 214 Federal New Source Amended 8/23/12...... 9/26/12
Review.
SMAQMD.................... 217 Public Notice Adopted 8/23/12...... 9/26/12
Requirements for
Permits.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
We proposed to approve these rules based on a conclusion that they
satisfy the applicable CAA requirements. Our proposed rule and related
Technical Support Document (TSD) contain more information on the basis
for this rulemaking and on our evaluation of the submitted rules.
II. Public Comments and EPA Responses
EPA's proposed action provided a 30-day public comment period.
During this period, we received one comment from the SMAQMD. We
summarize the comment and provide our response below.
Comment: The SMAQMD requested confirmation that EPA's final rule to
approve Rule 214 and Rule 217 into the SIP will remove the 1984 version
of Rule 202 (``New Source Review'') from the California SIP. The
District stated that, based on EPA's statements in the TSD for a
previous rulemaking action on SMAQMD permitting rules that were
intended to replace Rule 202 in the SIP (76 FR 43183, July 20, 2011),
the District had expected that Rule 202 would be removed from the SIP
but that the necessary language to amend the California SIP in 40 CFR
part 52 had not been included in EPA's final rule. The SMAQMD stated
that it supports EPA's proposed approvals and requests only that the
regulatory language to delete Rule 202 from the SIP be included in
EPA's final action on Rule 214 and Rule 217.
EPA Response: We agree with the District that SMAQMD Rule 202
should have been removed from the California SIP as a result of the
referenced July 20, 2011 final action on SMAQMD permitting rules that
were intended to replace Rule 202. Specifically, on July 20, 2011, EPA
finalized a full approval of Rule 203 and limited approval/limited
disapproval of Rule 214. See 76 FR 43183 (July 20, 2011). EPA explained
in the proposal for this rulemaking that ``[t]hese two new rules will
replace in its entirety, the existing SIP approved NSR/PSD programs
contained in Rule 202.'' 76 FR 28942 at 28943 (May 19, 2011); see also
U.S. EPA, Region IX, Technical Support Document for EPA's Notice of
Proposed Rulemaking for the California SIP, Sacramento Metropolitan Air
Quality Management District, Rule 214 (Federal New Source Review), Rule
203 (Prevention of Significant Deterioration), May 6, 2011, at 1
(``Upon approval into the SIP, [Rules 214 and 203] will replace current
SIP Rule 202--New Source Review, which was approved into the SIP by EPA
on June 19, 1985 (50 FR 25417).'' EPA received no comments on this
proposed rule and finalized the rulemaking as proposed. See 76 FR 43183
(July 20, 2011). In the final regulatory text codifying this final
action, however, EPA incorporated Rule 214 and Rule 203 into the SIP
but neglected to remove Rule 202. See 76 FR at 43185.
In response to SMAQMD's comment, we are making a technical
amendment to 40 CFR 52.220 to correct this error by removing Rule 202
from the SMAQMD portion of the California SIP. This technical amendment
makes no change to the substance of our July 20, 2011 final action or
to today's final action to fully approve Rule 214 and Rule 217 into the
California SIP.
III. EPA Action
No comments were submitted that change our assessment that
submitted Rule 214 and Rule 217 satisfy the applicable CAA
requirements. Therefore, under CAA section 110(k)(3) and for the
reasons set forth in our February 14, 2013 proposed rule, we are fully
approving Rule 214 and Rule 217. This action incorporates the submitted
rules into the SMAQMD portion of the California SIP and makes them
federally enforceable.
Simultaneously, we are making a technical amendment to 40 CFR
52.220 to remove Rule 202 from the SIP, consistent with the District's
intent and EPA's final rule at 76 FR 43183 (July 20, 2011).
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 final 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 final 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.
List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52
Air pollution control, Environmental protection, Incorporation by
reference, Intergovernmental relations, Nitrogen dioxide, Ozone,
Particulate matter,
[[Page 53272]]
Reporting and recordkeeping requirements, Volatile organic compounds.
Dated: April 25, 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)(159)(i)(B) and
(c)(427) to read as follows:
Sec. 52.220 Identification of plan.
* * * * *
(c) * * *
(159) * * *
(i) * * *
(A) * * *
(B) Previously approved on February 6, 1985 and now deleted without
replacement: Rule 202.
* * * * *
(427) New and amended regulations for the following APCDs were
submitted on September 26, 2012, by the Governor's Designee.
(i) Incorporation by Reference.
(A) Sacramento Metropolitan Air Quality Management District.
(1) Rule 214, ``Federal New Source Review,'' amended on August 23,
2012.
(2) Rule 217, ``Public Notice Requirements for Permits,'' adopted
on August 23, 2012.
[FR Doc. 2013-20920 Filed 8-28-13; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P