Daily Rules, Proposed Rules, and Notices of the Federal Government


40 CFR Part 52

[EPA-R09-OAR-2008-0863; FRL-8784-2]

Revisions to the California State Implementation Plan, Approval of the Ventura County Air Pollution Control District--Reasonably Available Control Technology Analysis

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).
ACTION: Final rule.
SUMMARY: EPA is finalizing approval of revisions to the Ventura County Air Pollution Control District portion of the California State Implementation Plan (SIP). These revisions were proposed in theFederal Registeron December 12, 2008 and concern the District's analysis of whether its rules met reasonably available control technology (RACT) under the 8-hour ozone National Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS). We are approving the analysis under the Clean Air Act as amended in 1990 (CAA or the Act).
DATES: Effective Date:This rule is effective on May 21, 2009.
ADDRESSES: EPA has established docket number EPA-R09-OAR-2008-0863 for this action. The index to the docket is available electronically athttp://www.regulations.govand in hard copy at EPA Region IX, 75 Hawthorne Street, San Francisco, California. While all documents in the docket are listed in the index, some information may be publicly available only at the hard copy location (e.g.,copyrighted material), 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 theFOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACTsection.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Stanley Tong, EPA Region IX, (415) 947-4122,

Throughout this document, “we,” “us” and “our” refer to EPA.

Table of Contents I. Proposed Action II. Public Comments and EPA Responses III. EPA Action IV. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews I. Proposed Action

On December 12, 2008 (73 FR 75626), EPA proposed to approve the following document into the California SIP.

Local agency Document Adopted Submitted VCAPCD 2006 Reasonably Available Control Technology Analysis 06/27/06 01/31/07

We proposed to approve this analysis and certification because we determined that they complied with the relevant CAA requirements. Our proposed action contains more information on the submitted RACT analysis and our evaluation.

II. Public Comments and EPA Responses

EPA's proposed action provided a 30-day public comment period. During this period, no comments were received.

III. EPA Action

No comments were submitted that change our assessment that the submitted RACT analysis complies with the relevant CAA requirements under the 8-hour ozone NAAQS. Therefore, as authorized in section 110(k)(3) of the Act, EPA is fully approving this document into the California SIP.

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, 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. 3501et 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. 601et 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, as appropriate, disproportionate human health or environmental effects, using practicable 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. 801et 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 theFederal Register. A major rule cannot take effect until 60 days after it is published in theFederal 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 June 22, 2009. 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. 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: March 5, 2009. Jane Diamond, Acting Regional Administrator, Region IX. Part 52, Chapter I, Title 40 of the Code of Federal Regulations is amended as follows: PART 52—[AMENDED] 1. The authority citation for Part 52 continues to read as follows: Authority:

42 U.S.C. 7401et seq.

Subpart F—California 2. Section 52.220 is amended by adding paragraph (c)(358)(i)(B) to read as follows:
§ 52.220 Identification of plan.

(c) * * *

(358) * * *

(i) * * *

(B) Ventura County Air Pollution Control District.

(1) Ventura County Air Pollution Control Board Resolution approving and adopting the 2006 Reasonably Available Control Technology State Implementation Plan Revision, dated June 27, 2006.

(2) Final Ventura County Air Pollution Control District 2006 Reasonably Available Control Technology (RACT) State Implementation Plan (SIP) Revision, including Tables A-1, A-2, B, C, and D, dated June 27, 2006.