Daily Rules, Proposed Rules, and Notices of the Federal Government
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).
We approved an earlier version of SDCAPCD Rule 67.4 into the SIP on November 3, 1997 (62 FR 59284) and an earlier version of SDCAPCD Rule 67.16 was approved into the SIP on March 27, 1997 (62 FR 14639). An earlier version of MBUAPCD Rule 205 was approved into the SIP on July 13, 1987 (52 FR 26148). There are no approved earlier versions of AVAQMD Rule 1168.
VOCs help produce ground-level ozone and smog, which harm human health and the environment. Section 110(a) of the CAA requires States to submit regulations that control VOC emissions by limiting VOC content in coatings and solvents. EPA's technical support documents (TSDs) have more information about these rules.
Generally, SIP rules must be enforceable (see section 110(a) of the Act), and must not relax existing requirements (see sections 110(1) and 193). In addition, SIP rules must implement Reasonably Available Control Measures (RACM), including Reasonably Available Control Technology (RACT), in moderate and above ozone nonattainment areas. Guidance and policy documents that we use to evaluate enforceability and RACT requirements consistently include the following:
1. "Issues Relating to VOC Regulation Cutpoints, Deficiencies, and Deviations" EPA, May 25, 1988 (the Bluebook),
2. "Guidance Document for Correcting Common VOC & Other Rule Deficiencies" EPA, Region 9, August 21, 2001 (the Little Bluebook),
3. "Control Techniques Guidelines for Control of Volatile Organic Emissions from Existing Stationary Sources, Volume II: Surface Coating of Cans, Coils, Paper, Fabrics, Automobiles and Light-Duty Trucks" EPA, May 1977 (EPA-450/2-76-028),
4. "Control Techniques Guidelines for Miscellaneous Metal and Plastic Parts Coatings", EPA, September 2008 (EPA-453/R-08-003),
5. "Control Techniques Guidelines for Control of Volatile Organic Emissions from Solvent Metal Cleaning", EPA, September 2006 (EPA 453/-06-001),
6. "Control Techniques Guidelines for Control of Volatile Organic Emissions from Existing Stationary Sources, Volume I: Control Methods for Surface Coating Operations", EPA, November 1976 (EPA-450/2-76-028),
7. "Control Techniques Guidelines for Offset Lithographic Printing and Letterpress Printing", EPA, September 2006 (EPA-453/R-06-002),
8. "Control Techniques Guidelines for Flexible Package Printing", EPA, September 2006 (EPA-453/R-06-003),
9. "Control Techniques Guidelines for Industrial Cleaning Solvents", EPA, September 2006 (EPA 453/R-06-001),
10. "Control Techniques Guidelines for Miscellaneous Industrial Adhesives", EPA, September 2008 (EPA-453/R-08-005) and
11. "Determination of Reasonably Available Control Technology (RACT) and Best Available Retrofit Control Technology (BARCT) for Adhesives and Sealants", CARB, December, 1998
We believe these rules are consistent with the relevant policy and guidance regarding enforceability, RACT and SIP relaxations. The TSDs have more information on our evaluation.
The TSDs describe additional rule revisions that we recommend for the next time the local agency modifies the rules.
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
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.
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
* 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
* 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
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 19, 2012. 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
Environmental protection, Air pollution control, Incorporation by reference, Intergovernmental relations, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements, Volatile organic compounds.
Part 52, Chapter I, Title 40 of the Code of Federal Regulations is amended as follows:
42 U.S.C. 7401
(c) * * *
(282) * * *
(i) * * *
(C) Monterey Bay Unified Air Pollution Control District
(411) * * *
(i) * * *
(C) San Diego County Air Pollution Control District
(D) Antelope Valley Air Quality Management District