Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 207 / Friday, October 25, 2013 / Proposed Rules 63937 

3See Sacramento Metro AQMD Rule 466, Solvent 

Cleaning, section 301.1 which specifies a 25 grams/ 

liter VOC limit for general solvent cleaning; 40 CFR 

Part 59, subpart D, National Volatile Organic 

Compound Emission Standards for Architectural 

Coatings; and CARB’s suggested control measures 

for architectural coatings at: http://www.arb.ca.gov/ 

coatings/arch/Approved_2007_SCM.pdf. 

TABLE 1—EDAQMD NEGATIVE DECLARATIONS—Continued 

CTG source category CTG document title 

Polyester Resin ........................................................................................ EPA–450/3–83–008—Control of VOC Emissions from Manufacture of 

High-Density Polyethylene, Polypropylene, and Polystyrene Resins. 

EPA–450/3–83–006—Control of VOC Fugitive Emissions from Synthetic Organic Chemical Polymer and Resin Manufacturing Equipment. 

Rubber Tires ............................................................................................. EPA–450/2–78–030—Control of Volatile Organic Emissions from Manufacture of Pneumatic Rubber Tires. 

Source: 2006 RACT SIP at 9. 

We are proposing to find that the 

EDAQMD 2006 RACT SIP submission, 

including all of these negative 

declarations, adequately demonstrates 

that the applicable SIP rules for all CTG 

source categories operating within the 

El Dorado AQMD satisfy RACT and that 

there are no existing major stationary 

sources of NOx or VOC in El Dorado 

County subject to RACT for the 1997 8- 

hour ozone NAAQS. 

C. EPA Recommendations to Strengthen 

the SIP 

We recommend strengthening the 

solvent cleaning limits in Rule 225, 

‘‘Solvent Cleaning Operations 

(Degreasing)’’ and coating limits in Rule 

215, ‘‘Architectural Coatings,’’ to more 

closely match corresponding 

requirements adopted by the 

Sacramento Metro AQMD and Placer 

County Air Pollution Control District.3

These recommendations will strengthen 

the SIP, but are not required to satisfy 

RACT. We discuss these 

recommendations further in our 2006 

RACT SIP TSD. 

D. Proposed Action and Request for 

Public Comment 

Based on the evaluations discussed 

above and more fully in our 2006 RACT 

SIP TSD, we are proposing to conclude 

that EDAQMD’s 2006 RACT SIP 

submission satisfies CAA section 182 

RACT requirements for the 1997 8-hour 

ozone NAAQS and to fully approve this 

submission into the California SIP 

pursuant to section 110(k)(3) of the Act. 

We will accept comments from the 

public on this proposal for the next 30 

days. Unless we receive convincing new 

information during the comment period, 

we intend to publish a final approval 

action that will incorporate this RACT 

submission into the federally 

enforceable SIP. 

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. This 

action merely proposes to approve State 

law as meeting Federal requirements 

and does not impose additional 

requirements beyond those imposed by 

State law. For that reason, this proposed 

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, as 

appropriate, disproportionate human 

health or environmental effects, with 

practical and legally permissible 

methods, under Executive Order 12898 

(59 FR 7629, February 16, 1994). 

In addition, this proposed action 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. 

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. 

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

Dated: September 25, 2013. 

Jared Blumenfeld, 

Regional Administrator, Region IX. 

[FR Doc. 2013–25260 Filed 10–24–13; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 6560–50–P 

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION 

AGENCY 

40 CFR Parts 52, 62 and 70 

[EPA–R07–OAR–2012–0410; FRL 990–64- 

Region 7] 

Approval and Promulgation of 

Implementation Plans; Approval and 

Promulgation of State Air Quality Plans 

for Designated Facilities and 

Pollutants, State of Iowa; Control of 

Emissions From Existing Hospital/

Medical/Infectious Waste Incinerator 

Units, Negative Declaration and 111(d) 

Plan Rescission; Approval and 

Promulgation of Operating Permits 

Program, State of Iowa 

AGENCY: Environmental Protection 

Agency (EPA). 

ACTION: Proposed rule. 


tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
63938 Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 207 / Friday, October 25, 2013 / Proposed Rules 

SUMMARY: EPA is proposing to approve, 

through direct final rulemaking, 

revisions to the State of Iowa’s State 

Implementation Plan (SIP), Title V 

program and Clean Air Act (CAA) 

section 111(d) Plan. The purpose of 

these revisions is to make general 

updates to existing state air quality 

rules, approve an exemption from 

constructing permitting for engines used 

in periodic pipeline testing, approve 

changes to State rules regarding regional 

haze requirements, and to approve 

adoption of Federal regulations 

including the National Ambient Air 

Quality Standards (NAAQS) for 2008 

Ozone, 2008 Lead, and 2010 Nitrogen 

Dioxide. EPA is proposing approval of 

the SIP provisions pursuant to section 

110 of the CAA. 

EPA is also proposing to approve the 

State of Iowa’s negative declaration and 

withdrawal of its section 111(d)/129 

plan for Hospital Medical Infectious 

Waste Incinerators (HMIWI) units. EPA 

is proposing approval of these actions 

pursuant to section 111 of the CAA. 

EPA is also proposing to approve two 

minor administrative changes to the 

Title V program, pursuant to section 500 

of the CAA. 

DATES: Comments on this proposed 

action must be received in writing by 

November 25, 2013. 

ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, 

identified by Docket ID No. EPA–R07– 

OAR–2012–0410; by mail to Michael 

Jay, Environmental Protection Agency, 

Air Planning and Development Branch, 

11201 Renner Blvd., Lenexa, KS 66219. 

Comments may also be submitted 

electronically or through hand delivery/ 

courier by following the detailed 

instructions in the ADDRESSES section of 

the direct final rule located in the rules 

section of this Federal Register. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Michael Jay at (913) 551–7460, or by 

email at jay.michael@epa.gov. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: In the 

final rules section of today’s Federal 

Register, EPA is approving the State’s 

revision as a direct final rule without 

prior proposal because the Agency 

views this as a noncontroversial 

revision amendment and anticipates no 

relevant adverse comments to this 

action. A detailed rationale for the 

approval is set forth in the direct final 

rule. If no relevant adverse comments 

are received in response to this action, 

no further activity is contemplated in 

relation to this action. If EPA receives 

relevant adverse comments, the direct 

final rule will be withdrawn and all 

public comments received will be 

addressed in a subsequent final rule 

based on this proposed action. EPA will 

not institute a second comment period 

on this action. Any parties interested in 

commenting on this action should do so 

at this time. Please note that if EPA 

receives adverse comment on part of 

this rule and if that part can be severed 

from the remainder of the rule, EPA may 

adopt as final those parts of the rule that 

are not the subject of an adverse 

comment. For additional information, 

see the direct final rule which is located 

in the rules section of this Federal 

Register. 

Dated: September 6, 2013. 

Karl Brooks, 

Regional Administrator, Region 7. 

[FR Doc. 2013–24865 Filed 10–21–13; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 6560–50–P 

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION 

AGENCY 

40 CFR Part 180 

[EPA–HQ–OPP–2013–0023; FRL–9901–96] 

Receipt of Several Pesticide Petitions 

Filed for Residues of Pesticide 

Chemicals in or on Various 

Commodities 

AGENCY: Environmental Protection 

Agency (EPA). 

ACTION: Notice of filing of petitions and 

request for comment. 

SUMMARY: This document announces the 

Agency’s receipt of several initial filings 

of pesticide petitions requesting the 

establishment or modification of 

regulations for residues of pesticide 

chemicals in or on various commodities. 

DATES: Comments must be received on 

or before November 25, 2013. 

ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, 

identified by docket identification (ID) 

number and the pesticide petition 

number (PP) of interest as shown in the 

body of this document, by one of the 

following methods: 

• Federal eRulemaking Portal: http:// 

www.regulations.gov. Follow the online 

instructions for submitting comments. 

Do not submit electronically any 

information you consider to be 

Confidential Business Information (CBI) 

or other information whose disclosure is 

restricted by statute. 

• Mail: OPP Docket, Environmental 

Protection Agency Docket Center (EPA/ 

DC), (28221T), 1200 Pennsylvania Ave. 

NW., Washington, DC 20460–0001. 

• Hand Delivery: To make special 

arrangements for hand delivery or 

delivery of boxed information, please 

follow the instructions at http://

www.epa.gov/dockets/contacts.html. 

Additional instructions on 

commenting or visiting the docket, 

along with more information about 

dockets generally, is available at 

http://www.epa.gov/dockets. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Robert McNally, Biopesticides and 

Pollution Prevention Division (BPPD) 

(7511P), (703) 305–7090, email address: 

BPPDFRNotices@epa.gov; or the 

Registration Division (RD) (7505P), (703) 

305–7090, email address: 

RDFRNotices@epa.gov.; Office of 

Pesticide Programs, Environmental 

Protection Agency, 1200 Pennsylvania 

Ave. NW., Washington, DC 20460–0001. 

As part of the mailing address, include 

the contact person’s name, division, and 

mail code. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

I. General Information 

A. Does this action apply to me? 

You may be potentially affected by 

this action if you are an agricultural 

producer, food manufacturer, or 

pesticide manufacturer. The following 

list of North American Industrial 

Classification System (NAICS) codes is 

not intended to be exhaustive, but rather 

provides a guide to help readers 

determine whether this document 

applies to them. Potentially affected 

entities may include: 

• Crop production (NAICS code 111). 

• Animal production (NAICS code 

112). 

• Food manufacturing (NAICS code 

311). 

• Pesticide manufacturing (NAICS 

code 32532). 

If you have any questions regarding 

the applicability of this action to a 

particular entity, consult the person 

listed at the end of the pesticide petition 

summary of interest. 

B. What should I consider as I prepare 

my comments for EPA? 

1. Submitting CBI. Do not submit this 

information to EPA through 

regulations.gov or email. Clearly mark 

the part or all of the information that 

you claim to be CBI. For CBI 

information in a disk or CD–ROM that 

you mail to EPA, mark the outside of the 

disk or CD–ROM as CBI and then 

identify electronically within the disk or 

CD–ROM the specific information that 

is claimed as CBI. In addition to one 

complete version of the comment that 

includes information claimed as CBI, a 

copy of the comment that does not 

contain the information claimed as CBI 

must be submitted for inclusion in the 

public docket. Information so marked 

will not be disclosed except in 

accordance with procedures set forth in 

40 CFR Part 2. 


tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS