Federal Register / Vol. 83, No. 134 / Thursday, July 12, 2018 / Rules and Regulations 32211 

• 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. 

B. Submission to Congress and the 

Comptroller General 

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). 

C. Petitions for Judicial Review 

Under section 307(b)(1) of the CAA, 

petitions for judicial review of this 

action must be filed in the United States 

Court of Appeals for the appropriate 

circuit by September 10, 2018. Filing a 

petition for reconsideration by the 

Administrator of this final rule does not 

affect the finality of this action for the 

purposes of judicial review nor does it 

extend the time within which a petition 

for judicial review may be filed, and 

shall not postpone the effectiveness of 

such rule or action. This action, 

addressing Delaware’s interstate 

transport for the 2012 PM2.5 NAAQS, 

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, Particulate matter. 

Dated: June 19, 2018. 

Cosmo Servidio, 

Regional Administrator, Region III. 

40 CFR part 52 is amended as follows: 

PART 52—APPROVAL AND 

PROMULGATION OF 

IMPLEMENTATION PLANS 

■ 1. The authority citation for part 52 

continues to read as follows: 

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

Subpart I—Delaware 

■ 2. In § 52.420, the table in paragraph 

(e) is amended by adding a second entry 

for Section 110(a)(2) Infrastructure 

Requirements for the 2012 PM2.5

NAAQS after the first entry. The revised 

text reads as follows: 

§ 52.470 Identification of plan. 

* * * * * 

(e) * * * 

Name of non-regulatory SIP revision 

Applicable 

geographic 

area 

State 

submittal 

date 

EPA 

approval 

date 

Additional explanation 

*******

Section 110(a)(2) Infrastructure Requirements for the 2012 PM2.5 NAAQS.

Statewide .......... 12/14/2015 7/12/2018, [Insert 

Federal Register 

citation].

Docket 2017–0152. This action addresses the infrastructure element of CAA 

section 110(a)(2)(D)(i)(I). 

* * * * * * * 

[FR Doc. 2018–14838 Filed 7–11–18; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 6560–50–P 

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION 

AGENCY 

40 CFR Part 52 

[EPA–R09–OAR–2018–0104; FRL–9980– 

43—Region 9] 

Approval of California Air Plan 

Revisions, Yolo-Solano Air Quality 

Management District 

AGENCY: Environmental Protection 

Agency (EPA). 

ACTION: Final rule. 

SUMMARY: The Environmental Protection 

Agency (EPA) is taking final action to 

approve a revision to the Yolo-Solano 

Air Quality Management District 

(YSAQMD or ‘‘District’’) portion of the 

California State Implementation Plan 

(SIP). This revision concerns emissions 

of volatile organic compounds (VOCs) 

from architectural coatings. 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 August 

13, 2018. 

ADDRESSES: The EPA has established a 

docket for this action under Docket ID 

No. EPA–R09–OAR–2018–0104. All 

documents in the docket are listed on 

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

Although listed in the index, some 

information is not publicly available, 

e.g., Confidential Business Information 

(CBI) or other information whose 

disclosure 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 through http://

www.regulations.gov, or please contact 

the person identified in the FOR FURTHER

INFORMATION CONTACT section for 

additional availability information. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Arnold Lazarus, EPA Region IX, (415) 

972–3024, Lazarus.Arnold@epa.gov. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

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

and ‘‘our’’ refer to the EPA. 

Table of Contents 

I. Proposed Action 

II. Public Comments and EPA Responses 

III. EPA Action 

IV. Incorporation by Reference 

V. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews 

I. Proposed Action 

On May 3, 2018 (83 FR 19495), the 

EPA proposed to approve the following 

rule into the California SIP. 


amozie on DSK3GDR082PROD with RULES
32212 Federal Register / Vol. 83, No. 134 / Thursday, July 12, 2018 / Rules and Regulations 

Local agency Rule No. Rule title Revised Submitted 

YSAQMD ................................ 2.14 Architectural Coatings ............................................................ 10/12/2016 01/24/2017 

We proposed to approve this rule 

because we determined that it complies 

with the relevant CAA requirements. 

Our proposed action contains more 

information on the rule and our 

evaluation. 

II. Public Comments and EPA 

Responses 

The EPA’s proposed action provided 

a 30-day public comment period. During 

this period, we received one comment 

in support of regulating VOC emissions, 

and another that was not germane to 

this rule. 

III. EPA Action 

No comments were submitted that 

change our assessment of the rule as 

described in our proposed action. 

Therefore, as authorized in section 

110(k)(3) of the Act, the EPA is fully 

approving this rule into the California 

SIP. 

IV. Incorporation by Reference 

In this rule, the EPA is finalizing 

regulatory text that includes 

incorporation by reference. In 

accordance with requirements of 1 CFR 

51.5, the EPA is finalizing the 

incorporation by reference of the 

YSAQMD rule described in the 

amendments to 40 CFR part 52 set forth 

below. The EPA has made, and will 

continue to make, these documents 

available through www.regulations.gov 

and at the EPA Region IX Office (please 

contact the person identified in the FOR

FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section of 

this preamble for more information). 

V. 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, the 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 Orders 12866 (58 FR 51735, 

October 4, 1993) and 13563 (76 FR 3821, 

January 21, 2011); 

• Is not an Executive Order 13771 (82 

FR 9339, February 2, 2017) regulatory 

action because SIP approvals are 

exempted under Executive Order 12866; 

• 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 the 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, the SIP is not approved 

to apply on any Indian reservation land 

or in any other area where the EPA or 

an Indian tribe has demonstrated that a 

tribe has jurisdiction. In those areas of 

Indian country, the rule does not have 

tribal implications and will not impose 

substantial direct costs on tribal 

governments or preempt tribal law as 

specified by Executive Order 13175 (65 

FR 67249, November 9, 2000). 

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. The 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 September 10, 

2018. Filing a petition for 

reconsideration by the Administrator of 

this final rule does not affect the finality 

of this action for the purposes of judicial 

review nor does it extend the time 

within which a petition for judicial 

review may be filed, and shall not 

postpone the effectiveness of such rule 

or action. This action may not be 

challenged later in proceedings to 

enforce its requirements. (See section 

307(b)(2).) 

List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52 

Environmental protection, Air 

pollution control, Incorporation by 

reference, Ozone, Reporting and 

recordkeeping requirements, Volatile 

organic compounds. 

Dated: June 22, 2018. 

Deborah Jordan, 

Acting Regional Administrator, Region IX. 

Part 52, chapter I, title 40 of the Code 

of Federal Regulations is amended as 

follows: 

PART 52—APPROVAL AND 

PROMULGATION OF 

IMPLEMENTATION PLANS 

■ 1. The authority citation for part 52 

continues to read as follows: 

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

Subpart F—California 

■ 2. Section 52.220 is amended by 

adding paragraphs (c)(293)(i)(B)(2) and 

(c)(497)(i)(D)(2) to read as follows: 

§ 52.220 Identification of plan-in part. 

* * * * * 

(c) * * * 

(293) * * * 


amozie on DSK3GDR082PROD with RULES
Federal Register / Vol. 83, No. 134 / Thursday, July 12, 2018 / Rules and Regulations 32213 

(i) * * * 

(B) * * * 

(2) Previously approved on January 2, 

2004 in paragraph (c)(293)(i)(B)(1) of 

this section and now deleted with 

replacement in (c)(497)(i)(D)(2), Rule 

2.14, adopted on November 14, 2001. 

* * * * * 

(497) * * * 

(i) * * * 

(D) * * * 

(2) Rule 2.14, ‘‘Architectural 

Coatings,’’ revised on October 12, 2016. 

* * * * * 

[FR Doc. 2018–14946 Filed 7–11–18; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 6560–50–P 

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION 

AGENCY 

40 CFR Part 63 

[EPA–HQ–OAR–2014–0741; FRL–9980–84– 

OAR] 

National Emission Standards for 

Hazardous Air Pollutants for Chemical 

Recovery Combustion Sources at 

Kraft, Soda, Sulfite, and Stand-Alone 

Semichemical Pulp Mills 

AGENCY: Environmental Protection 

Agency (EPA). 

ACTION: Notification of final action 

denying petition for reconsideration. 

SUMMARY: The U.S. Environmental 

Protection Agency (EPA) is providing 

notice that it has responded to a petition 

for reconsideration of the final National 

Emission Standards for Hazardous Air 

Pollutants (NESHAP) for Chemical 

Recovery Combustion Sources at Kraft, 

Soda, Sulfite, and Stand-Alone 

Semichemical Pulp Mills published in 

the Federal Register on October 11, 

2017. The Acting Administrator denied 

the petition in a separate letter to the 

petitioners. The letter, which provides a 

full explanation of the agency’s 

rationale for the denial, is in the 

rulemaking docket. 

DATES: July 12, 2018. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Dr. 

Kelley Spence, Sector Policies and 

Programs Division (E143–03), Office of 

Air Quality Planning and Standards, 

Environmental Protection Agency, 

Research Triangle Park, North Carolina 

27711; telephone number: (919) 541– 

3158; fax number: (919) 541–0516; 

email address: spence.kelley@epa.gov. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

I. How can I get copies of this document 

and other related information? 

This Federal Register document, the 

petition for reconsideration, and the 

letter denying the petition for 

reconsideration are available in the 

docket the EPA established under 

Docket ID No. EPA–HQ–OAR–2014– 

0741. All documents in the docket are 

listed on the www.regulations.gov 

website. Although listed, some 

information is not publicly available, 

e.g., confidential business information 

or other information whose disclosure 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 through 

www.regulations.gov or in hard copy at 

the EPA Docket Center (EPA/DC), Room 

3334, EPA WJC West Building, 1301 

Constitution Ave. NW, Washington, DC. 

The Public Reading Room is open from 

8:30 a.m. to 4:30 p.m., Monday through 

Friday, excluding legal holidays. The 

telephone number for the Public 

Reading Room is (202) 566–1744 and 

the telephone number for the Air Docket 

is (202) 566–1742. 

II. Judicial Review 

Section 307(b)(1) of the Clean Air Act 

(CAA) indicates which Federal Courts of 

Appeals have venue for petitions for 

review of final EPA actions. This section 

provides, in part, that the petitions for 

review must be filed in the United 

States Court of Appeals for the District 

of Columbia Circuit if: (1) The agency 

action consists of ‘‘nationally applicable 

regulations promulgated, or final action 

taken, by the Administrator,’’ or (2) such 

actions are locally or regionally 

applicable, if ‘‘such action is based on 

a determination of nationwide scope or 

effect and if in taking such action the 

Administrator finds and publishes that 

such action is based on such a 

determination.’’ 

The EPA has determined that its 

action denying the petition for 

reconsideration is nationally applicable 

for purposes of CAA section 307(b)(1) 

because the action directly affects the 

NESHAP for Chemical Recovery 

Combustion Sources at Kraft, Soda, 

Sulfite, and Stand-Alone Semichemical 

Pulp Mills, which are nationally 

applicable CAA section 112 standards. 

Any petitions for review of the letter 

denying the petition for reconsideration 

must be filed in the United States Court 

of Appeals for the District of Columbia 

Circuit by September 10, 2018. 

III. Description of Action 

On October 11, 2017, pursuant to 

sections 112(d)(6) and (f)(2) of the CAA, 

the EPA published the final residual 

risk and technology review (RTR) of the 

‘‘National Emission Standards for 

Hazardous Air Pollutants for Chemical 

Recovery Combustion Sources at Kraft, 

Soda, Sulfite, and Stand-Alone 

Semichemical Pulp Mills.’’ 82 FR 

47328. Following publication of the 

final RTR amendments, the 

Administrator received a petition for 

reconsideration of two aspects of the 

final RTR pursuant to CAA section 

307(d)(7)(B). The petitioners, 

Earthjustice on behalf of Crossett 

Concerned Citizens for Environmental 

Justice, Louisiana Environmental Action 

Network, PT AirWatchers, and Sierra 

Club, claimed: (1) It was impracticable 

to object to the EPA’s rationale for not 

setting additional standards for 

uncontrolled emissions when the EPA 

was conducting the review required by 

CAA section 112(d)(6), and their 

objections on this issue are of central 

relevance to the outcome of the rule; 

and (2) it was impracticable to object 

during the comment period to the EPA’s 

use of census block centroids to account 

for the residual risk to the most exposed 

individual, and their objections on this 

issue are of central relevance to the 

outcome of the rule. 

CAA section 307(d)(7)(B) requires the 

EPA to convene a proceeding for 

reconsideration of a rule if a party 

raising an objection to the rule ‘‘can 

demonstrate to the Administrator that it 

was impracticable to raise such 

objection within [the public comment 

period] or if the grounds for such 

objection arose after the period for 

public comment (but within the time 

specified for judicial review) and if such 

objection is of central relevance to the 

outcome of the rule.’’ The requirement 

to convene a proceeding to reconsider a 

rule is, thus, based on the petitioner 

demonstrating to the EPA both: (1) That 

it was impracticable to raise the 

objection during the comment period, or 

that the grounds for such objection arose 

after the comment period, but within 

the time specified for judicial review 

(i.e., within 60 days after publication of 

the final rulemaking in the Federal 

Register, see CAA section 307(b)(1)); 

and (2) that the objection is of central 

relevance to the outcome of the rule. 

The EPA carefully reviewed the 

petition for reconsideration and 

evaluated the issues raised to determine 

if they meet the CAA section 

307(d)(7)(B) criteria for reconsideration. 

In a separate letter to the petitioners, the 

EPA Acting Administrator, Andrew R. 

Wheeler, denied the petition for 

reconsideration. The letter is available 

in the docket for this action. 


amozie on DSK3GDR082PROD with RULES