20242 Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 70 / Tuesday, April 12, 2011 / Rules and Regulations 

EPA-APPROVED FLORIDA REGULATIONS—Continued 

State citation 

(Section) Title/subject State effective date EPA approval date Explanation 

*******

* * * * * 

[FR Doc. 2011–8701 Filed 4–11–11; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 6560–50–P 

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION 

AGENCY 

40 CFR Part 52 

[EPA–R09–OAR–2010–0743; FRL–9279–1] 

Revisions to the California State 

Implementation Plan; Sacramento 

Metropolitan Air Quality Management 

District 

AGENCY: Environmental Protection 

Agency (EPA). 

ACTION: Final rule. 

SUMMARY: EPA is finalizing approval of 

a revision to the Sacramento 

Metropolitan Air Quality Management 

District’s portion of the California State 

Implementation Plan (SIP). This 

revision was proposed in the Federal 

Register on October 5, 2010, and 

concerns emissions of oxides of nitrogen 

(NOX) from the landfill gas flare at the 

Kiefer Landfill in Sacramento, 

California. We are approving portions of 

a Permit to Operate that limit NOX

emissions from this facility under the 

Clean Air Act as amended in 1990 (CAA 

or the Act). 

DATES: This rule is effective on May 12, 

2011. 

ADDRESSES: EPA has established docket 

number EPA–R09–OAR–2010–0743 for 

this action. 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, multivolume 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: Mae 

Wang, EPA Region IX, (415) 947–4124, 

wang.mae@epa.gov. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

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 October 5, 2010 (75 FR 61369), 

EPA proposed to approve portions of 

the Permit to Operate for the Kiefer 

Landfill into the California SIP. The 

submitted portions of the Permit to 

Operate for the Kiefer Landfill (Permit 

No. 17359), which was issued by the 

Sacramento Metropolitan Air Quality 

Management District (SMAQMD), relate 

to the control of NOX emissions from 

the air pollution control landfill gas 

flare. The SMAQMD originally issued 

Permit No. 17359 on August 7, 2006, 

and later revised it on November 13, 

2006. We are proposing to act on the 

submitted portions of Permit No. 17359, 

as revised on November 13, 2006. The 

California Air Resources Board (CARB) 

submitted this SIP revision to EPA on 

July 11, 2007. 

We proposed to approve the 

submitted conditions of SMAQMD 

Permit No. 17359 into the SMAQMD 

portion of the California SIP because we 

determined that they complied with the 

relevant CAA requirements for SIP 

approval. Our proposed action contains 

more information on the submitted 

portions of the permit and our 

evaluation. 

II. Public Comments and EPA 

Responses 

EPA’s proposed action provided a 30- 

day public comment period. During this 

period, we did not receive any 

comments. 

III. EPA Action 

No comments were submitted that 

change our assessment that the 

submitted conditions of SMAQMD 

Permit No. 17359 comply with the 

relevant CAA requirements. Therefore, 

as authorized in section 110(k)(3) of the 

Act, EPA is fully approving these 

conditions into the California SIP. 

Specifically, we are approving permit 

conditions 1, 6, 10, 11, 16, 20, 27, 28, 

and 29, or portions thereof, which 

together establish an enforceable NOX

limitation satisfying RACT for the air 

pollution control landfill gas flare at the 

Kiefer Landfill. Please see the docket for 

a copy of the complete submitted 

document. 

IV. Statutory and Executive Order 

Reviews 

Under the CAA, 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 CAA. 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 


erowe on DSK5CLS3C1PROD with RULES
Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 70 / Tuesday, April 12, 2011 / Rules and Regulations 20243 

Act of 1995 (15 U.S.C. 272 note) because 

application of those requirements would 

be inconsistent with the CAA; 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 CAA, 

petitions for judicial review of this 

action must be filed in the United States 

Court of Appeals for the appropriate 

circuit by June 13, 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. 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. 

Dated: February 15, 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] 

■ 1. The authority citation for part 52 

continues to read as follows: 

Authority: 42 U.S.C. 7401 et seq. 

Subpart F—California 

■ 2. Section 52.220 is amended by 

adding paragraph (c)(382) to read as 

follows: 

§ 52.220 Identification of plan. 

* * * * * 

(c) * * * 

(382) New and amended regulations 

for the following APCDs were submitted 

on July 11, 2007, by the Governor’s 

designee. 

(i) Incorporation by reference. 

(A) Sacramento Metropolitan Air 

Quality Management District. 

(1) Permit to Operate for the Kiefer 

Landfill (‘‘Permit to Operate No. 17359 

(Rev01)’’), as revised on November 13, 

2006. 

* * * * * 

[FR Doc. 2011–8466 Filed 4–11–11; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 6560–50–P 

CORPORATION FOR NATIONAL AND 

COMMUNITY SERVICE 

45 CFR Part 2553 

RIN 3045–AA52 

Retired and Senior Volunteer Program 

Amendments 

AGENCY: Corporation for National and 

Community Service. 

ACTION: Final rule. 

SUMMARY: The Corporation for National 

and Community Service (Corporation) is 

issuing a final rule that sets forth a 

competitive process for selecting grant 

recipients for the Retired and Service 

Volunteer Program (RSVP), including 

performance measurement 

requirements, as required by the 

Domestic Volunteer Service Act 

(DVSA), as amended by the Edward M. 

Kennedy Serve America Act (Serve 

America Act) (Pub. L. 111–13) of April 

21, 2009. 

DATES: This final rule is effective July 

11, 2011. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Katharine Delo Gregg at (202) 606–6965 

(kgregg@cns.gov). The TDD/TTY 

number is (202) 606–3472. You may 

request this rule in an alternative format 

for the visually impaired. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

I. Background—The October 26, 2010, 

Proposed Rule 

On October 26, 2010, the Corporation 

published a proposed rule (45 CFR part 

2553) in the Federal Register (Vol. 75, 

No. 206) to regulate the competitive 

grantmaking process for the Retired and 

Senior Volunteer Program (RSVP). 

The proposed rule implements RSVP 

re-competition statutory requirements 

set forth in the Edward M. Kennedy 

Serve America Act (Serve America Act), 

which President Obama signed into law 

on April 21, 2009. The Serve America 

Act reauthorizes and expands national 

service programs administered by the 

Corporation for National and 

Community Service (Corporation) by 

amending the National and Community 

Service Act of 1990 (NCSA) and the 

Domestic Volunteer Service Act of 1973 

(DVSA). 

The Serve America Act amended the 

DVSA by requiring the Corporation to 

develop a competitive process for 

selecting grant recipients for the RSVP 

Program, beginning in fiscal year 2013. 

The competitive process, as directed by 

statute, will include the use of peer 

review panels with expertise in senior 

service and aging, site inspections, as 

appropriate, and evaluations of existing 

grantees. The amended statute requires 

that, beginning in fiscal year 2013, 

RSVP grants be awarded for a period of 

3 years, with an option for renewal of 

3 years if the grantee meets the 

performance measures established in its 

grant award, as well as complying with 

the terms and conditions of the grant. 

60-Day Comment Period 

In the Federal Register of October 26, 

2010 (45 CFR part 2553), the 

Corporation published the proposed 

rule, with a 60-day comment period. 

The Corporation received a total of 21 

comments from twelve commenters, 

including one association that 

represents several hundred members. 

Comments are discussed in detail in 

Part III. 

In general, most of the comments 

supported the proposed regulations. 

II. Discussion of the Final Rule 

The current competitive process for 

selecting RSVP grantees only occurs 

when there is new money above the 

appropriated base funding for RSVP 

grants. The future competitive process 

for selecting RSVP grantees will include 

the same elements specified in the 

amended DVSA that have been used for 

previous competitive processes. The 

elements specified in the amended 

DVSA are discussed below. 

A. Peer review panels [DVSA 

§ 201(e)(2)(B)(i); 45 CFR 2553.71(b)]: As 


erowe on DSK5CLS3C1PROD with RULES