
[Federal Register Volume 76, Number 88 (Friday, May 6, 2011)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 26192-26194]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2011-11038]


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

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

40 CFR Part 52

[EPA-R09-OAR-2011-0302; FRL-9292-6]


Revisions to the California State Implementation Plan, Northern 
Sonoma County Air Pollution Control District (NSCAPCD) and Mendocino 
County Air Quality Management District (MCAQMD)

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Direct final rule.

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

SUMMARY: EPA is taking direct final action to approve revisions to the 
Northern Sonoma County Air Pollution Control District (NSCAPCD) and 
Mendocino County Air Quality Management District (MCAQMD) portions of 
the California State Implementation Plan (SIP). Both districts are 
required under Part C of title I of the Clean Air Act (CAA) to adopt 
and implement SIP-approved Prevention of Significant Deterioration 
(PSD) permit programs. These revisions update the definitions used in 
the districts' PSD permit programs.

DATES: This rule is effective on July 5, 2011 without further notice, 
unless EPA receives adverse comments by June 6, 2011. 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-
2011-0302, by one of the following methods:
    1. Federal eRulemaking Portal: http://www.regulations.gov. Follow 
the online instructions.
    2. E-mail: R9airpermits@epa.gov.
    3. Mail or deliver: Gerardo Rios (Air-3), 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 http://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

[[Page 26193]]

should be clearly identified as such and should not be submitted 
through http://www.regulations.gov or e-mail. http://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 e-mail directly to EPA, your e-mail 
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: EPA has established a docket for this action under EPA-R09-
OAR-2011-0302. Generally, documents in the docket for this action are 
available electronically at http://www.regulations.gov or in hard copy 
at EPA Region IX, 75 Hawthorne Street, San Francisco, California. While 
all documents in the docket are listed at http://www.regulations.gov, 
some information may be publicly available only at the hard copy 
location (e.g., copyrighted material, large maps, multi-volume reports) 
and some may not be available in either location (e.g., confidential 
business information (CBI)). To inspect the hard copy materials, please 
schedule an appointment during normal business hours with the contact 
listed in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Laura Yannayon, EPA Region IX, (415) 
972-3534, yannayon.laura@epa.gov.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Throughout this document, ``we,'' ``us,'' 
and ``our'' refer to EPA.

Table of Contents

I. 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 and rule 
revisions?
II. EPA's Evaluation and Action
    A. How is EPA evaluating the rules?
    B. Do the rules meet the evaluation criteria?
    C. Public Comment and Final Action
III. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews

I. The State's Submittal

A. What rules did the State submit?

    Table 1 lists the rules we are approving with the dates that they 
were adopted by the local air agencies and submitted by the California 
Air Resources Board.

                                            Table 1--Submitted Rules
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
            Local agency                Rule No.          Rule title           Date adopted      Date submitted
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
NSCAPCD.............................          130  Definitions............           12/14/10           02/28/11
MCAQMD..............................          130  Definitions............           02/15/11           02/28/11
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    On March 22, 2011, EPA determined that the submittal for both 
NSCAPCD's and MCAQMD's Rule 130 met the completeness criteria in 40 CFR 
Part 51 Appendix V, which must be met before formal EPA review.

B. Are there other versions of these rules?

    We approved earlier versions of Rule 130 for both districts into 
the SIP. For NSCAPCD and MCAQMD, Rule 130 was last approved into the 
SIP on February 9, 1999 and July 31, 1998, respectively (See 64 FR 6223 
and 63 FR 40830). There are no other pending submittals of these rules.

C. What is the purpose of the submitted rules and rule revisions?

    Part C of title I of the Clean Air Act (CAA) requires that the SIP 
for any area designated as attainment or unclassifiable for a National 
Ambient Air Quality Standard (NAAQS) contain a Prevention of 
Significant Deterioration (PSD) permit program. Both the NSCAPCD and 
MCAQMD are currently designated as attainment or unclassifiable for all 
NAAQS, and are therefore required to adopt and implement a SIP-approved 
PSD permit program.
    Both NSCAPCD's and MCAQMD's Rule 130, Definitions, define various 
terms used throughout the District's regulations. In particular, Rule 
130 provides definitions of several key terms related to the PSD 
program. Both districts' submitted revisions to Rule 130, Definitions, 
are being evaluated together because both the existing SIP rules and 
proposed revisions are very similar. In each case, the District has 
revised Rule 130 to provide new and revised definitions in order to 
ensure consistency with CAA requirements for PSD programs.

II. EPA's Evaluation and Action

A. How is EPA evaluating the rules?

    Since the submitted rules only consist of definitions, our 
evaluation focuses on whether the definitions are either identical or 
equivalent to EPA's definitions found in 40 CFR 51.100 and 51.166, and 
40 CFR part 50.
    Section 110(l) of the Act prohibits EPA from approving any revision 
of a SIP that would interfere with any applicable requirement 
concerning attainment and reasonable further progress, or any other 
applicable requirement of the Act.
    Section 193 of the Act, which was added by the Clean Air Act 
Amendments of 1990, only applies to control requirements in 
nonattainment areas. Neither the NSCAPCD nor MCAQMD are designated 
nonattainment for any NAAQS; therefore Section 193 does not apply to 
this rulemaking action.

B. Do the rules meet the evaluation criteria?

    The new and revised definitions contained in both districts' 
submitted versions of Rule 130 are consistent with the applicable 
definitions of these terms in 40 CFR 51.100 and 51.166, and 40 CFR part 
50. EPA's approval of these rules will strengthen the SIP by adding and 
updating terms that establish applicability and evaluation criteria for 
pollutants subject to the PSD program. The rules do not interfere with 
attainment and reasonable further progress or any other applicable 
requirement of the Act, and thus are approvable under Section 110(l) of 
the Act. EPA's technical support document (TSD) has more information 
about these rules and the revisions.

C. 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 
applicable 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 June 6, 2011, we will publish a timely 
withdrawal in the Federal Register to notify the public

[[Page 26194]]

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 July 5, 2011. 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 July 5, 2011. 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, Ozone, Particulate matter, 
Reporting and recordkeeping requirements, Volatile organic compounds.

    Dated: March 31, 2011.
Jared Blumenfeld,
Regional Administrator, Region IX.

    Part 52, chapter I, title 40 of the Code of Federal Regulations is 
amended as follows:

PART 52--[AMENDED]

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)(385) to read as 
follows:


Sec.  52.220  Identification of plan.

* * * * *
    (c) * * *
    (385) New and amended regulations for the following APCDs were 
submitted on February 28, 2011.
    (i) Incorporation by Reference.
    (A) Mendocino County Air Quality Management District.
    (1) Rule 130, ``Definitions,'' amended February 15, 2011.
    (B) Northern Sonoma County Air Pollution Control District.
    (1) Rule 130, ``Definitions,'' amended December 14, 2010.

[FR Doc. 2011-11038 Filed 5-4-11; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P


