656 Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 4 / Monday, January 8, 2007 / Rules and Regulations 

Reporting and recordkeeping 

requirements. 

Dated: December 22, 2006. 

Donald S. Welsh, 

Regional Administrator, Region III. 

■ 40 CFR part 52 is amended as follows: 

PART 52—[AMENDED] 

■ 1. The authority citation for 40 CFR 

part 52 continues to read as follows: 

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

Subpart VV—Virginia 

■ 2. In § 52.2420, the table in paragraph 

(c) is amended by revising the entry for 

Chapter 20, Part II, Section 5–20–204 to 

read as follows: 

§ 52.2420 Identification of plan. 

* * * * * 

(c) * * * 

EPA-APPROVED VIRGINIA REGULATIONS AND STATUTES

State 

citation 

(9 VAC 5) 

Title/subject 

State 

effective 

date 

EPA approval date Explanation 

[former SIP citation] 

* * * * * * * 

Chapter 20 General Provisions 

* * * * * * * 

Part II Air Quality Programs 

* * * * * * * 

5–20–204 Nonattainment Areas 5/4/05 1/8/07 [Insert page number where the 

document begins] 

Paragraph 5–20–204A.3 is added. 

* * * * * * * 

* * * * * 

[FR Doc. E6–22552 Filed 1–5–07; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 6560–50–P 

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION 

AGENCY 

40 CFR Part 52 

[EPA–R09–OAR–2006–0843; FRL–8261–3] 

Revisions to the California State 

Implementation Plan, South Coast Air 

Quality Management District and 

Ventura County Air Pollution Control 

District 

AGENCY: Environmental Protection 

Agency (EPA). 

ACTION: Direct final rule. 

SUMMARY: EPA is taking direct final 

action to approve revisions to the South 

Coast Air Quality Management District 

(SCAQMD) and the Ventura County Air 

Pollution Control District (VCAPCD) 

portions of the California State 

Implementation Plan (SIP). This action 

revises various definitions of terms used 

by the SCAQMD and rescinds 

duplicative requirements for landfills 

from the VCAPCD. We are approving 

and rescinding these local rules under 

the Clean Air Act as amended in 1990 

(CAA or the Act). 

DATES: This rule is effective on March 9, 

2007 without further notice, unless EPA 

receives adverse comments by February 

7, 2007. 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–2006–0843, by one of the 

following methods: 

1. Federal eRulemaking Portal: 

http://www.regulations.gov. Follow the 

on-line instructions. 

2. E-mail: 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 http://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 e-mail. 

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 e-mail 

directly to EPA, your e-mail 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. 

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 

all documents in the docket are listed in 

the index, some information may be 

publicly available only at the hard copy 

location (e.g., copyrighted material), 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: 

Cynthia G. Allen, EPA Region IX, (415) 

947–4120, allen.cynthia@epa.gov. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

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

and ‘‘our’’ refer to EPA. 

Table of Contents 

I. The State’s Submittal 

A. What rules did the State submit? 

B. Are there other versions of these rules? 

C. What is the purpose of the submitted 

rule revisions? 

II. EPA’s Evaluation and Action. 

A. How is EPA evaluating the rules? 

B. Do the rules meet the evaluation 

criteria? 

C. Public Comment and Final Action 

III. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews 

I. The State’s Submittal 

A. What rules did the State submit? 

Table 1 lists the rules we are 

approving and rescinding with the date 

that they were adopted by the local air 


sroberts on PROD1PC70 with RULES
Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 4 / Monday, January 8, 2007 / Rules and Regulations 657 

agency and submitted by the California 

Air Resources Board (CARB). 

Local agency Rule # Rule title Adopted Submitted 

SCAQMD .................................... 102 Definition of Terms .......................................................................... 12/03/04 06/16/06 

VCAPCD .................................... 74.17 Solid Waste Disposal Sites (Rule Rescission) ............................... 03/10/98 07/15/05 

On July 21, 2006 (SCAQMD) and 

August 18, 2005 (VCAPCD), these rule 

submittals were found to meet the 

completeness criteria in 40 CFR Part 51 

Appendix V, which must be met before 

formal EPA review. 

B. Are there other versions of these 

rules? 

We approved versions of these rules 

into the SIP on the dates listed: 

SCAQMD Rule 102 on February 3, 2000 

and VCAPCD Rule 74.17 on October 4, 

1994. SCAQMD adopted a revision to 

the SIP approved version of Rule 102 on 

October 19, 2001 which was not 

submitted to us by CARB. 

C. What is the purpose of the submitted 

rule revisions? 

Section 110(a) of the CAA requires 

states to submit regulations that control 

volatile organic compounds, oxides of 

nitrogen, particulate matter, and other 

air pollutants which harm human health 

and the environment. These rules were 

developed as part of the local agency’s 

program to control these pollutants. 

South Coast Rule 102 has been 

revised to add the following definitions: 

Agricultural Permit Unit, Agricultural 

Source, Clean Air Solvent Certificate, 

Confined Animal Facility (CAF), 

Hazardous Air Pollutant, Orchard 

Heater, and Orchard Wind Machine. 

Ventura Rule 74.17 is being rescinded 

in its entirety because sources 

previously subject to this rule are now 

subject to Rule 74.17.1, which has been 

approved as part of the California State 

Plan for landfills and is federally 

enforceable. 

EPA’s technical support documents 

(TSD) have more information about 

these rules. 

II. EPA’s Evaluation and Action 

A. How is EPA evaluating the rule? 

SCAQMD Rule 102 provides 

definitions that support emission 

controls found in other local agency 

requirements. VCAPCD Rule 74.17 is 

being rescinded because the 

requirements for controlling VOC 

emissions from landfills are federally 

enforceable through another 

mechanism. In combination with the 

other requirements, rule revisions must 

be enforceable (see section 110(a) of the 

Act) and must not relax existing 

requirements (see sections 110(l) and 

193). EPA policy that we used to help 

evaluate enforceability requirements 

consistently includes the Bluebook 

(‘‘Issues Relating to VOC Regulation 

Cutpoints, Deficiencies, and 

Deviations,’’ EPA, May 25, 1988) and 

the Little Bluebook (‘‘Guidance 

Document for Correcting Common VOC 

& Other Rule Deficiencies,’’ EPA Region 

9, August 21, 2001). 

B. Do the rules meet the evaluation 

criteria? 

We believe these revisions are 

consistent with the relevant policy and 

guidance regarding enforceability and 

SIP relaxations. The TSD has more 

information on our evaluation. 

C. Public Comment and Final Action 

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

the Act, EPA is fully approving the 

submitted rule revisions because we 

believe they fulfill 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 

revisions. If we receive adverse 

comments by February 7, 2007, 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 March 9, 

2007. This will incorporate this rule 

into the federally enforceable SIP. 

III. Statutory and Executive Order 

Reviews 

A. Executive Order 12866, Regulatory 

Planning and Review 

The Office of Management and Budget 

(OMB) has exempted this regulatory 

action from Executive Order 12866, 

entitled ‘‘Regulatory Planning and 

Review.’’

B. Paperwork Reduction Act 

These rules do not impose an 

information collection burden under the 

provisions of the Paperwork Reduction 

Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.) 

C. Regulatory Flexibility Act 

The Regulatory Flexibility Act (RFA) 

generally requires an agency to conduct 

a regulatory flexibility analysis of any 

rule subject to notice and comment 

rulemaking requirements unless the 

agency certifies that the rule will not 

have a significant economic impact on 

a substantial number of small entities. 

Small entities include small businesses, 

small not-for-profit enterprises, and 

small governmental jurisdictions. 

These rules will not have a significant 

impact on a substantial number of small 

entities because SIP approvals under 

section 110 and subchapter I, part D of 

the Clean Air Act do not create any new 

requirements but simply approve 

requirements that the State is already 

imposing. Therefore, because the 

Federal SIP approval does not create 

any new requirements, I certify that this 

action will not have a significant 

economic impact on a substantial 

number of small entities. 

Moreover, due to the nature of the 

Federal-State relationship under the 

Clean Air Act, preparation of flexibility 

analysis would constitute Federal 

inquiry into the economic 

reasonableness of state action. The 

Clean Air Act forbids EPA to base its 

actions concerning SIPs on such 

grounds. Union Electric Co., v. U.S. 

EPA, 427 U.S. 246, 255–66 (1976); 42 

U.S.C. 7410(a)(2). 

D. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act 

Under sections 202 of the Unfunded 

Mandates Reform Act of 1995 

(‘‘Unfunded Mandates Act’’), signed 

into law on March 22, 1995, EPA must 

prepare a budgetary impact statement to 

accompany any proposed or final rule 

that includes a Federal mandate that 

may result in estimated costs to State, 

local, or tribal governments in the 

aggregate; or to the private sector, of 

$100 million or more. Under section 

205, EPA must select the most costeffective and least burdensome 

alternative that achieves the objectives 

of the rule and is consistent with 

statutory requirements. Section 203 

requires EPA to establish a plan for 

informing and advising any small 


sroberts on PROD1PC70 with RULES
658 Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 4 / Monday, January 8, 2007 / Rules and Regulations 

governments that may be significantly 

or uniquely impacted by the rule. 

EPA has determined that the approval 

action promulgated does not include a 

Federal mandate that may result in 

estimated costs of $100 million or more 

to either State, local, or tribal 

governments in the aggregate, or to the 

private sector. This Federal action 

approves pre-existing requirements 

under State or local law, and imposes 

no new requirements. Accordingly, no 

additional costs to State, local, or tribal 

governments, or to the private sector, 

result from this action. 

E. Executive Order 13132, Federalism 

Federalism (64 FR 43255, August 10, 

1999) revokes and replaces Executive 

Orders 12612 (Federalism) and 12875 

(Enhancing the Intergovernmental 

Partnership). Executive Order 13132 

requires EPA to develop an accountable 

process to ensure ‘‘meaningful and 

timely input by State and local officials 

in the development of regulatory 

policies that have federalism 

implications.’’ ‘‘Policies that have 

federalism implications’’ is defined in 

the Executive Order to include 

regulations that have ‘‘substantial direct 

effects on the States, on the relationship 

between the national government and 

the States, or on the distribution of 

power and responsibilities among the 

various levels of government.’’ Under 

Executive Order 13132, EPA may not 

issue a regulation that has federalism 

implications, that imposes substantial 

direct compliance costs, and that is not 

required by statute, unless the Federal 

government provides the funds 

necessary to pay the direct compliance 

costs incurred by State and local 

governments, or EPA consults with 

State and local officials early in the 

process of developing the proposed 

regulation. EPA also may not issue a 

regulation that has federalism 

implications and that preempts State 

law unless the Agency consults with 

State and local officials early in the 

process of developing the proposed 

regulation. 

These rules will not have substantial 

direct effects on the States, on the 

relationship between the national 

government and the States, or on the 

distribution of power and 

responsibilities among the various 

levels of government, as specified in 

Executive Order 13132, because it 

merely approves a state rule 

implementing a federal standard, and 

does not alter the relationship or the 

distribution of power and 

responsibilities established in the Clean 

Air Act. Thus, the requirements of 

section 6 of the Executive Order do not 

apply to this rule. 

F. Executive Order 13175, Coordination 

with Indian Tribal Governments 

Executive Order 13175, entitled 

‘‘Consultation and Coordination with 

Indian Tribal Governments’’ (65 FR 

67249, November 9, 2000), requires EPA 

to develop an accountable process to 

ensure ‘‘meaningful and timely input by 

tribal officials in the development of 

regulatory policies that have tribal 

implications.’’ This final rule does not 

have tribal implications, as specified in 

Executive Order 13175. It will not have 

substantial direct effects on tribal 

governments, 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. 

Thus, Executive Order 13175 does not 

apply to this rule. 

G. Executive Order 13045, Protection of 

Children From Environmental Health 

Risks and Safety Risks 

Protection of Children from 

Environmental Health Risks and Safety 

Risks (62 FR 19885, April 23, 1997), 

applies to any rule that: (1) Is 

determined to be ‘‘economically 

significant’’ as defined under Executive 

Order 12866, and (2) concerns an 

environmental health or safety risk that 

EPA has reason to believe may have a 

disproportionate effect on children. If 

the regulatory action meets both criteria, 

the Agency must evaluate the 

environmental health or safety effects of 

the planned rule on children, and 

explain why the planned regulation is 

preferable to other potentially effective 

and reasonably feasible alternatives 

considered by the Agency. 

These rules are not subject to 

Executive Order 13045 because they do 

not involve decisions intended to 

mitigate environmental health or safety 

risks. 

H. Executive Order 13211, Actions that 

Significantly Affect Energy Supply, 

Distribution, or Use 

These rules are not subject to 

Executive Order 13211, ‘‘Actions 

Concerning Regulations That 

Significantly Affect Energy Supply, 

Distribution, or Use’’ (66 FR 28355, May 

22, 2001) because it is not a significant 

regulatory action under Executive Order 

12866. 

I. National Technology Transfer and 

Advancement Act 

Section 12 of the National Technology 

Transfer and Advancement Act 

(NTTAA) of 1995 requires Federal 

agencies to evaluate existing technical 

standards when developing a new 

regulation. To comply with NTTAA, 

EPA must consider and use ‘‘voluntary 

consensus standards’’ (VCS) if available 

and applicable when developing 

programs and policies unless doing so 

would be inconsistent with applicable 

law or otherwise impractical. 

The EPA believes that VCS are 

inapplicable to this action. Today’s 

action does not require the public to 

perform activities conducive to the use 

of VCS. 

J. Congressional Review Act 

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 rule 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). This rule 

will be effective February 7, 2007. 

K. Petitions for Judicial Review 

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 March 9, 2007. 

Filing a petition for reconsideration by 

the Administrator of this final rule does 

not affect the finality of this rule 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, Incorporation by 

reference, Intergovernmental relations, 

Ozone, Reporting and recordkeeping 

requirements, Volatile organic 

compounds. 


sroberts on PROD1PC70 with RULES
Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 4 / Monday, January 8, 2007 / Rules and Regulations 659 

Dated: December 11, 2006. 

Laura Yoshii, 

Acting 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 paragraphs (c)(187)(i)(B)(5) and 

(c)(345) to read as follows: 

§ 52.220 Identification of plan. 

* * * * * 

(c) * * * 

(187) * * * 

(i) * * * 

(B) * * * 

(5) Previously approved on October 4, 

1994 in paragraph (c)(187)(i)(B)(1) of 

this section and now deleted without 

replacement, Rule 74.17. 

* * * * * 

(345) New and amended regulations 

for the following APCDs were submitted 

on June 16, 2006, by the Governor’s 

designee. 

(i) Incorporation by reference. 

(A) South Coast Air Quality 

Management District. 

(1) Rule 102, adopted on December 3, 

2004. 

* * * * * 

[FR Doc. E7–22 Filed 1–5–07; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 6560–50–P 


sroberts on PROD1PC70 with RULES