Air Plan Revisions; California; Sacramento Metropolitan Air Quality Management District, 86870-86872 [2023-27514]
Download as PDF
<![CDATA[
86870
Federal Register / Vol. 88, No. 240 / Friday, December 15, 2023 / Proposed Rules
applied in such a manner that parts of
the mark appear on different sides of the
mailpiece. See 325.1.
b. The mark must be a DOT-approved
lithium battery mark, as specified in 49
CFR 173.183(c)(3)(i) and Exhibit 325.2a.
c. The mark must include a telephone
number for those who need to obtain
additional information.
d. Lithium metal cells or batteries
must be marked with UN3090.
e. Lithium metal cells or batteries
installed in or packed with the
equipment they intend to operate must
indicate UN3091.
f. Lithium-ion cells or batteries must
be marked UN3480.
g. Lithium-ion cells or batteries
installed in or packed with the
equipment they intend to operate must
indicate UN3481.
6. Lithium battery marks are not
required on packages containing only
lithium button cell batteries, no more
than 4 lithium cells or 2 lithium
batteries installed in the equipment they
operate.
7. All used, damaged, or defective
electronic devices with lithium cells or
batteries contained in or packed with
device (excluding electronic devices
that are new in original packaging, and
manufacturer-certified new or
refurbished devices) must be marked
with the text ‘‘Restricted Electronic
Device’’ and ‘‘Surface Transportation
Only’’ on the address side of the
mailpiece.
*
*
*
*
*
[Renumber existing section 349.221 to
349.222]
ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with PROPOSALS1
349.222 Lithium Metal
(Nonrechargeable) Cells and Batteries—
Domestic
[Revise item a. as follows:]
a. General. The following restrictions
apply to the mailability of all lithium
metal (or lithium alloy) cells and
batteries:
1. Each cell must contain no more
than 1.0 gram (g) of lithium content per
cell.
2. Each battery must contain no more
than 2.0 g aggregate lithium content per
battery.
*
*
*
*
*
[Renumber existing section 349.222 to
349.223]
349.223 Lithium-Ion (Rechargeable)
Cells and Batteries—Domestic
[Revise item a. as follows:]
a. General. The following additional
restrictions apply to the mailability of
all secondary lithium-ion or lithium
polymer cells and batteries:
1. The watt-hour rating must not
exceed 20 Wh per cell.
VerDate Sep<11>2014
17:23 Dec 14, 2023
Jkt 262001
2. The watt-hour rating must not
exceed 100 Wh per battery.
3. Each battery must bear the ‘‘Watthour’’ or ‘‘Wh’’ marking on the battery
to determine if it is within the limits
defined in items 1 and 2.
*
*
*
*
*
criteria in 349.11d, installed in the
device they operate are not required to
be within a secondary container that can
withstand a 1.7-meter drop test prior to
utilizing a padded or poly bag as outer
packaging.
*
*
*
*
*
62 Hazardous Materials: International
Mail
Appendix D
621
General Requirements
*
*
*
*
*
*
[Insert new section 621.2 and
renumber existing 621.2 through 621.4
as 621.3 through 621.5]
621.2 Outer Packaging Requirements
Except as otherwise specified, rigid
outer packaging must be used for
shipments containing dangerous goods
following the instructions in 131.
*
*
*
*
*
Appendix C
Required Packaging
Lithium Metal and Lithium-Ion
Batteries
D Lithium batteries permitted to be
mailed under section 349 that are
installed in the device they operate, are
afforded adequate protection by that
equipment, and do not display
hazardous text, markings or labels as
permitted in 349.221a6, 622.51f and
622.52g may utilize padded and poly
bags as outer packaging provided the
device is within a secondary container
that can withstand a 1.7-meter drop test.
Button cell batteries, meeting the
classification criteria in 349.11d,
installed in the device they operate are
not required to be within a secondary
container that can withstand a 1.2-meter
drop test prior to utilizing a padded or
poly bag as outer packaging.
*
*
*
*
*
USPS Packaging Instruction 9E
[Insert new second bullet in the
Required Packaging section to read as
follows:]
Required Packaging
Lithium Metal and Lithium-Ion
Batteries
D Lithium batteries installed in the
device they operate that are permitted to
be mailed under section 622.5, may
utilize padded and poly bags as outer
packaging provided the device is within
a secondary container that can
withstand a 1.7-meter drop test. Button
cell batteries, meeting the classification
Frm 00031
*
*
*
*
[Revise definition of Rigid to read as
follows:]
Rigid means unable to bend or be
forced out of shape; not flexible. Rigid
outer packaging is generally interpreted
to mean a fiberboard (cardboard) box or
outer packaging of equivalent strength,
durability, and rigidity. See 131.
*
*
*
*
*
Colleen Hibbert-Kapler,
Attorney, Ethics and Legal Compliance.
[FR Doc. 2023–27643 Filed 12–14–23; 8:45 am]
USPS Packaging Instruction 9D
[Revise third bullet in the Required
Packaging section to read as follows:]
PO 00000
Hazardous Materials Definitions
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
BILLING CODE 7710–12–P
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION
AGENCY
40 CFR Part 52
[EPA–R09–OAR–2023–0588; FRL–11585–
01–R9]
Air Plan Revisions; California;
Sacramento Metropolitan Air Quality
Management District
Environmental Protection
Agency (EPA).
ACTION: Proposed rule.
AGENCY:
The Environmental Protection
Agency (EPA) is proposing to approve a
revision to the Sacramento Metropolitan
Air Quality Management District
(SMAQMD) portion of the California
State Implementation Plan (SIP)
concerning a rule submitted to address
section 185 of the Clean Air Act (CAA
or the Act). We are taking comments on
this proposal and plan to follow with a
final action.
DATES: Comments must be received on
or before January 16, 2024.
ADDRESSES: Submit your comments,
identified by Docket ID No. EPA–R09–
OAR–2023–0588 at https://
www.regulations.gov. For comments
submitted at Regulations.gov, follow the
online instructions for submitting
comments. Once submitted, comments
cannot be edited or removed from
Regulations.gov. The EPA may publish
any comment received to its public
docket. Do not submit electronically any
information you consider to be
Confidential Business Information (CBI)
SUMMARY:
E:\FR\FM\15DEP1.SGM
15DEP1
Federal Register / Vol. 88, No. 240 / Friday, December 15, 2023 / Proposed Rules
or other information whose disclosure is
restricted by statute. Multimedia
submissions (audio, video, etc.) must be
accompanied by a written comment.
The written comment is considered the
official comment and should include
discussion of all points you wish to
make. The EPA will generally not
consider comments or comment
contents located outside of the primary
submission (i.e., on the web, cloud, or
other file sharing system). For
additional submission methods, please
contact the person identified in the FOR
FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section.
For the full EPA public comment policy,
information about CBI or multimedia
submissions, and general guidance on
making effective comments, please visit
https://www.epa.gov/dockets/
commenting-epa-dockets. If you need
assistance in a language other than
English or if you are a person with a
disability who needs a reasonable
accommodation at no cost to you, please
contact the person identified in the FOR
FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Mae
Wang, EPA Region IX, 75 Hawthorne
St., San Francisco, CA 94105. By phone:
(415) 947–4137 or by email at
wang.mae@epa.gov.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Throughout this document, ‘‘we,’’ ‘‘us’’
and ‘‘our’’ refer to the EPA.
Table of Contents
I. The State’s Submittal
A. What rule did the State submit?
B. Are there other versions of this rule?
86871
C. What is the purpose of the submitted
rule?
II. The EPA’s Evaluation and Action
A. How is the EPA evaluating the rule?
B. Does the rule meet the evaluation
criteria?
C. The EPA’s Recommendations to Further
Improve the Rule
D. Proposed Action and Public Comment
III. Incorporation by Reference
IV. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews
I. The State’s Submittal
A. What rule did the State submit?
Table 1 lists the rule addressed by this
proposal with the date that it was
amended by the local air agency and
submitted by the California Air
Resources Board (CARB).
TABLE 1—SUBMITTED RULE
Local agency
Rule #
Rule title
Amended
Submitted
SMAQMD ..........
307
Clean Air Act Penalty Fees ..........................................................................
03/23/2023
05/11/2023
On November 6, 2023, the EPA
determined that the submittal for
SMAQMD Rule 307 met the
completeness criteria in 40 CFR part 51
Appendix V, which must be met before
formal EPA review.
ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with PROPOSALS1
B. Are there other versions of this rule?
We approved an earlier version of
Rule 307 into the SIP on August 26,
2003 (68 FR 51184). The SMAQMD
adopted revisions to the SIP-approved
version on March 23, 2023, and CARB
submitted them to us on May 11, 2023.
If we take final action to approve the
March 23, 2023 version of Rule 307, this
version will replace the previously
approved version of this rule in the SIP.
C. What is the purpose of the submitted
rule?
Under sections 182(d)(3), (e), (f) and
185 of the Act, states with ozone
nonattainment areas classified as
‘‘Severe’’ or ‘‘Extreme’’ are required to
submit a SIP revision that requires
major stationary sources of volatile
organic compounds (VOC) or oxides of
nitrogen (NOX) emissions in the area to
pay a fee if the area fails to attain the
standard by the attainment date. The
required SIP revision must provide for
annual payment of the fees, computed
in accordance with CAA section 185(b).
The Sacramento Metro ozone
nonattainment area has been classified
as Severe for the 1-hour, 1997, and 2008
ozone National Ambient Air Quality
Standards (NAAQS). Additionally, on
January 17, 2023 (88 FR 2541), the EPA
issued a finding that the State of
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:28 Dec 14, 2023
Jkt 262001
California failed to submit CAA section
185 fee programs for the 2008 ozone
NAAQS for portions of the Sacramento
Metro nonattainment area, including the
portion under the jurisdiction of the
SMAQMD. The SMAQMD submitted
Rule 307 to satisfy the requirement to
submit a CAA section 185 fee program
for each federal ozone NAAQS for
which the Sacramento Metro area is
classified as Severe or Extreme.
II. The EPA’s Evaluation and Action
A. How is the EPA evaluating the rule?
Rules in the SIP must be enforceable
(see CAA section 110(a)(2)), must not
interfere with applicable requirements
concerning attainment and reasonable
further progress or other CAA
requirements (see CAA section 110(l)),
and must not modify certain SIP control
requirements in nonattainment areas
without ensuring equivalent or greater
emissions reductions (see CAA section
193). The EPA is also evaluating the rule
for consistency with the statutory
requirements of CAA section 185.
Guidance and policy documents that
we used to evaluate enforceability,
revision/relaxation and rule stringency
requirements for the applicable criteria
pollutants include the following:
1. ‘‘State Implementation Plans; General
Preamble for the Implementation of Title I of
the Clean Air Act Amendments of 1990,’’ 57
FR 13498 (April 16, 1992); 57 FR 18070
(April 28, 1992).
2. ‘‘Issues Relating to VOC Regulation
Cutpoints, Deficiencies, and Deviations,’’
EPA, May 25, 1988 (the Bluebook, revised
January 11, 1990).
PO 00000
Frm 00032
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
3. ‘‘Guidance Document for Correcting
Common VOC & Other Rule Deficiencies,’’
EPA Region 9, August 21, 2001 (the Little
Bluebook).
B. Does the rule meet the evaluation
criteria?
This rule meets CAA requirements
and is consistent with relevant guidance
regarding enforceability and SIP
revisions. The EPA’s technical support
document (TSD) has more information
on our evaluation.
C. The EPA’s Recommendations to
Further Improve the Rule
The TSD includes recommendations
for the next time the local agency
modifies the rule.
D. Proposed Action and Public
Comment
As authorized in section 110(k)(3) of
the Act, the EPA proposes to fully
approve submitted Rule 307 because it
fulfills all relevant requirements. We
will accept comments from the public
on this proposal until January 16, 2024.
If we take final action to approve the
submitted rule, our final action will
incorporate this rule into the federally
enforceable SIP. Our final action to
approve SMAQMD Rule 307 will also
remove the EPA’s obligation to
promulgate a FIP associated with the
January 17, 2023 action.
III. Incorporation by Reference
In this rule, the EPA is proposing to
include in a final EPA rule regulatory
text that includes incorporation by
reference. In accordance with
E:\FR\FM\15DEP1.SGM
15DEP1
86872
Federal Register / Vol. 88, No. 240 / Friday, December 15, 2023 / Proposed Rules
requirements of 1 CFR 51.5, the EPA is
proposing to incorporate by reference
SMAQMD Rule 307, Clean Air Act
Penalty Fees, amended on March 23,
2023, which addresses the CAA section
185 fee program requirements. The EPA
has made, and will continue to make,
these materials available through
https://www.regulations.gov and at the
EPA Region IX Office (please contact the
person identified in the FOR FURTHER
INFORMATION CONTACT section of this
preamble for more information).
IV. Statutory and Executive Order
Reviews
ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with PROPOSALS1
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, the EPA’s role is to
approve state choices, provided that
they meet the criteria of the Clean Air
Act. Accordingly, this proposed action
merely proposes to approve state law as
meeting federal requirements and does
not impose additional requirements
beyond those imposed by state law. For
that reason, this proposed action:
• Is not a significant regulatory action
subject to review by the Office of
Management and Budget under
Executive Orders 12866 (58 FR 51735,
October 4, 1993) and 14094 (88 FR
21879, April 11, 2023);
• 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
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:28 Dec 14, 2023
Jkt 262001
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 subject to Executive Order
13045 (62 FR 19885, April 23, 1997)
because it proposes to approve a state
program;
• Is not a significant regulatory action
subject to Executive Order 13211 (66 FR
28355, May 22, 2001); and
• 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.
In addition, the SIP is not approved
to apply on any Indian reservation land
or in any other area where the EPA or
an Indian tribe has demonstrated that a
tribe has jurisdiction. In those areas of
Indian country, the rule does not have
tribal implications and will not impose
substantial direct costs on tribal
governments or preempt tribal law as
specified by Executive Order 13175 (65
FR 67249, November 9, 2000).
Executive Order 12898 (Federal
Actions To Address Environmental
Justice in Minority Populations and
Low-Income Populations, 59 FR 7629,
Feb. 16, 1994) directs Federal agencies
to identify and address
‘‘disproportionately high and adverse
human health or environmental effects’’
of their actions on minority populations
and low-income populations to the
greatest extent practicable and
PO 00000
Frm 00033
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 9990
permitted by law. The EPA defines
environmental justice (EJ) as ‘‘the fair
treatment and meaningful involvement
of all people regardless of race, color,
national origin, or income with respect
to the development, implementation,
and enforcement of environmental laws,
regulations, and policies.’’ The EPA
further defines the term fair treatment to
mean that ‘‘no group of people should
bear a disproportionate burden of
environmental harms and risks,
including those resulting from the
negative environmental consequences of
industrial, governmental, and
commercial operations or programs and
policies.’’
The State did not evaluate
environmental justice considerations as
part of its SIP submittal; the CAA and
applicable implementing regulations
neither prohibit nor require such an
evaluation. The EPA did not perform an
EJ analysis and did not consider EJ in
this action. Consideration of EJ is not
required as part of this action, and there
is no information in the record
inconsistent with the stated goal of E.O.
12898 of achieving environmental
justice for people of color, low-income
populations, and Indigenous peoples.
List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52
Environmental protection, Air
pollution control, Incorporation by
reference, Intergovernmental relations,
Nitrogen oxides, Ozone, Reporting and
recordkeeping requirements, Volatile
organic compounds.
Dated: December 8, 2023.
Martha Guzman Aceves,
Regional Administrator, Region IX.
[FR Doc. 2023–27514 Filed 12–14–23; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560–50–P
E:\FR\FM\15DEP1.SGM
15DEP1
]]>Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 88, Number 240 (Friday, December 15, 2023)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 86870-86872]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2023-27514]
=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
40 CFR Part 52
[EPA-R09-OAR-2023-0588; FRL-11585-01-R9]
Air Plan Revisions; California; Sacramento Metropolitan Air
Quality Management District
AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).
ACTION: Proposed rule.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is proposing to
approve a revision to the Sacramento Metropolitan Air Quality
Management District (SMAQMD) portion of the California State
Implementation Plan (SIP) concerning a rule submitted to address
section 185 of the Clean Air Act (CAA or the Act). We are taking
comments on this proposal and plan to follow with a final action.
DATES: Comments must be received on or before January 16, 2024.
ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, identified by Docket ID No. EPA-R09-
OAR-2023-0588 at https://www.regulations.gov. For comments submitted at
Regulations.gov, follow the online instructions for submitting
comments. Once submitted, comments cannot be edited or removed from
Regulations.gov. The EPA may publish any comment received to its public
docket. Do not submit electronically any information you consider to be
Confidential Business Information (CBI)
[[Page 86871]]
or other information whose disclosure is restricted by statute.
Multimedia submissions (audio, video, etc.) must be accompanied by a
written comment. The written comment is considered the official comment
and should include discussion of all points you wish to make. The EPA
will generally not consider comments or comment contents located
outside of the primary submission (i.e., on the web, cloud, or other
file sharing system). For additional submission methods, please contact
the person identified in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section.
For the full EPA public comment policy, information about CBI or
multimedia submissions, and general guidance on making effective
comments, please visit https://www.epa.gov/dockets/commenting-epa-dockets. If you need assistance in a language other than English or if
you are a person with a disability who needs a reasonable accommodation
at no cost to you, please contact the person identified in the FOR
FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Mae Wang, EPA Region IX, 75 Hawthorne
St., San Francisco, CA 94105. By phone: (415) 947-4137 or by email at
[email protected].
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Throughout this document, ``we,'' ``us'' and
``our'' refer to the EPA.
Table of Contents
I. The State's Submittal
A. What rule did the State submit?
B. Are there other versions of this rule?
C. What is the purpose of the submitted rule?
II. The EPA's Evaluation and Action
A. How is the EPA evaluating the rule?
B. Does the rule meet the evaluation criteria?
C. The EPA's Recommendations to Further Improve the Rule
D. Proposed Action and Public Comment
III. Incorporation by Reference
IV. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews
I. The State's Submittal
A. What rule did the State submit?
Table 1 lists the rule addressed by this proposal with the date
that it was amended by the local air agency and submitted by the
California Air Resources Board (CARB).
Table 1--Submitted Rule
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Local agency Rule # Rule title Amended Submitted
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
SMAQMD.......................... 307 Clean Air Act Penalty Fees. 03/23/2023 05/11/2023
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
On November 6, 2023, the EPA determined that the submittal for
SMAQMD Rule 307 met the completeness criteria in 40 CFR part 51
Appendix V, which must be met before formal EPA review.
B. Are there other versions of this rule?
We approved an earlier version of Rule 307 into the SIP on August
26, 2003 (68 FR 51184). The SMAQMD adopted revisions to the SIP-
approved version on March 23, 2023, and CARB submitted them to us on
May 11, 2023. If we take final action to approve the March 23, 2023
version of Rule 307, this version will replace the previously approved
version of this rule in the SIP.
C. What is the purpose of the submitted rule?
Under sections 182(d)(3), (e), (f) and 185 of the Act, states with
ozone nonattainment areas classified as ``Severe'' or ``Extreme'' are
required to submit a SIP revision that requires major stationary
sources of volatile organic compounds (VOC) or oxides of nitrogen
(NOX) emissions in the area to pay a fee if the area fails
to attain the standard by the attainment date. The required SIP
revision must provide for annual payment of the fees, computed in
accordance with CAA section 185(b).
The Sacramento Metro ozone nonattainment area has been classified
as Severe for the 1-hour, 1997, and 2008 ozone National Ambient Air
Quality Standards (NAAQS). Additionally, on January 17, 2023 (88 FR
2541), the EPA issued a finding that the State of California failed to
submit CAA section 185 fee programs for the 2008 ozone NAAQS for
portions of the Sacramento Metro nonattainment area, including the
portion under the jurisdiction of the SMAQMD. The SMAQMD submitted Rule
307 to satisfy the requirement to submit a CAA section 185 fee program
for each federal ozone NAAQS for which the Sacramento Metro area is
classified as Severe or Extreme.
II. The EPA's Evaluation and Action
A. How is the EPA evaluating the rule?
Rules in the SIP must be enforceable (see CAA section 110(a)(2)),
must not interfere with applicable requirements concerning attainment
and reasonable further progress or other CAA requirements (see CAA
section 110(l)), and must not modify certain SIP control requirements
in nonattainment areas without ensuring equivalent or greater emissions
reductions (see CAA section 193). The EPA is also evaluating the rule
for consistency with the statutory requirements of CAA section 185.
Guidance and policy documents that we used to evaluate
enforceability, revision/relaxation and rule stringency requirements
for the applicable criteria pollutants include the following:
1. ``State Implementation Plans; General Preamble for the
Implementation of Title I of the Clean Air Act Amendments of 1990,''
57 FR 13498 (April 16, 1992); 57 FR 18070 (April 28, 1992).
2. ``Issues Relating to VOC Regulation Cutpoints, Deficiencies,
and Deviations,'' EPA, May 25, 1988 (the Bluebook, revised January
11, 1990).
3. ``Guidance Document for Correcting Common VOC & Other Rule
Deficiencies,'' EPA Region 9, August 21, 2001 (the Little Bluebook).
B. Does the rule meet the evaluation criteria?
This rule meets CAA requirements and is consistent with relevant
guidance regarding enforceability and SIP revisions. The EPA's
technical support document (TSD) has more information on our
evaluation.
C. The EPA's Recommendations to Further Improve the Rule
The TSD includes recommendations for the next time the local agency
modifies the rule.
D. Proposed Action and Public Comment
As authorized in section 110(k)(3) of the Act, the EPA proposes to
fully approve submitted Rule 307 because it fulfills all relevant
requirements. We will accept comments from the public on this proposal
until January 16, 2024. If we take final action to approve the
submitted rule, our final action will incorporate this rule into the
federally enforceable SIP. Our final action to approve SMAQMD Rule 307
will also remove the EPA's obligation to promulgate a FIP associated
with the January 17, 2023 action.
III. Incorporation by Reference
In this rule, the EPA is proposing to include in a final EPA rule
regulatory text that includes incorporation by reference. In accordance
with
[[Page 86872]]
requirements of 1 CFR 51.5, the EPA is proposing to incorporate by
reference SMAQMD Rule 307, Clean Air Act Penalty Fees, amended on March
23, 2023, which addresses the CAA section 185 fee program requirements.
The EPA has made, and will continue to make, these materials available
through https://www.regulations.gov and at the EPA Region IX Office
(please contact the person identified in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION
CONTACT section of this preamble for more information).
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, the EPA's role is to approve state
choices, provided that they meet the criteria of the Clean Air Act.
Accordingly, this proposed action merely proposes to approve state law
as meeting federal requirements and does not impose additional
requirements beyond those imposed by state law. For that reason, this
proposed action:
Is not a significant regulatory action subject to review
by the Office of Management and Budget under Executive Orders 12866 (58
FR 51735, October 4, 1993) and 14094 (88 FR 21879, April 11, 2023);
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 subject to Executive Order 13045 (62 FR 19885,
April 23, 1997) because it proposes to approve a state program;
Is not a significant regulatory action subject to
Executive Order 13211 (66 FR 28355, May 22, 2001); and
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.
In addition, the SIP is not approved to apply on any Indian
reservation land or in any other area where the EPA or an Indian tribe
has demonstrated that a tribe has jurisdiction. In those areas of
Indian country, the rule does not have tribal implications and will not
impose substantial direct costs on tribal governments or preempt tribal
law as specified by Executive Order 13175 (65 FR 67249, November 9,
2000).
Executive Order 12898 (Federal Actions To Address Environmental
Justice in Minority Populations and Low-Income Populations, 59 FR 7629,
Feb. 16, 1994) directs Federal agencies to identify and address
``disproportionately high and adverse human health or environmental
effects'' of their actions on minority populations and low-income
populations to the greatest extent practicable and permitted by law.
The EPA defines environmental justice (EJ) as ``the fair treatment and
meaningful involvement of all people regardless of race, color,
national origin, or income with respect to the development,
implementation, and enforcement of environmental laws, regulations, and
policies.'' The EPA further defines the term fair treatment to mean
that ``no group of people should bear a disproportionate burden of
environmental harms and risks, including those resulting from the
negative environmental consequences of industrial, governmental, and
commercial operations or programs and policies.''
The State did not evaluate environmental justice considerations as
part of its SIP submittal; the CAA and applicable implementing
regulations neither prohibit nor require such an evaluation. The EPA
did not perform an EJ analysis and did not consider EJ in this action.
Consideration of EJ is not required as part of this action, and there
is no information in the record inconsistent with the stated goal of
E.O. 12898 of achieving environmental justice for people of color, low-
income populations, and Indigenous peoples.
List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52
Environmental protection, Air pollution control, Incorporation by
reference, Intergovernmental relations, Nitrogen oxides, Ozone,
Reporting and recordkeeping requirements, Volatile organic compounds.
Dated: December 8, 2023.
Martha Guzman Aceves,
Regional Administrator, Region IX.
[FR Doc. 2023-27514 Filed 12-14-23; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P
