32398 Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 106 / Friday, June 1, 2012 / Rules and Regulations 

Administrative Procedure Act 

This document affirms as final, 

without change, the interim final rule 

that is already in effect. In accordance 

with 5 U.S.C. 553(d)(3), the Secretary of 

Veterans Affairs has concluded that 

there is good cause to publish this rule 

with an immediate effective date. 

Unfunded Mandates 

The Unfunded Mandates Reform Act 

of 1995 requires, at 2 U.S.C. 1532, that 

agencies prepare an assessment of 

anticipated costs and benefits before 

issuing any rule that may result in an 

expenditure by State, local, and tribal 

governments, in the aggregate, or by the 

private sector of $100 million or more 

(adjusted annually for inflation) in any 

given year. This final rule will have no 

such effect on State, local, or tribal 

governments or on the private sector. 

Paperwork Reduction Act 

This final rule contains no provisions 

constituting a collection of information 

under the Paperwork Reduction Act (44 

U.S.C. 3501–3521). 

Executive Orders 12866 and 13563 

Executive Orders 12866 and 13563 

direct agencies to assess the costs and 

benefits of available regulatory 

alternatives and, when regulation is 

necessary, to select regulatory 

approaches that maximize net benefits 

(including potential economic, 

environmental, public health and safety 

effects, and other advantages; 

distributive impacts; and equity). 

Executive Order 13563 (Improving 

Regulation and Regulatory Review) 

emphasizes the importance of 

quantifying both costs and benefits, 

reducing costs, harmonizing rules, and 

promoting flexibility. Executive Order 

12866 (Regulatory Planning and 

Review) defines a ‘‘significant 

regulatory action’’ requiring review by 

the Office of Management and Budget 

(OMB) as ‘‘any regulatory action that is 

likely to result in a rule that may: (1) 

Have an annual effect on the economy 

of $100 million or more or adversely 

affect in a material way the economy, a 

sector of the economy, productivity, 

competition, jobs, the environment, 

public health or safety, or State, local, 

or tribal governments or communities; 

(2) Create a serious inconsistency or 

otherwise interfere with an action taken 

or planned by another agency; (3) 

Materially alter the budgetary impact of 

entitlements, grants, user fees, or loan 

programs or the rights and obligations of 

recipients thereof; or (4) Raise novel 

legal or policy issues arising out of legal 

mandates, the President’s priorities, or 

the principles set forth in this Executive 

Order.’’ 

VA has examined the economic, 

interagency, budgetary, legal, and policy 

implications of this regulatory action 

and has determined that it is not a 

significant regulatory action under 

Executive Order 12866. 

Regulatory Flexibility Act 

The Secretary of Veterans Affairs 

hereby certifies that this final rule will 

not have a significant economic impact 

on a substantial number of small entities 

as they are defined in the Regulatory 

Flexibility Act, 5 U.S.C. 601 et seq. This 

final rule will directly affect only 

individuals and will not directly affect 

small entities. Therefore, pursuant to 5 

U.S.C. 605(b), this rule is exempt from 

the initial and final regulatory flexibility 

analysis requirements of sections 603 

and 604. 

Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance 

Number and Title: 

The Catalog of Federal Domestic 

Assistance Program number and title for 

this regulation is 64.103, Life Insurance 

for Veterans. 

Signing Authority 

The Secretary of Veterans Affairs, or 

designee, approved this document and 

authorized the undersigned to sign and 

submit the document to the Office of the 

Federal Register for publication 

electronically as an official document of 

the Department of Veterans Affairs. John 

R. Gingrich, Chief of Staff, Department 

of Veterans Affairs, approved this 

document on May 24, 2012, for 

publication. 

List of Subjects in 38 CFR Part 9 

Life insurance, Military personnel, 

Veterans. 

Dated: May 29, 2012. 

Robert C. McFetridge, 

Director of Regulation Policy and 

Management, Office of the General Counsel, 

Department of Veterans Affairs. 

Accordingly, the interim final rule 

amending 38 CFR part 9, which was 

published at 76 FR 75458 on December 

2, 2011, is adopted as a final rule 

without change. 

[FR Doc. 2012–13298 Filed 5–31–12; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 8230–01–P 

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION 

AGENCY 

40 CFR Part 52 

[EPA–R09–OAR–2012–0236; FRL–9670–8] 

Revisions to the California State 

Implementation Plan, South Coast Air 

Quality Management District 

AGENCY: Environmental Protection 

Agency (EPA). 

ACTION: Direct final rule. 

SUMMARY: EPA is taking direct final 

action to approve a revision to the South 

Coast Air Quality Management District 

(SCAQMD) portion of the California 

State Implementation Plan (SIP). This 

revision concerns particulate matter 

(PM) emissions from cement 

manufacturing facilities. We are 

approving a local rule that regulates this 

emission source under the Clean Air Act 

as amended in 1990 (CAA or the Act). 

DATES: This rule is effective on July 31, 

2012 without further notice, unless EPA 

receives adverse comments by July 2, 

2012. 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–2012–0236, 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 


srobinson on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with RULES
Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 106 / Friday, June 1, 2012 / Rules and Regulations 32399 

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. 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: 

Christine Vineyard, EPA Region IX, 

(415) 947–4125, 

vineyard.christine@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. EPA Recommendations To Further 

Improve the Rule 

D. 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 dates that it was adopted by the 

local air agency and submitted by the 

California. 

TABLE 1—SUBMITTED RULE

Local agency Rule No. Rule title Adopted Submitted 

SCAQMD .................... 1156 Further Reductions of Particulate Emissions from Cement Manufacturing Facilities.03/06/09 04/29/09 

On July 20, 2009, EPA determined 

that the submittal for SCAQMD Rule 

1156 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? 

EPA approved an earlier version of 

Rule 1156 into the SIP on March 10, 

2008 (72 FR 12639). SCAQMD adopted 

a revision to the SIP-approved version 

on March 6, 2009 and CARB submitted 

it to us on April 29, 2009. 

C. What is the purpose of the submitted 

rule revision? 

PM contributes to effects that are 

harmful to human health and the 

environment, including premature 

mortality, aggravation of respiratory and 

cardiovascular disease, decreased lung 

function, visibility impairment, and 

damage to vegetation and ecosystems. 

Section 110(a) of the CAA requires 

States to submit regulations that control 

PM emissions. Revised Rule 1156 would 

require total enclosure of clinker storage 

and handling conducted within 1000 

feet from, and inside, a facility’s 

property line. Rule 1156 would allow 

the use of alternatives, such as a threesided barrier covered with a roof and 

wind fence for active barn-type storage, 

tarp and barrier/wind fence for other 

active piles, and tarp for inactive piles. 

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? 

Generally, SIP rules must be 

enforceable (see section 110(a) of the 

Act) and must not relax existing 

requirements (see sections 110(l) and 

193). In addition, SIP rules must 

implement Reasonably Available 

Control Measures (RACM), including 

Reasonably Available Control 

Technology (RACT), in moderate PM 

nonattainment areas, and Best Available 

Control Measures (BACM), including 

Best Available Control Technology 

(BACT), in serious PM nonattainment 

areas (see CAA sections 189(a)(1) and 

189(b)(1)). The SCAQMD regulates a PM 

nonattainment area classified as serious 

(see 40 CFR part 81), so Rule 1156 must 

implement BACM/BACT. 

Guidance and policy documents that 

we use to evaluate enforceability and 

BACM/BACT requirements consistently 

include the following: 

1. ‘‘Issues Relating to VOC Regulation 

Cutpoints, Deficiencies, and Deviations; 

Clarification to Appendix D of 

November 24, 1987 Federal Register 

Notice,’’ (Blue Book), notice of 

availability published in the May 25, 

1988 Federal Register. 

2. ‘‘Guidance Document for Correcting 

Common VOC & Other Rule 

Deficiencies,’’ EPA Region 9, August 21, 

2001 (the Little Bluebook). 

3. ‘‘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). 

4. ‘‘State Implementation Plans for 

Serious PM–10 Nonattainment Areas, 

and Attainment Date Waivers for PM–10 

Nonattainment Areas Generally; 

Addendum to the General Preamble for 

the Implementation of Title I of the 

Clean Air Act Amendments of 1990,’’ 59 

FR 41998 (August 16, 1994). 

5. ‘‘PM–10 Guideline Document,’’ 

EPA 452/R–93–008, April 1993. 

6. ‘‘Fugitive Dust Background 

Document and Technical Information 

Document for Best Available Control 

Measures,’’ EPA 450/2–92–004, 

September 1992. 

7. Standards of Performance for 

Portland Cement Plants (40 CRF Ch.1 

(7–1–09 Edition), Subpart F § 60.60). 

B. Does the rule meet the evaluation 

criteria? 

We believe this rule is consistent with 

the relevant policy and guidance 

regarding enforceability, BACM, and SIP 

relaxations. The TSD has more 

information on our evaluation. 

C. EPA Recommendations To Further 

Improve the Rule 

The TSD describes additional rule 

revisions that we recommend for the 

next time the local agency modifies the 

rule. 

D. 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 


srobinson on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with RULES
32400 Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 106 / Friday, June 1, 2012 / Rules and Regulations 

Federal Register, we are simultaneously 

proposing approval of the same 

submitted rule. If we receive adverse 

comments by July 2, 2012, 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 July 31, 2012. 

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 July 31, 2012. 

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, 

Particulate matter, Reporting and 

recordkeeping requirement. 

Dated: April 24, 2012. 

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)(362)(i)(B)(2) to 

read as follows: 

§ 52.220 Identification of plan. 

* * * * * 

(c) * * * 

(362) * * * 

(i) * * * 

(B) * * * 

(2) Rule 1156, ‘‘Further Reductions of 

Particulate Emissions from Cement 

Manufacturing Facilities,’’ amended on 

March 6, 2009. 

* * * * * 

[FR Doc. 2012–13301 Filed 5–31–12; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 6560–50–P 

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION 

AGENCY 

40 CFR Part 180 

[EPA–HQ–OPP–2006–0848; FRL–9351–5] 

Fenamidone; Pesticide Tolerance; 

Technical Amendment 

AGENCY: Environmental Protection 

Agency (EPA). 

ACTION: Final rule; technical 

amendment. 

SUMMARY: EPA issued a final rule in the 

Federal Register of October 24, 2007, 

establishing tolerances for residues of 

fenamidone in or on various 

commodities. This document is being 

issued to correct a typographical error. 

DATES: This final rule is effective June 

1, 2012. 

ADDRESSES: The docket for this action, 

identified by docket identification (ID) 


srobinson on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with RULES