
[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


