64402 Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 209 / Tuesday, October 29, 2013 / Rules and Regulations 

1EPA’s proposal to approve the Contingency 

Measures SIP relied in part on a simultaneous 

proposal to approve Rule 444 and Rule 445, which 

we stated would provide SIP-creditable PM2.5

emission reductions upon final EPA approval of 

these rules into the SIP. See 78 FR at 37745–37746 

and 37751, Table 4. 

[FR Doc. 2013–25575 Filed 10–28–13; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 4310–05–P 

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION 

AGENCY 

40 CFR Part 52 

[EPA–R09–OAR–2013–0384; FRL–9901–77– 

Region 9] 

Approval and Promulgation of 

Implementation Plans; California; 

South Coast; Contingency Measures 

for 1997 PM2.5 Standards 

AGENCY: Environmental Protection 

Agency (EPA). 

ACTION: Final rule. 

SUMMARY: EPA is approving a State 

implementation plan (SIP) revision 

submitted by California to address Clean 

Air Act (CAA) contingency measure 

requirements for the 1997 annual and 

24-hour national ambient air quality 

standard (NAAQS) for fine particulate 

matter (PM2.5) in the Los Angeles-South 

Coast Air Basin (South Coast). Approval 

of this SIP revision terminates the 

sanctions clocks and a federal 

implementation plan (FIP) clock that 

were triggered by EPA’s partial 

disapproval of a related SIP submission 

on November 5, 2011. 

DATES: This rule is effective on 

November 29, 2013. 

ADDRESSES: You may inspect the 

supporting information for this action, 

identified by docket number EPA–R09– 

OAR–2013–0384, by one of the 

following methods: 

1. Federal eRulemaking portal, 

http://www.regulations.gov, please 

follow the online instructions; or, 

2. Visit our regional office at, U.S. 

Environmental Protection Agency 

Region IX, 75 Hawthorne Street, San 

Francisco, CA 94105–3901. 

Docket: The index to the docket for 

this action is available electronically at 

http://www.regulations.gov and in hard 

copy at EPA Region IX, 75 Hawthorne 

Street, San Francisco, California. While 

documents in the docket are listed in 

the index, some information may be 

publicly available only at the hard copy 

location (e.g., voluminous records, large 

maps, copyrighted material), and some 

may not be publicly available in either 

location (e.g., Confidential Business 

Information). To inspect the hard copy 

materials, please schedule an 

appointment during normal business 

hours with the contact listed directly 

below. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Doris Lo, EPA Region IX, (415) 972– 

3959, lo.doris@epa.gov. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

Throughout this document, ‘‘we,’’ ‘‘us’’ 

and ‘‘our’’ refer to EPA. 

Table of Contents 

I. Summary of Proposed Action 

II. Public Comment and EPA Response 

III. EPA’s Final Action 

IV. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews 

I. Summary of Proposed Action 

On June 24, 2013 (78 FR 37741), EPA 

proposed to approve the ‘‘South Coast 

Air Quality Management District 

Proposed Contingency Measures for the 

2007 PM2.5 SIP’’ (dated October 2011), 

which the California Air Resources 

Board (CARB) submitted on November 

14, 2011 and supplemented on April 24, 

2013 (collectively the ‘‘Contingency 

Measures SIP’’). EPA proposed to 

approve the Contingency Measures SIP 

as satisfying the attainment contingency 

measure requirement in CAA section 

172(c)(9) for the 1997 PM2.5 NAAQS and 

to conclude that the reasonable further 

progress (RFP) contingency measure 

requirement in CAA section 172(c)(9) 

for the 2012 milestone year is moot 

because the South Coast area has 

achieved the emission reduction 

benchmarks for the 2012 RFP year. Our 

June 24, 2013 proposed rule provides 

the rationale for this action. 

II. Public Comment and EPA Response 

EPA provided a 30-day public 

comment period on our proposed 

action. The comment period ended on 

July 24, 2013. We received one public 

comment and respond to that comment 

below. 

Comment: A private citizen asserted 

that there has been no attempt to 

address methane outgassing and the 

many oil fields in the South Coast area. 

The commenter also stated that train 

maintenance, promotion of bicycles and 

rail, automobile and truck lane 

reductions, digital signage, outdoor 

wood burning and landfills are not 

being adequately addressed, that health 

risk assessments should be required, 

that there are cancer clusters in the area, 

and that ‘‘the political handling of [the] 

air quality problem does not change the 

quality of life and health of’’ South 

Coast area residents. 

Response: The commenter’s 

submission contained only general 

observations and conclusions that are 

outside the scope of EPA’s rulemaking 

action. While expressing a broad range 

of environmental concerns, the 

commenter failed to identify any 

specific issue relevant to EPA’s 

proposed action on the Contingency 

Measures SIP, and did not address the 

basis for EPA’s approval of the South 

Coast’s contingency measures. To the 

extent the commenter intended to 

encourage additional review and 

evaluation of air pollution sources in 

the South Coast area, and additional 

potential transportation and control 

measures that may reduce air pollution, 

EPA encourages the commenter to 

participate in the regulatory processes 

carried out by the South Coast Air 

Quality Management District 

(SCAQMD), CARB, and other State/local 

agencies involved in the development of 

air quality management plans for the 

South Coast area. EPA finds no basis in 

the comment to change its views on the 

approvability of the specific 

contingency measures at issue in this 

rulemaking. 

III. EPA’s Final Action 

We are finalizing our proposal to 

conclude that the Contingency Measures 

SIP submitted by CARB on November 

14, 2011, as supplemented on April 24, 

2013, satisfies the attainment 

contingency measure requirement in 

CAA section 172(c)(9) for the 1997 PM2.5

NAAQS in the South Coast 

nonattainment area. We therefore fully 

approve this submission into the 

California SIP. This final action is based 

in part on EPA’s final rule approving 

SCAQMD Rule 444 and Rule 445, which 

was signed by Jared Blumenfeld, 

Regional Administrator, Region IX, on 

August 22, 2013. See ‘‘Revisions to 

Implementation Plan, South Coast Air 

Quality Management District’’ Final 

Rule, signed August 22, 2013 (prepublication copy).1

We are also finalizing our proposal to 

conclude that the RFP contingency 

measure requirement in CAA section 

172(c)(9) for the 2012 milestone year is 

moot as applied to the South Coast 

because the area achieved its SIPapproved emission reduction 

benchmarks for the 2012 RFP year. 

Today’s final approval corrects 

deficiencies that were the basis for 

EPA’s partial disapproval of the South 

Coast PM2.5 SIP on November 9, 2011 

(76 FR 69928) and therefore terminates 

the CAA section 179(b) sanctions clocks 

triggered by that action and the 

obligation on EPA to promulgate a FIP 

within two years of that action. 


ehiers on DSK2VPTVN1PROD with RULES
Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 209 / Tuesday, October 29, 2013 / Rules and Regulations 64403 

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 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 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, 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 it does not 

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 December 30, 2013. 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, Intergovernmental 

relations, Incorporation by reference, 

Nitrogen dioxide, Particulate matter, 

Reporting and recordkeeping 

requirements, Sulfur oxides, Volatile 

organic compounds. 

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

Dated: September 25, 2013. 

Jared Blumenfeld, 

Regional Administrator, Region IX. 

Part 52, Chapter I, Title 40 of the Code 

of Federal Regulations is amended as 

follows: 

PART 52—APPROVAL AND 

PROMULGATION OF 

IMPLEMENTATION PLANS 

■ 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)(432) to read as 

follows: 

§ 52.220 Identification of plan. 

* * * * * 

(c) * * * 

(432) The following plan was 

submitted on November 14, 2011, by the 

Governor’s Designee. 

(i) [Reserved]. 

(ii) Additional materials. 

(A) South Coast Air Quality 

Management District. 

(1) South Coast Air Quality 

Management District Proposed 

Contingency Measures for the 2007 

PM2.5 SIP (dated October 2011) 

(‘‘Contingency Measures SIP’’), adopted 

October 7, 2011. 

(2) SCAQMD Resolution No. 11–24, 

dated October 7, 2011, adopting the 

Contingency Measures SIP. 

(3) Letter dated April 24, 2013 from 

Elaine Chang, Deputy Executive Officer, 

SCAQMD, to Deborah Jordan, Director, 

Air Division, EPA Region 9, Re: ‘‘Update 

of the 2012 RFP Emissions and 2015 

Reductions from Contingency Measures 

for the 2007 Annual PM2.5 Air Quality 

Management Plan for the South Coast 

Air Basin,’’ including attachments. 

(B) State of California Air Resources 

Board. 

(1) CARB Executive Order S–11–023, 

dated November 14, 2011, adopting the 

Contingency Measures SIP. 

[FR Doc. 2013–25182 Filed 10–28–13; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 6560–50–P 

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION 

AGENCY 

40 CFR Part 312 

[EPA–HQ–SFUND–2013–0513; FRL–9902– 

22–OSWER] 

Amendment to Standards and 

Practices for All Appropriate Inquiries 

AGENCY: Environmental Protection 

Agency (EPA). 

ACTION: Withdrawal of direct final rule. 

SUMMARY: Because EPA received 

adverse comment, we are withdrawing 

the direct final rule for the Amendment 

to Standards and Practices for All 

Appropriate Inquiries published on 

August 15, 2013. 

DATES: Effective October 29, 2013, EPA 

withdraws the direct final rule 

published at 78 FR 49690, on August 15 

2013. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Rachel Lentz, Office of Brownfields and 

Land Revitalization (5105–T), U.S. 

Environmental Protection Agency, 1200 

Pennsylvania Ave. NW., Washington, 

DC 20460–0002; telephone number: 

202–566–2745; fax number: 202–566– 


ehiers on DSK2VPTVN1PROD with RULES