Revisions to the California State Implementation Plan, Imperial County Air Pollution Control District and San Joaquin Valley Unified Air Pollution Control District, 59433-59435 [2014-23400]
Download as PDF
<![CDATA[
Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 191 / Thursday, October 2, 2014 / Rules and Regulations
from the operating regulations is
authorized under 33 CFR 117.35.
This rule is effective on
December 1, 2014 without further
notice, unless EPA receives adverse
comments by November 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–2014–0460, 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
DATES:
Dated: September 19, 2014.
Eric A. Washburn,
Bridge Administrator, Western Rivers.
[FR Doc. 2014–23544 Filed 10–1–14; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 9110–04–P
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION
AGENCY
40 CFR Part 52
[EPA–R09–OAR–2014–0460; FRL–9915–37–
Region 9]
Revisions to the California State
Implementation Plan, Imperial County
Air Pollution Control District and San
Joaquin Valley Unified 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
Imperial County Air Pollution Control
District (ICAPCD) and San Joaquin
Valley Unified Air Pollution Control
District (SJVUAPCD) portions of the
California State Implementation Plan
(SIP). These revisions concern
definitions that are necessary for the
creation, modification and
understanding of rules that address air
pollution. Among other changes, the
revised definitions help clarify federal
New Source Review (NSR)
requirements, update the districts’
exempt volatile organic compounds list
to correspond with EPA’s, and improve
formatting consistency. We are
approving local rules that define terms
under the Clean Air Act (CAA or the
Act).
SUMMARY:
59433
encryption, and be free of any defects or
viruses.
Docket: Generally, documents in the
docket for this action are available
electronically at www.regulations.gov
and in hard copy at EPA Region IX, 75
Hawthorne Street, San Francisco,
California 94105–3901. While all
documents in the docket are listed at
www.regulations.gov, some information
may be publicly available only at the
hard copy location (e.g., copyrighted
material, large maps), and some may not
be publicly available in either location
(e.g., CBI). To inspect the hard copy
materials, please schedule an
appointment during normal business
hours with the contact listed in the FOR
FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Arnold Lazarus, EPA Region IX, (415)
972–3024, Lazarus.Arnold@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
rule revisions?
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
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 the local air agencies and
submitted by the California Air
Resources Board (CARB).
TABLE 1—SUBMITTED RULES
Local agency
Rule No.
rmajette on DSK2VPTVN1PROD with RULES
ICAPCD ..............................................................................................................
SJVUAPCD ........................................................................................................
On April 9, 2014 and May 5, 2014
respectively, EPA determined that the
submittal for ICAPCD Rule 101 and
SJVUAPCD Rule 1020 met the
completeness criteria in 40 CFR part 51,
Appendix V, which must be met before
formal EPA review.
VerDate Sep<11>2014
12:56 Oct 01, 2014
Jkt 235001
101
1020
Rule title
Definitions ...
Definitions ...
Revised/
amended
10/22/13
02/21/13
Submitted
02/10/14
02/10/14
B. Are there other versions of these
rules?
SJVUAPCD Rule 1020 that was adopted
locally on January 15, 2009.
There are previous versions of
ICAPCD Rule 101 and SJVUAPCD Rule
1020 in the SIP. Most recently, on
March 7, 2011 (76 FR 12280), we
approved a version of ICAPCD Rule 101
that was adopted locally on February
23, 2010; and on August 28, 2009 (74 FR
44291), we approved a version of
C. What is the purpose of the submitted
rule revisions?
PO 00000
Frm 00011
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
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
E:\FR\FM\02OCR1.SGM
02OCR1
59434
Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 191 / Thursday, October 2, 2014 / Rules and Regulations
developed as part of the local agency’s
program to control these pollutants.
Imperial County Rule 101 is being
amended by adding new definitions,
revising definitions for clarity, making
various administrative changes,
updating the exempt volatile organic
compounds list to correspond with
EPA’s, and deleting two obsolete
definitions. EPA’s technical support
document (TSD) has more detailed
information about this rule.
SJVUAPCD amended Rule 1020 to
add dimethyl carbonate (DMC) and
propylene carbonate (PC) to the
District’s list of exempt compounds
within the definition of VOC as a
response to EPA findings that DMC and
PC have a low potential to form ozone
in the atmosphere. EPA’s TSD has more
detailed information about this rule.
II. EPA’s Evaluation and Action
A. How is EPA evaluating the rules?
These rules describe administrative
provisions and definitions that support
emission controls found in other local
agency requirements. In combination
with the other requirements, these rules
must be enforceable (see section 110(a)
of the Act) and must not relax existing
requirements (see sections 110(l) and
193). EPA policy that we used to
evaluate enforceability requirements
consistently includes the Bluebook
(‘‘Issues Relating to VOC Regulation
Cutpoints, Deficiencies, and
Deviations,’’ EPA, May 25, 1988), the
Little Bluebook (‘‘Guidance Document
for Correcting Common VOC & Other
Rule Deficiencies,’’ EPA Region 9,
August 21, 2001), and ‘‘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).
rmajette on DSK2VPTVN1PROD with RULES
B. Do the rules meet the evaluation
criteria?
We believe these rules are consistent
with the relevant policy and guidance
regarding enforceability and SIP
relaxations. The TSDs have more
information on our evaluations.
C. EPA Recommendations To Further
Improve the Rules
The TSD describes 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
VerDate Sep<11>2014
12:56 Oct 01, 2014
Jkt 235001
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 November 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 December 1,
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
PO 00000
Frm 00012
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
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 December 1,
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 this Federal Register, rather
than file an immediate petition for
judicial review of this direct final rule,
E:\FR\FM\02OCR1.SGM
02OCR1
Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 191 / Thursday, October 2, 2014 / Rules and Regulations
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)).
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION
AGENCY
List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52
Revision to the Idaho State
Implementation Plan; Approval and
Promulgation of Air Quality
Implementation Plans: Idaho, Northern
Ada County PM10 Second Ten-Year
Maintenance Plan and Pinehurst PM10
Contingency Measures
Environmental protection, Air
pollution control, Incorporation by
reference, Intergovernmental relations,
Nitrogen dioxide, Ozone, Reporting and
recordkeeping requirements, Volatile
organic compounds.
Dated: July 25, 2014.
Jared Blumenfeld,
Regional Administrator, Region IX.
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 paragraph (c)(442) to read as
follows:
■
Identification of plan.
*
*
*
*
*
(c) * * *
(442) New and amended regulations
for the following APCDs were submitted
on February 10, 2014 by the Governor’s
Designee.
(i) Incorporation by Reference.
(A) Imperial County Air Pollution
Control District.
(1) Rule 101, ‘‘Definitions,’’ revised on
October 22, 2013.
(B) San Joaquin Valley Unified Air
Pollution Control District.
(1) Rule 1020, ‘‘Definitions,’’ amended
on February 21, 2013.
*
*
*
*
*
[FR Doc. 2014–23400 Filed 10–1–14; 8:45 am]
rmajette on DSK2VPTVN1PROD with RULES
BILLING CODE 6560–50–P
VerDate Sep<11>2014
12:56 Oct 01, 2014
Jkt 235001
[EPA–R10–OAR–2013–0247; FRL–9917–38–
Region 10]
Environmental Protection
Agency.
ACTION: Final rule.
AGENCY:
The Environmental Protection
Agency (EPA) is approving the Northern
Ada County PM10 Second Ten-Year
Maintenance Plan submitted by the
Idaho Department of Environmental
Quality (IDEQ) on March 11, 2013, for
particulate matter with an aerodynamic
diameter less than or equal to ten
micrometers (PM10). Northern Ada
County was identified as an area of
concern for PM10 with the promulgation
of the PM10 NAAQS in 1987, and was
formally designated as a moderate PM10
nonattainment area upon passage of the
1990 Clean Air Act (CAA) amendments.
In October 2003, the EPA approved the
Northern Ada County PM10
Maintenance Plan and redesignated the
area to attainment for PM10. This revised
Maintenance Plan addresses
maintenance of the PM10 standard for a
second ten-year period beyond
redesignation through 2023, extends the
horizon years, and contains revised
transportation conformity budgets. The
EPA is also approving the February 15–
16, 2011 high wind exceptional event at
the Boise Fire Station monitor, as well
as contingency measures for the
Pinehurst PM10 Air Quality
Improvement Plan. The EPA is
approving the second ten-year PM10
Maintenance Plan for Northern Ada
County and the Pinehurst PM10
contingency measures pursuant to
section 110 of the CAA. The EPA is
approving the February 2011
exceptional event pursuant to 40 CFR
50.14. The EPA received one set of
adverse comments focused primarily on
proposed coal export terminals that may
be built in Oregon and Washington that
may affect Northern Ada County.
DATES: This final rule is effective on
November 3, 2014.
ADDRESSES: The EPA has established a
docket for this action under Docket
Identification No. EPA–R10–OAR–
2013–0247. All documents in the docket
are listed on the https://
SUMMARY:
Part 52, Chapter I, Title 40 of the Code
of Federal Regulations is amended as
follows:
§ 52.220
40 CFR Part 52
PO 00000
Frm 00013
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
59435
www.regulations.gov Web site. Although
listed in the index, some information
may not be publicly available, i.e.,
Confidential Business Information or
other information the disclosure of
which is restricted by statute. Certain
other material, such as copyrighted
material, is not placed on the Internet
and will be publicly available only in
hard copy form. Publicly available
docket materials are available either
electronically through https://
www.regulations.gov or in hard copy at
EPA Region 10, Office of Air, Waste,
and Toxics, AWT–107, 1200 Sixth
Avenue, Seattle, Washington 98101. The
EPA requests that you contact the
person listed in the FOR FURTHER
INFORMATION CONTACT section to
schedule your inspection. The Regional
Office’s official hours of business are
Monday through Friday, 8:30 a.m. to
4:30 p.m., excluding Federal holidays.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Lucy Edmondson at (360)753–9082 or
Edmondson.lucy@epa.gov.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Throughout this document, wherever
‘‘we,’’ ‘‘us,’’ or ‘‘our’’ is used, it is
intended to refer to the EPA.
Table of Contents
I. Background
II. Response to Comments
III. Final Action
IV. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews
I. Background
Northern Ada County was identified
as an area of concern for PM10 with the
promulgation of the PM10 NAAQS in
1987, and was formally designated as a
moderate PM10 nonattainment area
upon passage of the 1990 CAA
amendments. Idaho developed a state
implementation plan (SIP) and
submitted it to the EPA in November
1991, later submitting revisions in
December 1994 and July 1995. The EPA
approved the Northern Ada County
PM10 SIP on May 30, 1996 (61 FR
27019). Idaho submitted a maintenance
plan and a request to redesignate the
area to attainment on September 27,
2002, and provided supplemental
information on July 10 and 21, 2003. On
October 27, 2003, the EPA approved the
Northern Ada County PM10
Maintenance Plan and redesignated the
area to attainment status for PM10 (68 FR
61106).
In actions dated August 25, 1994 (59
FR 43475) and May 26, 1995 (60 FR
27891), the EPA conditionally approved
the SIP for the Pinehurst, Idaho PM10
nonattainment area. The conditional
approval concluded that IDEQ had not
satisfied the requirement for
contingency measures for both the City
E:\FR\FM\02OCR1.SGM
02OCR1
]]>Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 79, Number 191 (Thursday, October 2, 2014)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 59433-59435]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2014-23400]
=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
40 CFR Part 52
[EPA-R09-OAR-2014-0460; FRL-9915-37-Region 9]
Revisions to the California State Implementation Plan, Imperial
County Air Pollution Control District and San Joaquin Valley Unified
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 Imperial County Air Pollution
Control District (ICAPCD) and San Joaquin Valley Unified Air Pollution
Control District (SJVUAPCD) portions of the California State
Implementation Plan (SIP). These revisions concern definitions that are
necessary for the creation, modification and understanding of rules
that address air pollution. Among other changes, the revised
definitions help clarify federal New Source Review (NSR) requirements,
update the districts' exempt volatile organic compounds list to
correspond with EPA's, and improve formatting consistency. We are
approving local rules that define terms under the Clean Air Act (CAA or
the Act).
DATES: This rule is effective on December 1, 2014 without further
notice, unless EPA receives adverse comments by November 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-
2014-0460, by one of the following methods:
1. Federal eRulemaking Portal: www.regulations.gov. Follow the on-
line instructions.
2. Email: steckel.andrew@epa.gov.
3. Mail or deliver: Andrew Steckel (Air-4), U.S. Environmental
Protection Agency Region IX, 75 Hawthorne Street, San Francisco, CA
94105-3901.
Instructions: All comments will be included in the public docket
without change and may be made available online at www.regulations.gov,
including any personal information provided, unless the comment
includes Confidential Business Information (CBI) or other information
whose disclosure is restricted by statute. Information that you
consider CBI or otherwise protected should be clearly identified as
such and should not be submitted through www.regulations.gov or email.
www.regulations.gov is an ``anonymous access'' system, and EPA will not
know your identity or contact information unless you provide it in the
body of your comment. If you send email directly to EPA, your email
address will be automatically captured and included as part of the
public comment. If EPA cannot read your comment due to technical
difficulties and cannot contact you for clarification, EPA may not be
able to consider your comment. Electronic files should avoid the use of
special characters, any form of encryption, and be free of any defects
or viruses.
Docket: Generally, documents in the docket for this action are
available electronically at www.regulations.gov and in hard copy at EPA
Region IX, 75 Hawthorne Street, San Francisco, California 94105-3901.
While all documents in the docket are listed at www.regulations.gov,
some information may be publicly available only at the hard copy
location (e.g., copyrighted material, large maps), and some may not be
publicly available in either location (e.g., CBI). To inspect the hard
copy materials, please schedule an appointment during normal business
hours with the contact listed in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT
section.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Arnold Lazarus, EPA Region IX, (415)
972-3024, Lazarus.Arnold@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 rule revisions?
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
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 the local air agencies and submitted by the California
Air Resources Board (CARB).
Table 1--Submitted Rules
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Revised/
Local agency Rule No. Rule title amended Submitted
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
ICAPCD............................... 101 Definitions.............. 10/22/13 02/10/14
SJVUAPCD............................. 1020 Definitions.............. 02/21/13 02/10/14
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
On April 9, 2014 and May 5, 2014 respectively, EPA determined that
the submittal for ICAPCD Rule 101 and SJVUAPCD Rule 1020 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?
There are previous versions of ICAPCD Rule 101 and SJVUAPCD Rule
1020 in the SIP. Most recently, on March 7, 2011 (76 FR 12280), we
approved a version of ICAPCD Rule 101 that was adopted locally on
February 23, 2010; and on August 28, 2009 (74 FR 44291), we approved a
version of SJVUAPCD Rule 1020 that was adopted locally on January 15,
2009.
C. What is the purpose of the submitted rule revisions?
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
[[Page 59434]]
developed as part of the local agency's program to control these
pollutants.
Imperial County Rule 101 is being amended by adding new
definitions, revising definitions for clarity, making various
administrative changes, updating the exempt volatile organic compounds
list to correspond with EPA's, and deleting two obsolete definitions.
EPA's technical support document (TSD) has more detailed information
about this rule.
SJVUAPCD amended Rule 1020 to add dimethyl carbonate (DMC) and
propylene carbonate (PC) to the District's list of exempt compounds
within the definition of VOC as a response to EPA findings that DMC and
PC have a low potential to form ozone in the atmosphere. EPA's TSD has
more detailed information about this rule.
II. EPA's Evaluation and Action
A. How is EPA evaluating the rules?
These rules describe administrative provisions and definitions that
support emission controls found in other local agency requirements. In
combination with the other requirements, these rules must be
enforceable (see section 110(a) of the Act) and must not relax existing
requirements (see sections 110(l) and 193). EPA policy that we used to
evaluate enforceability requirements consistently includes the Bluebook
(``Issues Relating to VOC Regulation Cutpoints, Deficiencies, and
Deviations,'' EPA, May 25, 1988), the Little Bluebook (``Guidance
Document for Correcting Common VOC & Other Rule Deficiencies,'' EPA
Region 9, August 21, 2001), and ``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?
We believe these rules are consistent with the relevant policy and
guidance regarding enforceability and SIP relaxations. The TSDs have
more information on our evaluations.
C. EPA Recommendations To Further Improve the Rules
The TSD describes 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 November 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 December 1, 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, 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 December 1, 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 this Federal Register, rather than file an immediate
petition for judicial review of this direct final rule,
[[Page 59435]]
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 25, 2014.
Jared Blumenfeld,
Regional Administrator, Region IX.
Part 52, Chapter I, Title 40 of the Code of Federal Regulations is
amended as follows:
PART 52--APPROVAL AND PROMULGATION OF IMPLEMENTATION PLANS
0
1. The authority citation for part 52 continues to read as follows:
Authority: 42 U.S.C. 7401 et seq.
Subpart F--California
0
2. Section 52.220 is amended by adding paragraph (c)(442) to read as
follows:
Sec. 52.220 Identification of plan.
* * * * *
(c) * * *
(442) New and amended regulations for the following APCDs were
submitted on February 10, 2014 by the Governor's Designee.
(i) Incorporation by Reference.
(A) Imperial County Air Pollution Control District.
(1) Rule 101, ``Definitions,'' revised on October 22, 2013.
(B) San Joaquin Valley Unified Air Pollution Control District.
(1) Rule 1020, ``Definitions,'' amended on February 21, 2013.
* * * * *
[FR Doc. 2014-23400 Filed 10-1-14; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P
