Revisions to the California State Implementation Plan, Santa Barbara County Air Pollution Control District, 4821-4823 [2014-01317]

Download as PDF TKELLEY on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with RULES Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 20 / Thursday, January 30, 2014 / Rules and Regulations significantly or uniquely affect small governments or impose a significant intergovernmental mandate, as described in sections 203 and 204 of UMRA. This rule also 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, as specified by Executive Order 13175 (65 FR 67249, November 9, 2000), nor will it 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 governments, as specified by Executive Order 13132 (64 FR 43255, August 10, 1999). This rule also is not subject to Executive Order 13045 (62 FR 19885, April 23, 1997), because it is not economically significant. This technical correction action does not involve technical standards; thus the requirements of section 12(d) of the National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act of 1995 (15 U.S.C. 272 note) do not apply. The rule also does not involve special consideration of environmental justice related issues as required by Executive Order 12898 (59 FR 7629, February 16, 1994). In issuing this rule, EPA has taken the necessary steps to eliminate drafting errors and ambiguity, minimize potential litigation, and provide a clear legal standard for affected conduct, as required by section 3 of Executive Order 12988 (61 FR 4729, February 7, 1996). EPA has complied with Executive Order 12630 (53 FR 8859, March 15, 1998) by examining the takings implications of the rule in accordance with the ‘‘Attorney General’s Supplemental Guidelines for the Evaluation of Risk and Avoidance of Unanticipated Takings’’ issued under the executive order. This rule does not impose an information collection burden under the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq). 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. Section 808 allows the issuing agency to make a rule effective sooner than otherwise provided by the CRA if the agency makes a good cause finding that notice and public procedure is impracticable, unnecessary or contrary to the public VerDate Mar<15>2010 16:23 Jan 29, 2014 Jkt 232001 interest. This determination must be supported by a brief statement. 5 U.S.C. 808(2). As stated previously, EPA has made such a good cause finding, including the reasons therefore, and established an effective date of January 16, 2014. EPA will submit a report containing this rule 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. This correction to 40 CFR 52.427(c) for Delaware is not a ‘‘major rule’’ as defined by 5 U.S.C. 804(2). Dated: January 8, 2014. W.C. Early, Acting Regional Administrator, EPA Region III. [FR Doc. 2014–01722 Filed 1–29–14; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6560–50–P ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY 40 CFR Part 52 [EPA–R09–OAR–2013–0725; FRL–9904–02– Region 9] Revisions to the California State Implementation Plan, Santa Barbara County Air Pollution Control District Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). ACTION: Direct final rule. AGENCY: The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is taking direct final action to approve revisions to the Santa Barbara County Air Pollution Control District (SBCAPCD) portion of the California State Implementation Plan (SIP). These revisions concern volatile organic compound (VOC) emissions from solvent cleaning machines and operations, coating of metal parts and products and polyester resin operations. We are approving local rules that regulate these emission sources under the Clean Air Act as amended in 1990 (CAA or the Act). DATES: This rule is effective on March 31, 2014 without further notice, unless EPA receives adverse comments by March 3, 2014. 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–2013–0725, by one of the following methods: 1. Federal eRulemaking Portal: www.regulations.gov. Follow the on-line instructions. SUMMARY: PO 00000 Frm 00005 Fmt 4700 Sfmt 4700 4821 2. Email: steckel.andrew@epa.gov. 3. Mail or deliver: Andrew Steckel (Air-4), U.S. Environmental Protection Agency Region IX, 75 Hawthorne Street, San Francisco, CA 94105–3901. Instructions: All comments will be included in the public docket without change and may be made available online at www.regulations.gov, including any personal information provided, unless the comment includes Confidential Business Information (CBI) or other information whose disclosure is restricted by statute. Information that you consider CBI or otherwise protected should be clearly identified as such and should not be submitted through www.regulations.gov or email. www.regulations.gov is an ‘‘anonymous access’’ system, and EPA will not know your identity or contact information unless you provide it in the body of your comment. If you send email directly to EPA, your email address will be automatically captured and included as part of the public comment. If EPA cannot read your comment due to technical difficulties and cannot contact you for clarification, EPA may not be able to consider your comment. Electronic files should avoid the use of special characters, any form of encryption, and be free of any defects or viruses. Docket: Generally, documents in the docket for this action are available electronically at www.regulations.gov and in hard copy at EPA Region IX, 75 Hawthorne Street, San Francisco, California. While all documents in the docket are listed at www.regulations.gov, some information may be publicly available only at the hard copy location (e.g., copyrighted material, large maps), and some may not be publicly available in either location (e.g., CBI). To inspect the hard copy materials, please schedule an appointment during normal business hours with the contact listed in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Adrianne Borgia, EPA Region IX, (415) 972–3576, borgia.adrianne@epa.gov or Nancy Levin, EPA Region IX, (415) 972– 3848, levin.nancy@epa.gov. 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. EPA Recommendations To Further Improve the Rules D. Public Comment and Final Action E:\FR\FM\30JAR1.SGM 30JAR1 4822 Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 20 / Thursday, January 30, 2014 / Rules and Regulations III. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews I. The State’s Submittal A. What rules did the State submit? Table 1 lists the rules we are approving with the dates that they were adopted by SBCAPCD and submitted by the California Air Resources Board (CARB). TABLE 1—SUBMITTED RULES Local agency Rule No. SBCAPCD ............................... SBCAPCD ............................... SBCAPCD ............................... 321 330 349 Rule title Revised Solvent Cleaning Machines and Solvent Cleaning ................... Surface Coating of Metal Parts and Products .......................... Polyester Resin Operations ....................................................... B. Are there other versions of these rules? Solvents’’, EPA, September 2006 (EPA–453/ R–06–001) We approved an earlier version of SBCAPCD Rule 321 into the SIP on September 29, 2011 (76 FR 60376). A previous version of SBCAPCD 330 was approved into the SIP on June 8, 2000 (65 FR 36349). The most recent version of SBCAPCD Rule 349 was approved into the SIP on January 6, 1995 (60 FR 2025). B. Do the rules meet the evaluation criteria? We believe these rules are consistent with the relevant policy and guidance regarding enforceability, RACT and SIP relaxations. The TSDs have more information on our evaluation. C. What is the purpose of the submitted rules? 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 by limiting VOC content in solvents and coatings. EPA’s technical support documents (TSDs) have more information about these rules. II. EPA’s Evaluation and Action A. How is EPA evaluating the rules? TKELLEY on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with RULES Generally, SIP rules must be enforceable (see section 110(a) of the Act), and must not relax existing requirements (see sections 110(1) and 193). In addition, SIP rules must implement Reasonably Available Control Measures (RACM), including Reasonably Available Control Technology (RACT), in moderate and above ozone nonattainment areas. Guidance and policy documents that we use to evaluate enforceability and RACT requirements consistently include the following: 1. ‘‘Issues Relating to VOC Regulation Cutpoints, Deficiencies, and Deviations’’ EPA, May 25, 1988 (the Bluebook), 2. ‘‘Guidance Document for Correcting Common VOC & Other Rule Deficiencies’’ EPA, Region 9, August 21, 2001 (the Little Bluebook), 3. ‘‘Control Techniques Guidelines for Control Techniques Guidelines for Miscellaneous Industrial Adhesives’’ EPA, December 1977 (EPA–453/R–08–005), 4. ‘‘Control Techniques Guidelines for Control of Volatile Organic Compound Emissions from Industrial Cleaning VerDate Mar<15>2010 16:23 Jan 29, 2014 Jkt 232001 C. EPA Recommendations To Further Improve the Rules The TSDs describe additional rule revisions that we recommend for the next time the local agency modifies the rules. D. Public Comment and Final Action As authorized in section 110(k)(3) of the Act, EPA is fully approving the submitted rules 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 rules. If we receive adverse comments by March 3, 2014, 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 March 31, 2014. This will incorporate these rules into 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 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 PO 00000 Frm 00006 Fmt 4700 Sfmt 4700 6/21/12 06/21/12 06/21/12 Submitted 09/21/12 09/21/12 09/21/12 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, E:\FR\FM\30JAR1.SGM 30JAR1 Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 20 / Thursday, January 30, 2014 / Rules and Regulations TKELLEY on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with RULES 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 March 31, 2014. 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, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements, Volatile organic compounds. VerDate Mar<15>2010 16:23 Jan 29, 2014 Jkt 232001 Dated: November 22, 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)(423) (i)(E)(3), (4) and (5) to read as follows: ■ § 52.220 Identification of plan. * * * * * (c) * * * (423) * * * (i) * * * (E) * * * (3) Rule 321, ‘‘Solvent Cleaning Machines and Solvent Cleaning,’’ revised on June 21, 2012. (4) Rule 330, ‘‘Surface Coating of Metal Parts and Products,’’ revised on June 21, 2012. (5) Rule 349, ‘‘Polyester Resin Operations,’’ revised on June 21, 2012. * * * * * [FR Doc. 2014–01317 Filed 1–29–14; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6560–50–P DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration 50 CFR Part 622 [Docket No. 101206604–1758–02] RIN 0648–XD100 Fisheries of the Caribbean, Gulf of Mexico, and South Atlantic; Coastal Migratory Pelagic Resources of the Gulf of Mexico and South Atlantic; Trip Limit Increase National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS), National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), Commerce. ACTION: Temporary rule; in-season trip limit increase. AGENCY: NMFS increases the trip limit in the commercial sector for king mackerel in the Florida east coast subzone to 75 fish per day in or from the exclusive economic zone (EEZ). This trip limit increase is necessary to SUMMARY: PO 00000 Frm 00007 Fmt 4700 Sfmt 4700 4823 maximize the socioeconomic benefits of the quota. DATES: This rule is effective 12:01 a.m., local time, February 1, 2014, through March 31, 2014, unless changed by further notification in the Federal Register. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Susan Gerhart, telephone: 727–824– 5305, email: Susan.Gerhart@noaa.gov. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The fishery for coastal migratory pelagic fish (king mackerel, Spanish mackerel, and cobia) is managed under the Fishery Management Plan for the Coastal Migratory Pelagic Resources of the Gulf of Mexico and South Atlantic (FMP). The FMP was prepared by the Gulf of Mexico and South Atlantic Fishery Management Councils (Councils) and is implemented under the authority of the Magnuson-Stevens Fishery Conservation and Management Act (Magnuson-Stevens Act) by regulations at 50 CFR part 622. On January 30, 2012 (76 FR 82058, December 29, 2011), NMFS implemented a commercial quota of 1,102,896 lb (500,265 kg) for Gulf migratory group king mackerel in the Florida east coast subzone of the eastern zone (50 CFR 622.384(b)(1)(i)(A)), for the current fishing year, July 1, 2013, through June 30, 2014. From November 1 through March 31, the Florida east coast subzone encompasses an area of the EEZ south of a line extending due east of the Flagler/Volusia County, FL, boundary, and north of a line extending due east of the Miami-Dade/Monroe County, FL, boundary. In accordance with 50 CFR 622.385(a)(2)(i)(B)(2), beginning on February 1, if less than 75 percent of the Florida east coast subzone king mackerel commercial quota has been harvested by that date, king mackerel in or from that subzone may be possessed on board or landed from a permitted vessel in amounts not exceeding 75 fish per day. NMFS has determined that 75 percent of the quota for Gulf group king mackerel in the Florida east coast subzone will not be reached before February 1, 2014. Accordingly, a 75-fish trip limit applies to vessels fishing for king mackerel in or from the EEZ in the Florida east coast subzone effective 12:01 a.m., local time, February 1, 2014. The 75-fish trip limit will remain in effect until the subzone closes or until the end of the current fishing year (March 31, 2014) for this subzone. Classification The Regional Administrator, Southeast Region, NMFS, has determined this temporary rule is E:\FR\FM\30JAR1.SGM 30JAR1

Agencies

[Federal Register Volume 79, Number 20 (Thursday, January 30, 2014)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 4821-4823]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2014-01317]


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

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

40 CFR Part 52

[EPA-R09-OAR-2013-0725; FRL-9904-02-Region 9]


Revisions to the California State Implementation Plan, Santa 
Barbara County Air Pollution Control District

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Direct final rule.

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

SUMMARY: The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is taking direct 
final action to approve revisions to the Santa Barbara County Air 
Pollution Control District (SBCAPCD) portion of the California State 
Implementation Plan (SIP). These revisions concern volatile organic 
compound (VOC) emissions from solvent cleaning machines and operations, 
coating of metal parts and products and polyester resin operations. We 
are approving local rules that regulate these emission sources under 
the Clean Air Act as amended in 1990 (CAA or the Act).

DATES: This rule is effective on March 31, 2014 without further notice, 
unless EPA receives adverse comments by March 3, 2014. 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-
2013-0725, by one of the following methods:
    1. Federal eRulemaking Portal: www.regulations.gov. Follow the on-
line instructions.
    2. Email: steckel.andrew@epa.gov.
    3. Mail or deliver: Andrew Steckel (Air-4), U.S. Environmental 
Protection Agency Region IX, 75 Hawthorne Street, San Francisco, CA 
94105-3901.
    Instructions: All comments will be included in the public docket 
without change and may be made available online at www.regulations.gov, 
including any personal information provided, unless the comment 
includes Confidential Business Information (CBI) or other information 
whose disclosure is restricted by statute. Information that you 
consider CBI or otherwise protected should be clearly identified as 
such and should not be submitted through www.regulations.gov or email. 
www.regulations.gov is an ``anonymous access'' system, and EPA will not 
know your identity or contact information unless you provide it in the 
body of your comment. If you send email directly to EPA, your email 
address will be automatically captured and included as part of the 
public comment. If EPA cannot read your comment due to technical 
difficulties and cannot contact you for clarification, EPA may not be 
able to consider your comment. Electronic files should avoid the use of 
special characters, any form of encryption, and be free of any defects 
or viruses.
    Docket: Generally, documents in the docket for this action are 
available electronically at www.regulations.gov and in hard copy at EPA 
Region IX, 75 Hawthorne Street, San Francisco, California. While all 
documents in the docket are listed at www.regulations.gov, some 
information may be publicly available only at the hard copy location 
(e.g., copyrighted material, large maps), and some may not be publicly 
available in either location (e.g., CBI). To inspect the hard copy 
materials, please schedule an appointment during normal business hours 
with the contact listed in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Adrianne Borgia, EPA Region IX, (415) 
972-3576, borgia.adrianne@epa.gov or Nancy Levin, EPA Region IX, (415) 
972-3848, levin.nancy@epa.gov.

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. EPA Recommendations To Further Improve the Rules
    D. Public Comment and Final Action

[[Page 4822]]

III. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews

I. The State's Submittal

A. What rules did the State submit?

    Table 1 lists the rules we are approving with the dates that they 
were adopted by SBCAPCD and submitted by the California Air Resources 
Board (CARB).

                                            Table 1--Submitted Rules
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
              Local agency                 Rule No.           Rule title              Revised        Submitted
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
SBCAPCD................................          321  Solvent Cleaning Machines          6/21/12        09/21/12
                                                       and Solvent Cleaning.
SBCAPCD................................          330  Surface Coating of Metal          06/21/12        09/21/12
                                                       Parts and Products.
SBCAPCD................................          349  Polyester Resin Operations        06/21/12        09/21/12
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

B. Are there other versions of these rules?

    We approved an earlier version of SBCAPCD Rule 321 into the SIP on 
September 29, 2011 (76 FR 60376). A previous version of SBCAPCD 330 was 
approved into the SIP on June 8, 2000 (65 FR 36349). The most recent 
version of SBCAPCD Rule 349 was approved into the SIP on January 6, 
1995 (60 FR 2025).

C. What is the purpose of the submitted rules?

    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 by limiting VOC 
content in solvents and coatings. EPA's technical support documents 
(TSDs) have more information about these rules.

II. EPA's Evaluation and Action

A. How is EPA evaluating the rules?

    Generally, SIP rules must be enforceable (see section 110(a) of the 
Act), and must not relax existing requirements (see sections 110(1) and 
193). In addition, SIP rules must implement Reasonably Available 
Control Measures (RACM), including Reasonably Available Control 
Technology (RACT), in moderate and above ozone nonattainment areas. 
Guidance and policy documents that we use to evaluate enforceability 
and RACT requirements consistently include the following:

    1. ``Issues Relating to VOC Regulation Cutpoints, Deficiencies, 
and Deviations'' EPA, May 25, 1988 (the Bluebook),
    2. ``Guidance Document for Correcting Common VOC & Other Rule 
Deficiencies'' EPA, Region 9, August 21, 2001 (the Little Bluebook),
    3. ``Control Techniques Guidelines for Control Techniques 
Guidelines for Miscellaneous Industrial Adhesives'' EPA, December 
1977 (EPA-453/R-08-005),
    4. ``Control Techniques Guidelines for Control of Volatile 
Organic Compound Emissions from Industrial Cleaning Solvents'', EPA, 
September 2006 (EPA-453/R-06-001)

B. Do the rules meet the evaluation criteria?

    We believe these rules are consistent with the relevant policy and 
guidance regarding enforceability, RACT and SIP relaxations. The TSDs 
have more information on our evaluation.

C. EPA Recommendations To Further Improve the Rules

    The TSDs describe additional rule revisions that we recommend for 
the next time the local agency modifies the rules.

D. Public Comment and Final Action

    As authorized in section 110(k)(3) of the Act, EPA is fully 
approving the submitted rules 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 rules. If we 
receive adverse comments by March 3, 2014, 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 March 31, 2014. This will incorporate these 
rules into 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 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,

[[Page 4823]]

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 March 31, 2014. 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, Reporting and recordkeeping 
requirements, Volatile organic compounds.

    Dated: November 22, 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)(423) (i)(E)(3), 
(4) and (5) to read as follows:


Sec.  52.220  Identification of plan.

* * * * *
    (c) * * *
    (423) * * *
    (i) * * *
    (E) * * *
    (3) Rule 321, ``Solvent Cleaning Machines and Solvent Cleaning,'' 
revised on June 21, 2012.
    (4) Rule 330, ``Surface Coating of Metal Parts and Products,'' 
revised on June 21, 2012.
    (5) Rule 349, ``Polyester Resin Operations,'' revised on June 21, 
2012.
* * * * *
[FR Doc. 2014-01317 Filed 1-29-14; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P