Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 237 / Wednesday, December 10, 2014 / Rules and Regulations 73203 

ACTION: Withdrawal of direct final rule. 

SUMMARY: Due to the receipt of an 

adverse comment, the Environmental 

Protection Agency (EPA) is withdrawing 

the October 17, 2014, direct final rule 

approving a revision to the Illinois State 

Implementation Plan (SIP) to phase out 

the requirements of the Stage II Vapor 

Recovery program. 

DATES: The direct final rule published at 

79 FR 62352 on October 17, 2014, is 

withdrawn effective December 10, 2014. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Francisco J. Acevedo, Mobile Source 

Program Manager, Control Strategies 

Section, Air Programs Branch (AR–18J), 

Environmental Protection Agency, 

Region 5, 77 West Jackson Boulevard, 

Chicago, Illinois 60604, (312) 886–6061, 

acevedo.francisco@epa.gov. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The 

Illinois Environmental Protection 

Agency submitted this revision as a 

modification to the SIP for gasoline 

vapor recovery requirements. In the 

direct final rule, EPA stated that if 

adverse comments were submitted by 

November 17, 2014, the rule would be 

withdrawn and not take effect. On 

October 20, 2014, EPA received an 

adverse comment and, therefore, is 

withdrawing the direct final rule. EPA 

will address the comment in a 

subsequent final action based upon the 

proposed action also published on 

October 17, 2014. EPA will not institute 

a second comment period on this action. 

List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52 

Environmental protection, Air 

pollution control, Incorporation by 

reference, Oxides of nitrogen, Ozone, 

Volatile organic compounds. 

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

Dated: November 24, 2014. 

Susan Hedman, 

Regional Administrator, Region 5. 

PART 52—APPROVAL AND 

PROMULGATION OF 

IMPLEMENTATION PLANS 

Accordingly, the amendment to 40 

CFR 52.720 published in the Federal 

Register on October 17, 2014 (79 FR 

62352) on page 62356 is withdrawn 

effective December 10, 2014. 

[FR Doc. 2014–28803 Filed 12–9–14; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 6560–50–P 

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION 

AGENCY 

40 CFR Part 52 

[EPA–R09–OAR–2014–0480; FRL–9919–76– 

Region 9] 

Revisions to the California State 

Implementation Plan, Antelope Valley 

Air Quality Management District and 

South Coast Air Quality Management 

District 

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 

Antelope Valley Air Quality 

Management District (AVAQMD) and 

South Coast Air Quality Management 

District (SCAQMD) portions of the 

California State Implementation Plan 

(SIP). These revisions concern 

particulate matter (PM) emissions from 

fugitive dust and abrasive blasting. We 

are approving local rules that regulate 

these emission sources under the Clean 

Air Act (CAA or the Act). 

DATES: This rule is effective on February 

9, 2015 without further notice, unless 

EPA receives adverse comments by 

January 9, 2015. 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–2014–0480, 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: 

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 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. EPA Recommendations to Further 

Improve the Rules 

D. 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 with the dates that they were 

adopted by the local air agencies and 

submitted by the California Air 

Resource Board. 


rmajette on DSK2VPTVN1PROD with RULES
73204 Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 237 / Wednesday, December 10, 2014 / Rules and Regulations 

1EPA generally takes action on a RACM 

demonstration as part of our action on the State’s 

attainment demonstration for the relevant NAAQS, 

based on an evaluation of the control measures 

submitted as a whole and their overall potential to 

advance the applicable attainment date in the area. 

TABLE 1—SUBMITTED RULES

Local agency Rule No. Rule title Amended Submitted 

AVAQMD .......................................................... 403 Fugitive Dust .................................................... 04/20/10 07/20/10 

SCAQMD .......................................................... 1140 Abrasive Blasting .............................................. 08/02/85 11/12/85 

On May 12, 1986 and August 25, 

2010, EPA determined that the 

submittal for SCAQMD Rule 1140 and 

AVAQMD Rule 403, respectively, met 

the completeness criteria in 40 CFR part 

51 Appendix V, which must be met 

before formal EPA review. We recognize 

that we are acting on Rule 1140 many 

years after California’s submittal of the 

rule to EPA. SCAQMD, CARB and EPA 

staff uncovered the outstanding 

submittal as part of a broader review of 

California submittals in general. Despite 

the age of this submittal, SCAQMD, 

CARB and EPA staff preliminarily 

determined that it is still a legitimate 

submittal and, as discussed below, 

appropriate to incorporate into the SIP. 

B. Are there other versions of these 

rules? 

We approved an earlier version of 

Rules 403 and 1140 into the SIP on June 

14, 1978 and September 28, 1981, 

respectively. The AVAQMD adopted 

revisions to the SIP-approved version of 

Rule 403 on November 8, 1992, July 9, 

1993 and February 14, 1997, but they 

were not submitted to us. 

C. What is the purpose of the submitted 

rule revisions? 

PM, including particulate matter of 

ten microns or less (PM10) and 

particulate matter of 2.5 microns or less 

(PM2.5), 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. AVAQMD Rule 403 is 

revised to establish a general 20 percent 

opacity limit and requirements during 

high wind conditions, as well as to 

conform the rule to AVAQMD’s 

attainment status and to clarify rule 

requirements. SCAQMD Rule 1140 

limits particulate discharge, including 

PM10 and PM2.5, into the atmosphere 

from abrasive blasting activities and sets 

standards for the abrasives that may be 

used in different blasting operations. 

II. EPA’s Evaluation and Action 

A. How is EPA evaluating the rules? 

Generally, SIP rules must be 

enforceable (see CAA section 110(a)(2)), 

must not interfere with applicable 

requirements concerning attainment and 

reasonable further progress or other 

CAA requirements (see CAA section 

110(l)), and must not modify certain SIP 

control requirements in nonattainment 

areas without ensuring equivalent or 

greater emissions reductions (see CAA 

section 193). In addition, SIP rules must 

implement Reasonably Available 

Control Measures (RACM), including 

Reasonably Available Control 

Technology (RACT), in moderate PM10

nonattainment areas, and Best Available 

Control Measures (BACM), including 

Best Available Control Technology 

(BACT), in serious PM10 nonattainment 

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

189(b)(1)). The AVAQMD does not 

regulate any PM2.5 or PM10

nonattainment areas, so AVAQMD Rule 

403 is not subject to RACM 

requirements at this time. The SCAQMD 

regulates a PM2.5 nonattainment area 

classified as moderate (see 40 CFR 

81.305), so the RACM requirement 

applies to this area.1

Guidance and policy documents that 

we use to evaluate enforceability and 

RACM/RACT or BACM/BACT 

requirements consistently include the 

following: 

1. ‘‘Issues Relating to VOC Regulation 

Cutpoints, Deficiencies, and Deviations,’’ 

EPA, May 25, (revised January 11, 1990) (the 

Bluebook). 

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. 

B. Do the rules meet the evaluation 

criteria? 

We believe these rules are consistent 

with the relevant policy and guidance 

regarding enforceability, RACM, and SIP 

relaxations. The TSDs have more 

information on our evaluation. 

C. EPA Recommendations to Further 

Improve the Rules 

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 rules 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 rules. If we receive adverse 

comments by January 9, 2015, 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 February 9, 

2015. This will incorporate these rules 

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 


rmajette on DSK2VPTVN1PROD with RULES
Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 237 / Wednesday, December 10, 2014 / Rules and Regulations 73205 

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 (Public Law 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 February 9, 2015. 

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 this 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, Carbon monoxide, 

Incorporation by reference, 

Intergovernmental relations, Particulate 

matter, Reporting and recordkeeping 

requirements. 

Dated: November 3, 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—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)(165)(i)(B)(2) and 

(c)(381)(i)(G)(3) to read as follows: 

§ 52.220 Identification of plan. 

* * * * * 

(c) * * * 

(165) * * * 

(i) * * * 

(B) * * * 

(2) Rule 1140, ‘‘Abrasive Blasting,’’ 

amended on August 2, 1985. 

* * * * * 

(381) * * * 

(i) * * * 

(G) * * * 

(3) Rule 403, ‘‘Fugitive Dust,’’ 

amended on April 20, 2010. 

* * * * * 

[FR Doc. 2014–28802 Filed 12–9–14; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 6560–50–P 

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION 

AGENCY 

40 CFR Parts 52 

[EPA–R05–OAR–2012–0989; FRL 9920–14- 

Region 5] 

Approval and Promulgation of 

Implementation Plans and Designation 

of Areas for Air Quality Planning 

Purposes; Indiana; Redesignation of 

Lake and Porter Counties to 

Attainment of the 2008 Eight-Hour 

Ozone Standard 

AGENCY: Environmental Protection 

Agency. 

ACTION: Final rule. 

SUMMARY: The Environmental Protection 

Agency (EPA) is disapproving a 

December 5, 2012, request from the state 

of Indiana to redesignate Lake and 

Porter Counties to attainment of the 

2008 ozone National Ambient Air 

Quality Standard (NAAQS or standard) 

because Indiana has not demonstrated 

that the Chicago-Naperville, IllinoisIndiana-Wisconsin (IL-IN-WI) ozone 

nonattainment area (Chicago 

nonattainment area), which includes 

Lake and Porter Counties, has attained 

this NAAQS. EPA is also disapproving 

Indiana’s ozone maintenance plan and 

Motor Vehicle Emission Budgets 

(MVEBs) for Volatile Organic 

Compounds (VOC) and Nitrogen Oxides 

(NOX), submitted with Indiana’s ozone 

redesignation request. 

DATES: This final rule is effective 

January 9, 2015. 

ADDRESSES: EPA has established a 

docket for this action: Docket ID No. 

EPA EPA–R05–OAR–2012–0989. All 


rmajette on DSK2VPTVN1PROD with RULES