918 Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 4 / Monday, January 7, 2013 / Proposed Rules 

(c) Effective/applicability date. This 

section applies after the date of 

publication of the Treasury decision 

adopting these rules as final regulations 

in the Federal Register. The rules in 

these proposed regulations may be 

relied upon by the affected filers prior 

to the publication of final regulations. 

Steven T. Miller, 

Deputy Commissioner for Services and 

Enforcement. 

[FR Doc. 2012–31745 Filed 1–2–13; 4:15 pm] 

BILLING CODE 4830–01–P 

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION 

AGENCY 

40 CFR Part 52 

[EPA–R10–OAR–2008–0903: FRL–9768–5] 

Approval and Promulgation of 

Implementation Plans; Oregon: Open 

Burning and Enforcement Procedures 

AGENCY: Environmental Protection 

Agency (EPA). 

ACTION: Proposed rule. 

SUMMARY: The EPA is proposing to 

approve revisions to Oregon’s State 

Implementation Plan submitted to the 

EPA by the Oregon Department of 

Environmental Quality on February 16, 

2001, July 14, 2005, August 28, 2006, 

and May 20, 2008. The February 16, 

2001 submittal relates to open burning 

rules. The July 2005, August 2006, and 

May 2008 submittals relate to 

enforcement procedures, civil penalties, 

and procedures in contested cases 

(appeals). 

DATES: Written comments must be 

received on or before February 6, 2013. 

ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, 

identified by Docket ID No. EPA–R10– 

OAR–2008–0903, by any of the 

following methods: 

• www.regulations.gov. Follow the 

on-line instructions for submitting 

comments. 

• Mail: Justin A. Spenillo, EPA, 

Office of Air, Waste, and Toxics, AWT– 

107, 1200 Sixth Avenue, Suite 900, 

Seattle, Washington 98101. 

• Email: R10- 

Public_Comments@epa.gov. 

• Hand Delivery: EPA, Region 10 

Mailroom, 9th Floor, 1200 Sixth 

Avenue, Seattle, Washington 98101. 

Attention: Justin A. Spenillo, Office of 

Air, Waste, and Toxics, AWT–107. Such 

deliveries are only accepted during 

normal hours of operation, and special 

arrangements should be made for 

deliveries of boxed information. 

Instructions: Direct your comments to 

Docket ID No. EPA–R10–OAR–2008– 

0903. The EPA’s policy is that all 

comments received will be included in 

the public docket without change and 

may be made available online at 

www.regulations.gov, including any 

personal information provided, unless 

the comment includes information 

claimed to be Confidential Business 

Information (CBI) or other information 

the disclosure of which is restricted by 

statute. Do not submit information that 

you consider to be CBI or otherwise 

protected through www.regulations.gov 

or email. The www.regulations.gov Web 

site is an ‘‘anonymous access’’ system, 

which means the EPA will not know 

your identity or contact information 

unless you provide it in the body of 

your comment. If you send an email 

comment directly to the EPA without 

going through www.regulations.gov, 

your email address will be 

automatically captured and included as 

part of the comment that is placed in the 

public docket and made available on the 

Internet. If you submit an electronic 

comment, the EPA recommends that 

you include your name and other 

contact information in the body of your 

comment and with any disk or CD–ROM 

you submit. If the EPA cannot read your 

comment due to technical difficulties 

and cannot contact you for clarification, 

the EPA may not be able to consider 

your comment. Electronic files should 

avoid the use of special characters, any 

form of encryption, and be free of any 

defects or viruses. 

Docket: All documents in the 

electronic docket are listed in the 

www.regulations.gov index. Although 

listed in the index, some information is 

not publicly available, i.e., CBI or other 

information the disclosure of which is 

restricted by statute. Certain other 

material, such as copyrighted material is 

not placed on the Internet and will be 

publicly available only in hard copy 

form. Publicly available docket 

materials are available either 

electronically in www.regulations.gov or 

in hard copy during normal business 

hours at the Office of Air, Waste and 

Toxics, EPA Region 10, 1200 Sixth 

Avenue, Seattle, Washington 98101. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Justin A. Spenillo at (206) 553–6125, 

spenillo.justin@epa.gov, or the above 

EPA, Region 10 address. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

Throughout this document whenever 

‘‘we,’’ ‘‘us,’’ or ‘‘our’’ are used, it is 

intended to refer to the EPA. 

Table of Contents 

I. This Action 

II. Why are we proposing to approve these 

revisions? 

A. EPA’s Review of Oregon Administrative 

Rules (OAR) Chapter 340, Division 264 

Open Burning Rules (February 16, 2001 

Submittal) 

B. EPA’s Review of OAR Chapter 340, 

Division 12 Rules (July 14, 2005 and 

August 28, 2006 Submittals) 

C. EPA’s Review of OAR Chapter 340 

Division 11 Rules (May 20, 2008 

Submittal) 

D. EPA’s Review of OAR 340–200–0040 

(February 16, 2001, July 14, 2005, August 

28, 2006, and May 20, 2008 Submittals) 

E. EPA’s Review of OAR 340–150–0250 

(July 14, 2005 Submittal) 

III. Summary of Action 

IV. Statutory and Executive Orders Review 

I. This Action 

Title I of the Clean Air Act (CAA), as 

amended by Congress in 1990, specifies 

the general requirements for states to 

submit State Implementation Plans 

(SIPs) to attain and maintain the 

National Ambient Air Quality Standards 

(NAAQS) and EPA’s actions regarding 

approval of those SIPs. In this action, 

the EPA is proposing to approve and 

incorporate by reference revisions to 

Oregon’s open burning rules submitted 

by the Oregon Department of 

Environmental Quality (ODEQ) on 

February 16, 2001. Oregon’s open 

burning rules are currently codified at 

Oregon Administrative Rules (OAR) 

Chapter 340, Division 264. 

The EPA is also proposing to approve 

but not incorporate by reference (with 

certain exceptions explained below) the 

enforcement provisions in Chapter 340, 

Division 12 submitted by ODEQ on July 

14, 2005 and August 28, 2006. 

We are also proposing to approve but 

not incorporate by reference revisions 

related to procedures in contested cases 

(that is, appeals from ODEQ actions) 

found at OAR Chapter 340, Division 11. 

These revisions were submitted by 

ODEQ on May 20, 2008. 

Each of the above described 

submittals (the February 16, 2001, July 

14, 2005, August 28, 2006, and May 20, 

2008 submittals) contains an 

amendment to OAR 340–200–0040, 

which describes the State’s procedures 

for adopting its Clean Air Act 

Implementation Plan and references all 

of the state air regulations that have 

been adopted by the Environmental 

Quality Commission for approval into 

the SIP (as a matter of state law), 

whether or not they have yet been 

submitted to or approved by the EPA. 

We are proposing no action on the 

revisions to OAR 340–200–0040 in each 

of ODEQ’s SIP submittals because it is 

unnecessary to take action on a 

provision addressing State SIP adoption 

procedures and because the federallyapproved SIP consists only of 


wreier-aviles on DSK7SPTVN1PROD with 
Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 4 / Monday, January 7, 2013 / Proposed Rules 919 

regulations and other requirements that 

have been submitted by ODEQ and 

approved by EPA. 

Finally, the EPA is proposing to take 

no action on the expedited enforcement 

process set forth in OAR 340–150–0250 

included in ODEQ’s July 14, 2005 

submittal because this section applies to 

underground storage tank regulations 

and does not relate to attainment or 

maintenance of the NAAQS or other 

requirements of section 110 of the CAA. 

II. Why are we proposing to approve 

these revisions? 

We are proposing to approve the SIP 

revisions submitted by ODEQ on 

February 16, 2001; July 14, 2005; August 

28, 2006; and May 20, 2008, subject to 

the exceptions discussed in more detail 

below, because they serve to clarify and 

strengthen Oregon’s existing SIP and are 

consistent with CAA requirements. A 

more detailed explanation of the basis 

for our approval is provided below and 

in the materials included in the docket. 

A. EPA’s Review of OAR Chapter 340, 

Division 264 Open Burning Rules 

(February 16, 2001 Submittal) 

The federally-approved open burning 

rules previously codified at OAR 

Chapter 340, Division 23, have been 

recodified at OAR Chapter 340, Division 

264. In addition to the recodification, 

ODEQ’s February 16, 2001 submittal 

includes revisions to ODEQ’s federallyapproved open burning rules that fall 

into several categories: changes related 

to growth, additional requirements, 

delegation, alterations to exemptions, 

and clarifications. The first category of 

revisions updates the list of open 

burning control areas to reflect 

population growth since the SIP was 

last revised. For example, commercial 

burning is now prohibited except by 

permit in Madras, Tillamook, and 

Warranton, and adjoining areas within 

three miles of these cities’ limits (all 

located in Lincoln County). See OAR 

340–264–0100 (previously at OAR 340– 

023–055). In general, this category of 

revisions imposes more stringent 

requirements on additional geographic 

areas, and thus makes the open burning 

requirements more stringent. 

A second category consists of 

revisions that impose additional 

requirements in all geographic areas and 

thus make the open burning regulations 

overall more stringent. For example, 

OAR 340–264–0050(2) (previously at 

OAR 340–023–0040) now requires that 

a person responsible for a fire not only 

constantly attend the open burning, but 

also be capable of and have the 

necessary equipment for extinguishing 

the fire and completely extinguish the 

fire before leaving it. As another 

example, OAR 340–264–0060(8) 

(previously at OAR 340–023–0040) 

requires that most open burning debris 

be burned on site unless a letter permit 

is issued. 

OAR 340–264–0010 and -0075 are 

new provisions that allow ODEQ to 

delegate authority to issue and enforce 

open burning permits to a city, county, 

fire protection district, forest protection 

district or other state agency that ODEQ 

determines is capable of effectively 

administering the permit program and 

authorizes ODEQ to withdraw any such 

delegation upon a finding that the entity 

is not effectively administering the 

program. Given the narrow scope of the 

delegation to local agencies, that the 

delegated authority will continue to be 

carried out under the SIP-approved 

open burning regulations, and that 

ODEQ has the ultimate responsibility 

under this provision, EPA believes these 

provisions do not affect the stringency 

of ODEQ’s open burning regulations and 

are consistent with the requirements of 

the CAA. See CAA 110(a)(2)(E). 

Another category of revisions to 

ODEQ’s open burning rules exempts 

open burning that is subject to 

restrictions under the current SIP. OAR 

340–264–0040 (previously at OAR 340– 

023–0035) adds three narrow activities 

to the list of activities exempt from 

ODEQ’s open burning rules: fires set for 

disposal of dry tumbleweed; agricultural 

burning for disease or pest control when 

authorized in writing by the Department 

of Agriculture; and open burning of 

animal carcasses by the Department of 

Agriculture because of an animal 

disease emergency. That regulation also 

expands the exemption for slash 

burning on forest land conducted under 

Oregon’s Smoke Management program 

to lands within one-eighth of a mile of 

forest land. Given the very narrow scope 

of these changes and the other revisions 

that make ODEQ’s open burning rules 

more stringent than the open burning 

rules currently approved in the SIP, 

EPA believes these revisions will not 

interfere with attainment or 

maintenance of the NAAQS or other 

requirements of the CAA. 

The remaining revisions clarify 

existing requirements. For example, 

revisions to OAR 340–264–0050 

(previously at OAR 340–023–0040) 

clarify that persons responsible for open 

burning activities are also strictly liable 

for violations of the rules and clarify 

ODEQ’s authority to extinguish existing 

fires. As another example, revisions to 

OAR 340–264–0040(3) (previously at 

OAR 340–023–035(3)) clarify that open 

burning fires otherwise exempt from the 

open burning rules are still subject to 

the requirements and prohibitions of 

local jurisdictions and the State Fire 

Marshall. 

One set of clarifications to ODEQ’s 

rules requires further discussion. Based 

on statutory clarifications to ODEQ’s 

authority to regulate agricultural open 

burning in 1999, ODEQ has revised its 

open burning rules to make clear that it 

does not have authority to regulate 

agricultural open burning except for its 

explicit statutory and regulatory 

authority to regulate field burning in the 

Willamette Valley as provided in ORS 

468A.555 to –620 and OAR Division 

340, Chapter 266. The open burning 

rules currently in the SIP do have 

provisions that purport to make 

agricultural open burning in some areas 

outside of the Willamette Valley subject 

to the general statewide requirements 

and prohibitions for open burning. See, 

e.g., OAR 340–023–022, –040, –042, 

–055, –060, –065, –070, –075, –080, 

–085, –090. The underlying statutory 

authority approved into the SIP, 

however, has for many years exempted 

all agricultural operations and the 

growing or harvesting of crops from 

regulation—except for field burning in 

the Willamette Valley regulated under 

ORS 468A.555 to 468A.620. See 56 FR 

30006 (July 30, 1991); 60 FR 37013 (July 

19, 1995). On December 27, 2011, EPA 

approved revisions to Oregon’s SIP 

which include statutory and regulatory 

changes narrowing the exemption for 

agricultural operations (76 FR 80747). 

These changes, however, narrow the 

agricultural operations exemption only 

to the extent necessary to meet the 

requirements of the CAA. Because there 

is no express requirement to regulate 

agricultural open burning in the CAA 

and no information showing that the 

lack of regulation of agricultural open 

burning in Oregon is interfering with 

attainment or maintenance of the 

NAAQS, the most recent SIP revisions 

to the agricultural operations exemption 

do not have a bearing on whether the 

regulation of agricultural open burning 

has ever been or currently is subject to 

regulation by ODEQ. EPA therefore 

concludes that agricultural open 

burning (except for field burning in the 

Willamette Valley) has not previously 

been subject to regulation by ODEQ 

under the SIP and, therefore, Oregon’s 

revision of its open burning rules to 

make this clear (and EPA’s approval of 

those revisions) does not affect the 

stringency of the SIP-approved open 

burning rules. 

Based on EPA’s review and analysis 

of OAR Chapter 340, Division 264, EPA 

is proposing to approve this revision to 

Oregon’s SIP as meeting the 

requirements of section 110 of the Clean 


wreier-aviles on DSK7SPTVN1PROD with 
920 Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 4 / Monday, January 7, 2013 / Proposed Rules 

Air Act. In addition, EPA proposes to 

remove from the SIP the regulations 

previously codified at OAR Chapter 340, 

Division 023 because they have been 

recodified and no longer exist at the 

location previously approved in the SIP. 

B. EPA’s Review of Division 12 Rules 

(July 14, 2005 and August 28, 2006 

Submittals) 

ODEQ has submitted two SIP 

revisions to OAR 340, Division 12, one 

on July 14, 2005 and one on August 28, 

2006. Division 12 contains enforcement 

procedures and civil penalty provisions 

that apply across all programs 

implemented by ODEQ, including the 

air quality regulations that EPA has 

approved into the SIP. Division 12 

provides the authority and procedures 

under which ODEQ notifies regulated 

entities of violations, determines the 

appropriate penalties for violations, and 

assesses penalties for such violations. 

The revisions to Division 12 made by 

ODEQ in 2005 and 2006 clarify the 

differences between formal and informal 

enforcement processes, make 

adjustments to the penalty matrices, and 

streamline and reorganize the rules to 

more closely track ODEQ’s enforcement 

and penalty calculation process. 

EPA has reviewed the revisions to 

Division 12 and finds that they continue 

to provide ODEQ with adequate 

authority for enforcing the SIP as 

required by Section 110 of the CAA and 

40 CFR 50.230(b). Importantly, OAR 

340–012–0160(3) gives ODEQ the 

discretion to deviate from the penalty 

matrices and assess penalties of up to 

$10,000 per day, per violation based on 

the facts and circumstances of the 

individual case. EPA is therefore 

proposing to approve into the SIP the 

revisions to Division 12 submitted by 

ODEQ, subject to the qualifications and 

in the manner discussed below. 

First, where ODEQ submitted a 

regulation in Division 12 as part of its 

July 14, 2005 submittal and that 

regulation was subsequently revised and 

submitted as part of ODEQ’s August 28, 

2006 submittal, EPA is proposing to 

approve the version of the regulation 

submitted as part of the August 28, 2006 

submittal. The docket contains a chart 

showing the version of the regulations 

in Division 12 we are approving. 

Second, EPA’s authority to approve 

SIPs extends to provisions related to 

attainment and maintenance of the 

NAAQS and carrying out other specific 

requirements of Section 110 of the CAA. 

Therefore, EPA is not approving the 

following regulations in Division 12 that 

do not relate to air emissions: OAR– 

340–012–0055, –0060, –0065, –0066, 

–0067, –0068, –0071, –0072, –0074, 

–0079, –0081, –0083, –0097. In 

addition, EPA is approving the 

remaining sections in Chapter 340, 

Division 12 only to the extent they 

relate to enforcement of requirements 

contained in the Oregon SIP. 

Finally, although EPA is approving 

the rules in Division 12 in the manner 

discussed above, EPA is not 

incorporating these rules by reference 

into the Code of Federal Regulations 

because EPA relies on its independent 

enforcement procedures and penalty 

provisions in bringing enforcement 

actions and assessing penalties under 

the CAA. 

In approving these SIP revisions, EPA 

also notes that ORS 468.126 prohibits 

ODEQ from imposing a penalty for 

violation of an air, water or solid waste 

permit unless the source has been 

provided five days’ advanced written 

notice of the violation and has not come 

into compliance or submitted a 

compliance schedule within that fiveday period. By its terms, the statute does 

not apply to Oregon’s Title V program 

or to any other program if the 

application of the notice provision 

would disqualify the program from 

Federal delegation. Oregon has 

previously confirmed that, because the 

application of the notice provision 

would preclude EPA approval of the 

Oregon SIP, no advance notice is 

required for violation of SIP 

requirements. 

C. EPA’s Review of Division 11 Rules 

(May 20, 2008 Submittal) 

Oregon’s May 20, 2008 submittal 

revises OAR Chapter 340, Division 11, 

which addresses procedures in 

contested cases (appeals of ODEQ 

actions). These rule revisions were 

adopted by Oregon on October 17, 2007 

and became effective on March 20, 

2008. The rules were revised to improve 

the clarity and completeness of 

contested case appeals coming before 

the Environmental Quality Commission. 

Division 11 provides authority needed 

for implementing the SIP and is 

consistent with the Clean Air Act 

requirements for the issuance of permits 

and enforcement authority. It is not 

appropriate to incorporate these rules by 

reference into the Code of Federal 

Regulations, however, because EPA 

relies on its own administrative and 

enforcement procedures in enforcing the 

Clean Air Act. 

D. EPA’s Review of OAR 340–200–0040 

(February 16, 2001, July 14, 2005, 

August 28, 2006, and May 20, 2008 

Submittals) 

On February 16, 2001, July 14, 2005, 

August 28, 2006 and May 20, 2008, 

Oregon submitted revisions to OAR 

340–200–0040. EPA is proposing no 

action on these revisions because it is 

unnecessary to take action on provisions 

addressing State SIP adoption 

procedures and incorporating by 

reference all of the revisions adopted by 

the Environmental Quality Commission 

for approval into the Oregon SIP (as a 

matter of state law). 

E. EPA’s Review of OAR 340–150–0250 

(July 14, 2005 Submittal) 

ODEQ’s July 14, 2005 SIP submittal 

included OAR 340–150–0250. We are 

taking no action on this submittal 

because this section applies to 

underground storage tank regulations 

and does not relate to attainment or 

maintenance of the NAAQS or other 

requirements of section 110 of the CAA. 

III. Summary of Action 

EPA is proposing to approve revisions 

to OAR, Chapter 340, Divisions 11, 12, 

and 264 because they are consistent 

with Clean Air Act requirements. We 

are also proposing to take no action on 

revisions to OAR, Chapter 340, Division 

200–0040 submitted on February 16, 

2001, July 14, 2005, August 28, 2006, 

and May 20, 2008 and OAR, Chapter, 

Division 150–0250 submitted on July 

14, 2005 for the reasons discussed in 

Section II. 

Oregon has not demonstrated 

authority to implement and enforce the 

Oregon Administrative Rules within 

‘‘Indian Country’’ as defined in 18 

U.S.C. 1151. Therefore, this proposed 

SIP approval does not extend to ‘‘Indian 

Country’’ in Oregon. 

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. 3501 et seq.); 


wreier-aviles on DSK7SPTVN1PROD with 
Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 4 / Monday, January 7, 2013 / Proposed Rules 921 

• 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 the 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. 

List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52 

Environmental protection, Air 

pollution control, Incorporation by 

reference, Intergovernmental relations, 

Particulate matter, Reporting, and 

recordkeeping requirements. 

Dated: December 27, 2012. 

Kate Kelly, 

Acting Regional Administrator, Region 10. 

[FR Doc. 2013–00056 Filed 1–4–13; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 6560–50–P 

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION 

AGENCY 

40 CFR Part 52 

[EPA–R09–OAR–2012–0587; FRL–9733–1] 

Revisions to the California State 

Implementation Plan, San Diego APCD, 

Northern Sierra AQMD, and 

Sacramento Metropolitan AQMD 

AGENCY: Environmental Protection 

Agency (EPA). 

ACTION: Proposed rule. 

SUMMARY: EPA is proposing to approve 

revisions to the San Diego Air Pollution 

Control District (SDAPCD), Northern 

Sierra Air Quality Management District 

(NSAQMD), and Sacramento 

Metropolitan Air Quality Management 

District (SMAQMD) portions of the 

California State Implementation Plan 

(SIP). These revisions concern volatile 

organic compound (VOC) emissions 

from transfer of gasoline at gasoline 

dispensing facilities. We are proposing 

to approve four local rules to regulate 

these emission sources under the Clean 

Air Act (CAA or the Act). 

DATES: Any comments on this proposal 

must arrive by February 6, 2013. 

ADDRESSES: Submit comments, 

identified by docket number EPA–R09– 

OAR–2012–0587, by one of the 

following methods: 

1. Federal eRulemaking Portal: 

www.regulations.gov. Follow the on-line 

instructions. 

2. Email: steckel.andrew@epa.gov. 

3. Mail or deliver: Andrew Steckel 

(Air-4), U.S. Environmental Protection 

Agency Region IX, 75 Hawthorne Street, 

San Francisco, CA 94105–3901. 

Instructions: All comments will be 

included in the public docket without 

change and may be made available 

online at www.regulations.gov, 

including any personal information 

provided, unless the comment includes 

Confidential Business Information (CBI) 

or other information whose disclosure is 

restricted by statute. Information that 

you consider CBI or otherwise protected 

should be clearly identified as such and 

should not be submitted through 

www.regulations.gov or email. 

www.regulations.gov is an ‘‘anonymous 

access’’ system, and EPA will not know 

your identity or contact information 

unless you provide it in the body of 

your comment. If you send email 

directly to EPA, your email address will 

be automatically captured and included 

as part of the public comment. If EPA 

cannot read your comment due to 

technical difficulties and cannot contact 

you for clarification, EPA may not be 

able to consider your comment. 

Electronic files should avoid the use of 

special characters, any form of 

encryption, and be free of any defects or 

viruses. 

Docket: Generally, documents in the 

docket for this action are available 

electronically at www.regulations.gov 

and in hard copy at EPA Region IX, 75 

Hawthorne Street, San Francisco, 

California 94105–3901. While all 

documents in the docket are listed at 

www.regulations.gov, some information 

may be publicly available only at the 

hard copy location (e.g., copyrighted 

material, large maps), 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 the FOR

FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Nicole Law, EPA Region IX, (415) 947– 

4126, law.nicole@epa.gov. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: This 

proposal addresses the following local 

rules: NSAQMD Rule 214 Phase I Vapor 

Recovery Requirements, SDAPCD Rule 

61.4 Transfer of Volatile Organic 

Compounds into Vehicle Fuel Tanks, 

SMAQMD Rule 448 Gasoline Transfer 

into Stationary Storage Containers, and 

SMAQMD Rule 449 Transfer of Gasoline 

into Vehicle Fuel Tanks. In the Rules 

and Regulations section of this Federal 

Register, we are approving these local 

rules in a direct final action without 

prior proposal because we believe these 

SIP revisions are not controversial. If we 

receive adverse comments, however, we 

will publish a timely withdrawal of the 

direct final rule and address the 

comments in subsequent action based 

on this proposed rule. Please note that 

if we receive adverse comment on an 

amendment, paragraph, or section of 

this rule and if that provision may be 

severed from the remainder of the rule, 

we may adopt as final those provisions 

of the rule that are not the subject of an 

adverse comment. 

We do not plan to open a second 

comment period, so anyone interested 

in commenting should do so at this 

time. If we do not receive adverse 

comments, no further activity is 

planned. For further information, please 

see the direct final action. 

Dated: September 5, 2012. 

Jared Blumenfeld, 

Regional Administrator, Region IX. 

[FR Doc. 2012–31634 Filed 1–4–13; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 6560–50–P 


wreier-aviles on DSK7SPTVN1PROD with