62346 Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 201 / Friday, October 17, 2014 / Rules and Regulations 

State, local, or tribal government, in the 

aggregate, or by the private sector of 

$100,000,000 (adjusted for inflation) or 

more in any one year. Though this rule 

will not result in such an expenditure, 

we do discuss the effects of this rule 

elsewhere in this preamble. 

8. Taking of Private Property 

This rule will not cause a taking of 

private property or otherwise have 

taking implications under Executive 

Order 12630, Governmental Actions and 

Interference with Constitutionally 

Protected Property Rights. 

9. Civil Justice Reform 

This rule meets applicable standards 

in sections 3(a) and 3(b)(2) of Executive 

Order 12988, Civil Justice Reform, to 

minimize litigation, eliminate 

ambiguity, and reduce burden. 

10. Protection of Children 

We have analyzed this rule under 

Executive Order 13045, Protection of 

Children from Environmental Health 

Risks and Safety Risks. This rule is not 

an economically significant rule and 

does not create an environmental risk to 

health or risk to safety that may 

disproportionately affect children. 

11. Indian Tribal Governments 

This rule does not have tribal 

implications under Executive Order 

13175, Consultation and Coordination 

with Indian Tribal Governments, 

because it does not have a substantial 

direct effect on one or more Indian 

tribes, on the relationship between the 

Federal Government and Indian tribes, 

or on the distribution of power and 

responsibilities between the Federal 

Government and Indian tribes. 

12. Energy Effects 

This action is not a ‘‘significant 

energy action’’ under Executive Order 

13211, Actions Concerning Regulations 

That Significantly Affect Energy Supply, 

Distribution, or Use. 

13. Technical Standards 

This rule does not use technical 

standards. Therefore, we did not 

consider the use of voluntary consensus 

standards. 

14. Environment 

We have analyzed this rule under 

Department of Homeland Security 

Management Directive 023–01 and 

Commandant Instruction M16475.lD, 

which guide the Coast Guard in 

complying with the National 

Environmental Policy Act of 1969 

(NEPA) (42 U.S.C. 4321–4370f), and 

have determined that this action is one 

of a category of actions that do not 

individually or cumulatively have a 

significant effect on the human 

environment. This rule involves a safety 

zone of limited size and duration. This 

rule is categorically excluded from 

further review under paragraph 34(g) of 

Figure 2–1 of the Commandant 

Instruction. An environmental analysis 

checklist supporting this determination 

and a Categorical Exclusion 

Determination are available in the 

docket where indicated under 

ADDRESSES. We seek any comments or 

information that may lead to the 

discovery of a significant environmental 

impact from this rule. 

List of Subjects in 33 CFR Part 165 

Harbors, Marine safety, Navigation 

(water), Reporting and recordkeeping 

requirements, Security measures, and 

Waterways. 

For the reasons discussed in the 

preamble, the Coast Guard amends 33 

CFR part 165 as follows: 

PART 165—REGULATED NAVIGATION 

AREAS AND LIMITED ACCESS AREAS 

■ 1. The authority citation for part 165 

continues to read as follows: 

Authority: 33 U.S.C. 1231; 46 U.S.C. 

Chapter 701, 3306, 3707; 50 U.S.C. 191, 195; 

33 CFR 1.05–1, 6.04–1, 6.04–6, 160.5; Pub. L. 

107–295, 116 Stat. 2064; Department of 

Homeland Security Delegation No. 0170.1. 

■ 2. Add § 165.T11–664 to read as 

follows: 

§ 165.T11–664 Safety zone; Pier 39 36th 

Anniversary Fireworks Display, San 

Francisco Bay, San Francisco, CA. 

(a) Location. This temporary safety 

zone is established in the navigable 

waters of the San Francisco Bay near 

Pier 39 in San Francisco, CA as depicted 

in National Oceanic and Atmospheric 

Administration (NOAA) Chart 18650. 

From 11 a.m. to 8:30 p.m. on October 4, 

11, 18 and 25, 2014, the temporary 

safety zone applies to the nearest point 

of the fireworks barge within a radius of 

100 feet during the loading, transit, and 

arrival of the fireworks barge from Pier 

50 to the launch site near Pier 39 in 

approximate positions 37°48′45′′ N, 

122°24′40′′ W (NAD83). From 8:30 p.m. 

until 9 p.m. on October 4, 11, 18 and 25, 

2014, the temporary safety zone will 

increase in size and encompass the 

navigable waters around and under the 

fireworks barge in approximate position 

37°48′45′′ N, 122°24′40′′ W (NAD83) 

within a radius of 560 feet. 

(b) Enforcement period. The zone 

described in paragraph (a) of this 

section will be enforced from 11 a.m. to 

9 p.m. on October 4, 11, 18 and 25, 

2014. The Captain of the Port San 

Francisco (COTP) will notify the 

maritime community of periods during 

which this zone will be enforced via 

Broadcast Notice to Mariners in 

accordance with 33 CFR 165.7. 

(c) Definitions. As used in this 

section, ‘‘designated representative’’ 

means a Coast Guard Patrol 

Commander, including a Coast Guard 

coxswain, petty officer, or other officer 

on a Coast Guard vessel or a Federal, 

State, or local officer designated by or 

assisting the COTP in the enforcement 

of the safety zone. 

(d) Regulations. (1) Under the general 

regulations in 33 CFR Part 165, Subpart 

C, entry into, transiting or anchoring 

within this safety zone is prohibited 

unless authorized by the COTP or a 

designated representative. 

(2) The safety zone is closed to all 

vessel traffic, except as may be 

permitted by the COTP or a designated 

representative. 

(3) Vessel operators desiring to enter 

or operate within the safety zone must 

contact the COTP or a designated 

representative to obtain permission to 

do so. Vessel operators given permission 

to enter or operate in the safety zone 

must comply with all directions given to 

them by the COTP or a designated 

representative. Persons and vessels may 

request permission to enter the safety 

zone on VHF–23A or through the 24- 

hour Command Center at telephone 

(415) 399–3547. 

Dated: September 29, 2014. 

Gregory G. Stump, 

Captain, U.S. Coast Guard, Captain of the 

Port San Francisco. 

[FR Doc. 2014–24780 Filed 10–16–14; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 9110–04–P 

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION 

AGENCY 

40 CFR Part 52 

[EPA–R09–OAR–2014–0529; FRL–9915–53– 

Region 9] 

Revisions to the California State 

Implementation Plan, California Air 

Resources Board—Consumer 

Products 

AGENCY: Environmental Protection 

Agency (EPA). 

ACTION: Direct final rule. 

SUMMARY: The Environmental Protection 

Agency (EPA) is taking direct final 

action to approve revisions to the 

California Air Resources Board portion 

of the California State Implementation 

Plan (SIP). These revisions concern 

mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with RULES

Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 201 / Friday, October 17, 2014 / Rules and Regulations 62347 

1 Date the Final Rulemaking Package was filed 

with the California Office of Administrative Law. 

volatile organic compound (VOC) 

emissions from consumer products. We 

are approving a local rule that regulates 

these emission sources under the Clean 

Air Act (CAA or the Act). 

DATES: This rule is effective on 

December 16, 2014 without further 

notice, unless EPA receives adverse 

comments by November 17, 2014. If we 

receive such comments, we will publish 

a timely withdrawal in the Federal 

Register to notify the public that this 

direct final rule will not take effect. 

ADDRESSES: Submit comments, 

identified by docket number EPA–R09– 

OAR–2014–0529, 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: 

Stanley Tong, EPA Region IX, (415) 

947–4122, tong.stanley@epa.gov. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

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

and ‘‘our’’ refer to EPA. 

Table of Contents 

I. The State’s Submittal 

A. What rule did the State submit? 

B. Are there other versions of this rule? 

C. What is the purpose of the submitted 

rule revision? 

II. EPA’s Evaluation and Action 

A. How is EPA evaluating the rule? 

B. Does the rule meet the evaluation 

criteria? 

C. Public Comment and Final Action 

III. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews 

I. The State’s Submittal 

A. What rule did the State submit? 

Table 1 lists the rule we are approving 

with the date it was amended by the 

State and submitted by the California 

Air Resources Board (CARB). 

TABLE 1—SUBMITTED CALIFORNIA AIR RESOURCES BOARD RULE

Regulation Amended Filed with California 

Secretary of State 

Submitted to 

EPA 

Subchapter 8.5—Consumer Products; Article 2—Consumer Products ........... March 15, 2013 ......... April 25, 2013 ............ May 28, 2014. 

On July 18, 2014, EPA determined 

that the submittal for California Code of 

Regulations, Title 17, Division 3, 

Chapter 1, Subchapter 8.5—Consumer 

Products; Article 2—Consumer Products 

met the completeness criteria in 40 CFR 

Part 51 Appendix V, which must be met 

before formal EPA review. 

B. Are there other versions of this rule? 

We approved an earlier version of 

CARB’s Consumer Products Regulation 

(amended on August 6, 2010 and 

submitted to EPA on January 28, 2011), 

into the SIP on February 13, 2012 (77 FR 

7535). CARB’s submittal letter advised 

EPA that its SIP submission did not 

include the second tier 3% VOC limits 

for Multi-purpose Solvents and Paint 

Thinners. CARB’s intent was to monitor 

manufacturers’ progress to meet both 

the technology forcing lower VOC limit 

and a less flammable product. In 2013 

CARB determined the 3% VOC limit for 

Multi-purpose Solvents and Paint 

Thinners was technically feasible and 

included the limit in a May 28, 2014 SIP 

submittal. 

On September 29, 2011, and March 

15, 2013 CARB adopted additional 

revisions to the SIP-approved version 

and submitted them to us along with the 

3% VOC limit for Multi-purpose 

Solvents and Paint Thinners on May 28, 

2014. Table 2 lists the three 

amendments. While we can act on only 

the most recently amended version that 

was submitted to EPA, we have 

reviewed materials provided with the 

SIP submittal and note that it includes 

and builds on the previous 

amendments. 

TABLE 2—CALIFORNIA AIR RESOURCES BOARD SUBMITTED REVISIONS TO ITS CONSUMER PRODUCTS REGULATION

Board hearing Amended 1 Filed with California 

Secretary of State Submitted to EPA 

September 24, 2009 .......................... August 6, 2010 .......... September 20, 2010 .. May 28, 2014 (2nd tier—3% VOC limit for Multi-purpose Solvents and Paint Thinners only). 

November 18, 2010 ........................... September 29, 2011 November 10, 2011 .. May 28, 2014. 

October 18, 2012 ............................... March 15, 2013 ......... April 25, 2013 ............ May 28, 2014. 

mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with RULES

62348 Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 201 / Friday, October 17, 2014 / Rules and Regulations 

2Robert D. Fletcher (CARB), letter to Jared 

Blumenfeld (EPA Region IX), January 28, 2011, 

submitting the August 6, 2010 amendments to 

California’s Consumer Products Regulation. 

3 Initial Statement of Reasons; Proposed 

Amendments to the California Regulation for 

Reducing Emissions from Consumer Products; 

Release Date: September 29, 2010. IV–25. http://

www.arb.ca.gov/regact/2009/cpmthd310/

cpmthdisor.pdf. 

4 Ibid. IV–19. 

C. What is the purpose of the submitted 

rule revision? 

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. The California Health and 

Safety Code (Section 41712(b)) requires 

CARB to adopt regulations to achieve 

the maximum feasible reduction in 

volatile organic compounds emitted by 

consumer products if the state board 

determines that adequate data exist to 

establish both of the following: 

(1) The regulations are necessary to 

attain state and federal ambient air 

quality standards. 

(2) The regulations are commercially 

and technologically feasible and 

necessary. 

CARB’s May 28, 2014 submittal 

contains the following three 

amendments to its Consumer Products 

Regulation: (1) The second tier 3% VOC 

limits for Multi-purpose Solvents and 

Paint Thinners from CARB’s August 6, 

2010 amendments (September 24, 2009 

Board Hearing), but excluded from 

CARB’s January 28, 2011 SIP 

submittal; 2 (2) CARB’s September 29, 

2011 amendments (November 18, 2010 

Board Hearing), which established new 

or lower VOC limits for 11 consumer 

product categories; and (3) CARB’s 

March 15, 2013 amendments (October 

18, 2012 Board Hearing), which 

incorporates additional areas where 

higher VOC automobile windshield 

washer fluid could be sold to 

accommodate mountainous areas that 

routinely experience freezing 

temperatures in the winter. 

The amendments also: (1) Add or 

modify the definitions for artist’s 

solvent/thinner, oven cleaners, spot 

removers, and the ‘‘Most Restrictive 

Limit’’ provision; (2) consolidate 

existing requirements into a table listing 

the consumer product categories that 

prohibit the use of the toxic air 

contaminants methylene chloride, 

perchloroethylene, and 

trichloroethylene. This will make it 

easier to find the requirements for all 

consumer product categories where use 

of these compounds is prohibited; (3) 

consolidate into a table listing the 

consumer product categories that 

prohibit the use of compounds with a 

global warming potential (GWP) of 150 

or greater; (4) consolidate into a table 

listing the consumer products that 

prohibit the use of paradichlorobenzene; (5) add additional test 

methods to be used to determine the 

aromatic content of Multi-purpose 

Solvents and Paint Thinners and the 

VOC content of Fabric Softener-Single 

Use Drying Product; (6) raise the VOC 

limit for nonaerosol Oven or Grill 

Cleaners products to 4% to 

accommodate the use of noncaustic 

technologies; (7) delay the effective date 

until December 31, 2012 for Spot 

Removers, and until December 31, 2013 

for Flying Bug Insecticide (aerosol) and 

Wasp or Hornet Insecticide (aerosol); 

and (8) prohibit the use of alkylphenol 

ethoxylates in certain products to 

ensure these compounds are not used 

when reformulating the products. 

Generally, CARB received support for 

its amendments from both the consumer 

products industry and environmental 

organizations. Although industry 

commented about the serious and costly 

reformulation challenges posed by the 

amendments, industry was committed 

to expending the money to conduct the 

research and development necessary to 

meet the new requirements. 

Environmental organizations were also 

generally supportive of the proactive 

approach CARB was taking to prohibit 

the use of certain toxic compounds in 

order to help protect the health of 

workers and consumers, and prohibiting 

the use of compounds with high global 

warming potential in the reformulation 

of products to meet lower VOC limits. 

CARB estimates that raising the VOC 

limit for Oven or Grill Cleaners to 4% 

will result in an increase of 

approximately 0.1 tons per day (tpd) 

and that increasing the number of areas 

where higher VOC automotive 

windshield washer fluid could be sold 

will result in an increase of 0.12 tpd 

VOC. CARB’s staff reports indicate these 

increases would be offset by 

approximately 11 tpd of VOC reductions 

from other consumer product categories. 

EPA’s technical support document 

(TSD) has more information about this 

rule. 

II. EPA’s Evaluation and Action 

A. How is EPA evaluating the rule? 

CAA section 110(a)(2)(A) requires that 

regulations submitted to EPA for 

approval into a SIP must be clear and 

legally enforceable. CAA section 110(l) 

prohibits EPA from approving any SIP 

revision that would interfere with any 

applicable requirement concerning 

attainment and reasonable further 

progress (RFP) or any other applicable 

requirement of the CAA. California’s 

consumer products regulation covers 

VOC area sources and not stationary 

sources. In 1998 EPA promulgated a 

national rule to regulate VOC emissions 

from consumer products (63 FR 48831, 

September 11, 1998). EPA’s national 

rule largely parallels an early SIPapproved version of CARB’s consumer 

products regulation. The amendments 

from CARB that we are approving today 

regulate nearly three times the number 

of consumer product categories and has 

more stringent VOC limits than 

categories covered under EPA’s 1998 

national rule. CARB points out that 

although emissions from individual 

consumer products may not seem large, 

collectively, they represent a significant 

source of emissions when taking into 

account 39 million California residents 

use these products and that given the 

severity of air pollution in California, 

‘‘dramatic emission reductions from all 

sources contributing to ground-level 

ozone are necessary’’.3 CARB estimates 

that ozone pollution damage to crops is 

estimated to cost agriculture over $500 

million dollars annually.4

Guidance and policy documents that 

we use to evaluate enforceability and 

SIP requirements consistently include 

the following: 

1. ‘‘Issues Relating to VOC Regulation 

Cutpoints, Deficiencies, and 

Deviations,’’ EPA, May 25, 1988, revised 

January 11, 2000 (the Bluebook). 

2. ‘‘State Implementation Plans; 

General Preamble for the 

Implementation of Title I of the Clean 

Air Act Amendments of 1990,’’ 57 FR 

13498 (April 16, 1992); 57 FR 18070 

(April 28, 1992). 

3. ‘‘Guidance Document for Correcting 

Common VOC & Other Rule 

Deficiencies,’’ EPA Region 9, August 21, 

2001 (the Little Bluebook). 

4. 40 CFR 59 Subpart C, National 

Volatile Organic Compound Emission 

Standards for Consumer Products. 

B. Does the rule meet the evaluation 

criteria? 

We believe this rule is consistent with 

the relevant policy and guidance 

regarding enforceability and SIP 

relaxations. CARB estimates that raising 

the VOC limit for Oven or Grill Cleaners 

and increasing the mountainous areas 

where higher VOC windshield washer 

fluid can be sold will increase VOC 

emissions by approximately 0.1 and 

0.12 tpd respectively, but that these 

increases are offset by VOC reductions 

(approximately 11 tpd) from other 

consumer product categories. We have 

mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with RULES

Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 201 / Friday, October 17, 2014 / Rules and Regulations 62349 

reviewed CARB’s analysis and agree 

that the emission increases are offset by 

greater VOC reductions achieved in 

other consumer product categories and 

that it will not interfere with attainment, 

RFP, or any other applicable CAA 

requirement. Our TSD has more 

information on our evaluation. 

Our action is being taken under CAA 

Title 1 part D and is limited to the 

control of criteria pollutants. However, 

we support CARB’s actions to limit 

toxic or potentially toxic compounds 

and those compounds with a high global 

warming potential. 

C. Public Comment and Final Action 

As authorized in section 110(k)(3) of 

the Act, EPA is fully approving the 

submitted rule because we believe it 

fulfills 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 

Federal Register, we are simultaneously 

proposing approval of the same 

submitted rule. If we receive adverse 

comments by November 17, 2014, we 

will publish a timely withdrawal in the 

Federal Register to notify the public 

that the direct final approval will not 

take effect and we will address the 

comments in a subsequent final action 

based on the proposal. If we do not 

receive timely adverse comments, the 

direct final approval will be effective 

without further notice on December 16, 

2014. This will incorporate the rule into 

the federally enforceable SIP. 

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. 

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. 

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 

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 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 December 16, 

2014. 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 Federal Register, 

rather than file an immediate petition 

for judicial review of this direct final 

rule, so that EPA can withdraw this 

direct final rule and address the 

comment in the proposed rulemaking. 

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, 

Ozone, Reporting and recordkeeping 

requirements, Volatile organic 

compounds. 

Dated: August 5, 2014. 

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)(444) to read as 

follows: 

§ 52.220 Identification of plan. 

* * * * * 

(c) * * * 

(444) New and amended regulations 

were submitted on May 28, 2014, by the 

Governor’s designee. 

(i) Incorporation by reference. (A) 

California Air Resource Board. 

(1) ‘‘Final Regulation Order, 

Regulation for Reducing Emissions from 

Consumer Products,’’ Subchapter 8.5 

(Consumer Products), Article 2 

mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with RULES

62350 Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 201 / Friday, October 17, 2014 / Rules and Regulations 

(Consumer Products), amended March 

15, 2013. 

* * * * * 

[FR Doc. 2014–24492 Filed 10–16–14; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 6560–50–P 

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION 

AGENCY 

40 CFR Part 52 

[EPA–R09–OAR–2014–0495; FRL–9917–82– 

Region–9] 

Revisions of Air Quality 

Implementation Plan; Nevada; Clark 

County; Stationary Source Permits 

AGENCY: Environmental Protection 

Agency. 

ACTION: Final rule. 

SUMMARY: The Environmental Protection 

Agency (EPA) is finalizing approval of 

revisions to the Clark County 

Department of Air Quality (Clark or 

DEQ) portion of the Nevada State 

Implementation Plan (SIP). This action 

was proposed in the Federal Register on 

July 23, 2014, and concerns seven Clark 

County permitting related rules 

submitted by Nevada Division of 

Environmental Protection (NDEP). Final 

approval of these rules makes these 

rules federally enforceable and corrects 

program deficiencies identified in 

previous EPA rulemaking. 

DATES: These rules will be effective on 

November 17, 2014. 

ADDRESSES: EPA has established docket 

number EPA–R09–OAR–2014–0495 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 94105–3901. 

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, 

multi-volume 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: 

Laura Yannayon, EPA Region IX, (415) 

972–3534, yannayon.laura@epa.gov. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: This 

action concerns seven Clark County 

permitting related rules (referred to as 

Sections) submitted by Nevada Division 

of Environmental Protection (NDEP): 

Sections 0—Definitions, 12.0— 

Applicability, General Requirements 

and Transition Procedures, 12.1— 

Permit Requirements for Minor Sources, 

12.2—Permit Requirements for Major 

Sources in Attainment Areas, 12.3— 

Permit Requirements for Major Sources 

in Nonattainment Areas, 12.4— 

Authority to Construct Application and 

Permit Requirements for Part 70 

Sources, and subsection 12.7.5 of 

Section 12.7—Emission Reduction 

Credits. 

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 July 23, 2014 (79 FR 42752), EPA 

proposed to approve the following rules 

into the Clark portion of the Nevada SIP. 

TABLE 1—SUBMITTED NSR RULES

Section No. Section title Adopted Submitted 

0 ............................................... Definitions ......................................................................................................... 3/18/14 4/1/14 

12.0 .......................................... Applicability, General Requirements and Transition Procedures ..................... 3/18/14 4/1/14 

12.1 .......................................... Permit Requirements for Minor Sources .......................................................... 3/18/14 4/1/14 

12.2 .......................................... Permit Requirements for Major Sources in Attainment Areas (Prevention of 

Significant Deterioration).

3/18/14 4/1/14 

12.3 .......................................... Permit Requirements for Major Sources in Nonattainment Areas ................... 3/18/14 4/1/14 

12.4 .......................................... Authority to Construct Application and Permit Requirements for Part 70 

Sources.

3/18/14 4/1/14 

12.7 (Subsection 12.7.5) .......... Emission Reduction Credits .............................................................................. 5/18/10 4/1/14 

We proposed to approve these rules 

because we determined that they 

address deficiencies identified in a 

previous action (77 FR 64039, October 

18, 2012), and complied with the 

relevant CAA requirements. On July 23, 

2014, we simultaneously proposed to 

remove several outdated regulations 

from the SIP as listed below. 

TABLE 2—RULES REQUESTED TO RESCIND

Section No. Section title Repealed Submitted 

1 ................... Definitions ...................................................................................................................................... 3/18/14 4/01/14 

11 ................. Ambient Air Quality Standards ...................................................................................................... 4/05/11 4/01/14 

24 ................. Sampling and Testing—Records and Reports ............................................................................. 3/16/10 4/01/14 

We have reconsidered our proposed 

rescission of all of the remaining 

defined terms in section 1 

(‘‘Definitions’’) and are taking final 

action to rescind all of them with the 

exception of certain defined terms that 

are necessary to retain because they are 

relied upon in certain Clark County 

rules in the existing SIP. The terms in 

section 1 for which we are deferring 

final rescission action at this time, and 

the corresponding Clark County SIP rule 

that relies on the term, are as follows: 

‘‘affected facility’’ (SIP section 23), 

‘‘dust’’ (SIP section 27), ‘‘existing 

gasoline station’’ (SIP section 52), 

‘‘fumes’’ (SIP section 27), ‘‘mist’’ (SIP 

section 1 definition of ‘‘uncombined 

water’’), ‘‘new gasoline station’’ (SIP 

section 52), ‘‘new source’’ (SIP section 

26), ‘‘single source’’ (SIP section 26), 

‘‘standard conditions’’ (SIP section 30), 

and ‘‘uncombined water’’ (SIP section 

26). 

Our proposed action and the 

associated Technical Support Document 

(TSD) contains more information on the 

mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with RULES