Daily Rules, Proposed Rules, and Notices of the Federal Government
A copy of the rules may also be available via the Internet at
Throughout this document, “we,” “us” and “our” refer to EPA.
Table 1 lists the rule rescissions and negative declarations we are approving with the dates that they were adopted by the Antelope Valley Air Quality Management District (AVAQMD) and submitted by the California Air Resources Board (CARB).
These rule submittals were found to meet the completeness criteria in 40 CFR part 51, Appendix V, which must be met before formal EPA review on June 30, 2004 and August 10, 2004, respectively.
There are no previous rescissions or negative declarations for Rules 1125, 1126, 1141, and 1141.2 in the SIP.
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 originally developed as part of the South Coast Air Quality Management District's (SCAQMD) program to control volatile organic compounds (VOC). The SCAQMD rules applied to the portion of Los Angeles County located in the Mojave Desert Air Basin, known as the Antelope Valley. On July 1, 1997 the AVAQMD was formed, pursuant to statute and assumed the duties and powers of the SCAQMD in the Antelope Valley. The AVAQMD remains subject to the RACT requirements. The AVAQMD has rescinded Rules 1125, 1126, 1141, and 1141.2 and submitted negative declarations to certify that there are no sources regulated by these rules within the jurisdiction of the AVAQMD. Therefore, the rules are being rescinded and negative declarations were adopted to fulfil the requirements of section 182(b)(2) of the Act. The TSD has more information about these rules.
EPA has evaluated all the appropriate background and submittal documentation and has determined that the rescission of Rules 1125, 1126, 1141, and 1141.2 is approvable. The AVAQMD has certified with Negative Declarations that the sources regulated by these rules are not present in the AVAQMD. Further, the AVAQMD also stated that they do not anticipate these types of sources in the future.
The rule rescissions are consistent with the CAA, EPA regulations and EPA policy.
We believe these rule rescissions and negative declarations are consistent with the relevant policy and guidance. The TSD has more information on our evaluation.
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
Under Executive Order 12866 (58 FR 51735, October 4, 1993), this action is not a “significant regulatory action” and therefore is not subject to review by the Office of Management and Budget. For this reason, this action is also not subject to Executive Order 13211, “Actions Concerning Regulations That Significantly Affect Energy Supply, Distribution, or Use” (66 FR 28355, May 22, 2001). This action merely approves state law as meeting Federal requirements and imposes no additional requirements beyond those imposed by state law. Accordingly, the Administrator certifies that this rule will not have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities under the Regulatory Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 601
This rule also does not have tribal implications because it will not have a substantial direct effect on one or more Indian tribes, on the relationship between the Federal Government and Indian tribes, or on the distribution of power and responsibilities between the Federal Government and Indian tribes, as specified by Executive Order 13175 (65 FR 67249, November 9, 2000). This action also does not have Federalism implications because it does not have substantial direct effects on the States, on the relationship between the national government and the States, or on the distribution of power and
In reviewing SIP submissions, EPA's role is to approve state choices, provided that they meet the criteria of the Clean Air Act. In this context, in the absence of a prior existing requirement for the State to use voluntary consensus standards (VCS), EPA has no authority to disapprove a SIP submission for failure to use VCS. It would thus be inconsistent with applicable law for EPA, when it reviews a SIP submission, to use VCS in place of a SIP submission that otherwise satisfies the provisions of the Clean Air Act. Thus, the requirements of section 12(d) of the National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act of 1995 (15 U.S.C. 272 note) do not apply. This rule does not impose an information collection burden under the provisions of the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. 3501
The Congressional Review Act, 5 U.S.C. 801
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 November 22, 2004. Filing a petition for reconsideration by the Administrator of this final rule does not affect the finality of this rule 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. This action may not be challenged later in proceedings to enforce its requirements. (
Environmental protection, Air pollution control, Incorporation by reference, Intergovernmental relations, Ozone, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements, Volatile organic compounds.
42 U.S.C. 7401
(c) * * *
(156) * * *
(vii) * * *
(B) Previously approved on January 15, 1987 in paragraph (c)(156)(vii)(A) of this section and now deleted without replacement for implementation in the Antelope Valley Air Quality Management District Rule 1141.2.
(189) * * *
(i) * * *
(A) * * *
(215) * * *
(i) * * *
(A) * * *
(a) * * *
(6) * * *
(v) Metal Container, Closure and Coil Coating Operations and Magnet Wire Coating Operations submitted on June 3, 2004 and adopted on February 17, 2004.
(vi) Control of Volatile Compound Emissions from Resin Manufacturing and Surfactant Manufacturing submitted on July 19, 2004 and adopted on March 16, 2004.