43180 Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 139 / Wednesday, July 20, 2011 / Rules and Regulations 

List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52 

Environmental protection, Air 

pollution control, Incorporation by 

reference, Intergovernmental relations, 

Particulate matter. 

Dated: June 28, 2011. 

Susan Hedman, 

Regional Administrator, Region 5. 

40 CFR part 52 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 P—Indiana 

■ 2. Section 52.776 is amended by 

adding paragraph (u), to read as follows: 

§ 52.776 Control strategy: Particulate 

matter. 

* * * * * 

(u) Disapproval. EPA is disapproving 

the portions of Indiana’s Infrastructure 

SIP for the 2006 24-hour PM2.5 NAAQS 

addressing interstate transport, 

specifically with respect to section 

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

Subpart KK—Ohio 

■ 3. Section 52.1880 is amended by 

adding paragraph (l), to read as follows: 

§ 52.1880 Control strategy: Particulate 

matter. 

* * * * * 

(l) Disapproval. EPA is disapproving 

the portions of Ohio’s Infrastructure SIP 

for the 2006 24-hour PM2.5 NAAQS 

addressing interstate transport, 

specifically with respect to section 

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

[FR Doc. 2011–17739 Filed 7–19–11; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 6560–50–P 

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION 

AGENCY 

40 CFR Part 52 

[EPA–HQ–OAR–2011–0338; FRL–9435–7] 

Finding of Failure To Submit Section 

110 State Implementation Plans for 

Interstate Transport for the 2006 

National Ambient Air Quality 

Standards for Fine Particulate Matter 

AGENCY: Environmental Protection 

Agency (EPA). 

ACTION: Final rule. 

SUMMARY: In this action, EPA is finding 

that Tennessee has failed to submit a 

State Implementation Plan (SIP) to 

satisfy the requirements of the Clean Air 

Act (CAA) with respect to the 2006 24- 

hour National Ambient Air Quality 

Standards (NAAQS) for fine particulate 

matter (24-hour PM2.5). Although 

Tennessee has submitted a SIP to 

address the requirements, the state 

subsequently withdrew that portion of 

its SIP submittal because it relied on the 

Clean Air Interstate Rule to address 

transport. This finding creates a 2-year 

deadline for the promulgation of a 

Federal Implementation Plan (FIP) by 

EPA. In a separate action, commonly 

referred to as the Transport Rule, EPA 

is finalizing a FIP for Tennessee to 

address these requirements. 

DATES: The effective date of this rule is 

August 19, 2011. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

General questions concerning this final 

rule should be addressed to Edgar 

Mercado, Office of Atmospheric 

Programs, Clean Air Markets Division, 

2400 Pennsylvania Avenue, Mail Code 

6204J, Washington, DC 20460; 

telephone (202) 343–9440; e-mail 

address: mercado.edgar@epa.gov. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: For 

questions related to Tennessee, please 

contact Richard A. Schutt, Chief, 

Regulatory Development Section, EPA 

Region IV, Sam Nun Atlanta Federal 

Center, 61 Forsyth Street, SW., 12th 

Floor, Atlanta, GA 30303. 

Table of Contents 

I. Background 

II. This Action 

III. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews 

A. Notice and Comment Under the 

Administrative Procedures Act (APA) 

B. Executive Order 12866: Regulatory 

Planning and Review 

C. Paperwork Reduction Act 

D. Regulatory Flexibility Act 

E. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act 

F. Executive Order 13132 (Federalism) 

G. Executive Order 13175 

H. Executive Order 13045: Protection of 

Children From Environmental Health 

Risks and Safety Risks 

I. Executive Order 13211: Actions 

Concerning Regulations That 

Significantly Affect Energy Supply, 

Distribution, or Use 

J. National Technology Transfer and 

Advancement Act 

K. Executive Order 12898: Federal Actions 

To Address Environmental Justice in 

Minority Populations and Low-Income 

Populations 

L. Congressional Review Act 

M. Judicial Review 

I. Background 

On October 17, 2006, EPA published 

a final rule revising the 24-hour 

standard for fine particulate matter 

(PM2.5) from 65 micrograms per cubic 

meter (μg/m3) to 35μg/m3. Section 

110(a)(1) of the CAA requires states to 

submit revised SIPs that provide for the 

implementation, maintenance, and 

enforcement of a new or revised 

standard within 3 years after 

promulgation of such standard, or 

within such shorter period as EPA may 

prescribe. Section 110(a)(2)(D)(i) 

contains four elements that revised SIPs 

must address. This findings notice 

addresses the first two elements which 

require each state to submit SIPs which 

contain adequate provisions to prohibit 

air pollution within the state that (1) 

contributes significantly to another 

state’s nonattainment of the NAAQS; or 

(2) interferes with another state’s 

maintenance of the NAAQS. Section 

110(a)(1) imposes the obligation upon 

states to make a SIP submission for a 

new or revised NAAQS, but the 

contents of that submission may vary 

depending upon the facts and 

circumstances. In particular, the data 

and analytical tools available at the time 

the state develops and submits the SIP 

for a new or revised NAAQS necessarily 

affects the content of the submission. 

States were required to have 

submitted complete SIPs that addressed 

the section 110(a)(2)(D)(i)(I) requirement 

related to interstate transport for the 

2006 24-hour PM2.5 NAAQS by 

September 21, 2009. On June 9, 2010, in 

a separate final rulemaking (75 FR 

32763), EPA found that 29 states and 

territories had not made a SIP submittal 

that addressed this requirement. 

Although Tennessee has submitted a 

SIP intended to address the Section 

110(a)(2)(D)(i) requirements, the state 

subsequently withdrew the Section 

110(a)(2)(D)(i) of its infrastructure SIP 

with respect to the 2006 24-hour PM2.5

NAAQS on December 2, 2010, because 

it relied on the Clean Air Interstate Rule. 

Although deficient to address the 

transport of pollution as highlighted in 

recent EPA air quality modeling to 

support the final Transport Rule, EPA 

acknowledges the State’s efforts in 

making this SIP submittal. In response 

to Tennessee’s withdrawal of the 

110(a)(2)(D)(i)(I) portions of its SIP 

because it relied on the Clean Air 

Interstate Rule, EPA is making a finding 

that Tennessee has failed to submit the 

required infrastructure SIP elements 

with respect to nonattainment or 

interference with maintenance of the 

2006 24-hour PM2.5 NAAQS. In 

accordance with Section 110(c)(1), this 

finding creates a 2-year deadline for the 

promulgation of a Federal 

Implementation Plan (FIP) by EPA 

unless, prior to promulgation of a FIP, 

the state makes a submission to meet 

and EPA approves such submission as 

meeting the attainment and 


jlentini on DSK4TPTVN1PROD with RULES
Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 139 / Wednesday, July 20, 2011 / Rules and Regulations 43181 

maintenance requirements of section 

110(a)(2)(D)(i)(I) for the 2006 24-hour 

PM2.5 NAAQS. The State’s SIP submittal 

to address other portions of Section 

110(a)(2)(D)(i) will be addressed in a 

separate rulemaking. 

This action does not result in 

sanctions pursuant to CAA section 179 

because this finding of failure to submit 

does not pertain to a part D plan for 

nonattainment areas, or to a SIP Call 

pursuant to section 110(k)(5). 

II. This Action 

By this action, EPA is making the 

finding that Tennessee has failed to 

submit a SIP that addresses the 

requirements of section 110(a)(2)(D)(i)(I) 

of the CAA for the revised 2006 24-hour 

PM2.5 NAAQS. This finding creates a 2- 

year deadline for the promulgation of a 

FIP by EPA for Tennessee unless the 

State submits a SIP to satisfy these 

section 110(a)(2)(D)(i)(I) requirements, 

and EPA approves such submission 

prior to promulgation of a FIP. 

III. Statutory and Executive Order 

Reviews 

A. Notice and Comment Under the 

Administrative Procedures Act (APA) 

This is a final EPA action, which is 

subject to notice-and-comment 

requirements of the Administrative 

Procedures Act (APA), 5 U.S.C. 553(b). 

However, EPA invokes, consistent with 

past practice (for example, 61 FR 

36294), the good cause exception 

pursuant to APA, 5 U.S.C. 553(b)(3)(B). 

Notice and comment are unnecessary 

because no significant EPA judgment is 

involved in making a finding of failure 

to submit SIPs or elements of SIPs 

required by the CAA, where states have 

made no submissions to meet the 

requirement by the statutory deadline. 

B. Executive Order 12866: Regulatory 

Planning and Review 

This action is not a ‘‘significant 

regulatory action’’ under the terms of 

Executive Order (EO) 12866 (58 FR 

51735, October 4, 1993) and is therefore 

not subject to review by the Office of 

Management and Budget under the EO. 

C. Paperwork Reduction Act 

This action does not impose an 

information collection burden under the 

provisions of the Paperwork Reduction 

Act, 44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq. Burden is 

defined at 5 CFR 1320.3(b). This action 

relates to the requirement in the CAA 

for states to submit SIPs under section 

110(a)(1) that implements the CAA 

requirements for the revised 24-hour 

PM2.5 NAAQS. Section 110(a)(1) of the 

CAA requires that states submit SIPs 

that implement, maintain, and enforce a 

new or revised NAAQS which satisfies 

the requirements of section 110(a)(2) 

within 3 years of promulgation of such 

standard, or shorter period as EPA may 

provide. The present final action does 

not establish any new information 

collection requirement apart from that 

required by law. 

D. Regulatory Flexibility Act 

The Regulatory Flexibility Act (RFA) 

generally requires an agency to prepare 

a regulatory flexibility analysis of any 

rule subject to notice and comment 

rulemaking requirements under the 

APA or any other statute unless the EPA 

certifies that the rule will not have a 

significant economic impact on a 

substantial number of small entities. 

Small entities include small businesses, 

small organizations, and small 

governmental jurisdictions. 

For the purpose of assessing the 

impacts of this final action on small 

entities, small entity is defined as: (1) A 

small business that is a small industry 

entity as defined in the U.S. Small 

Business Administration (SBA) size 

standards. (See 13 CFR, part 121); (2) a 

small governmental jurisdiction that is a 

government of a city, county, town, 

school district or special district with a 

population of less than 50,000; and (3) 

a small organization that is any not-for 

profit enterprise which independently 

owned and operated is not dominate in 

its field. 

Courts have interpreted the RFA to 

require a regulatory flexibility analysis 

only when small entities will be subject 

to the requirements of the rule. See, 

Michigan v. EPA, 213 F.3d 663, 668–69 

(DC Cir., 2000), cert. den., 532 U.S. 903 

(2001). This rule would not establish 

requirements applicable to small 

entities. Instead, it would require states 

to develop, adopt, and submit SIPs to 

meet the requirements of section 

110(a)(2)(D)(i), and would leave to the 

states the task of determining how to 

meet those requirements, including 

which entities to regulate. Moreover, 

because affected states would have 

discretion to choose the sources to 

regulate and how much emissions 

reductions each selected source would 

have to achieve, EPA could not predict 

the effect of the rule on small entities. 

After considering the economic impacts 

of this final rule on small entities, I 

certify that this action will not have a 

significant economic impact on a 

substantial number of small entities. In 

addition, although the action is subject 

to the Administrative Procedures Act, 

the Agency has invoked the ‘‘good 

cause’’ exemption under 5 U.S.C. 

553(b); therefore, it is not subject to the 

notice and comment requirement. 

E. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act 

This action contains no federal 

mandates under the provisions of Title 

II of the Unfunded Mandates Reform 

Act of 1995 (UMRA), 2 U.S.C. 1531– 

1538 for state, local, or tribal 

governments or the private sector. The 

action implements mandate(s) 

specifically and explicitly set forth by 

the Congress in CAA section 

110(a)(2)(D)(i)(I) without the exercise of 

any policy discretion by EPA. 

This action does not create any 

additional requirements beyond those of 

the 2006 24-hour PM2.5 NAAQS (71 FR 

61144, October 17, 2006). Therefore, no 

UMRA analysis is needed. This rule 

responds to the requirement in the CAA 

for states to submit SIPs to satisfy the 

requirements of section 110(a)(2) of the 

CAA for the 2006 24-hour PM2.5

NAAQS. Section 110(a)(1) of the CAA 

requires that states submit SIPs that 

implement, maintain, and enforce a new 

or revised NAAQS within 3 years of 

promulgation of such standard, or 

shorter period as EPA may provide. This 

action does not impose any 

requirements beyond those specified in 

the Act. 

Therefore, this action is not subject to 

the requirements of sections 202 or 205 

of the UMRA. This action is also not 

subject to the requirements of section 

203 of UMRA because it contains no 

regulatory requirements that might 

significantly or uniquely affect small 

governments. 

F. Executive Order 13132: Federalism 

This action does not have federalism 

implications. It 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 EO 

13132. The CAA establishes the scheme 

whereby states take the lead in 

developing plans to meet the NAAQS. 

This action will not modify the 

relationship of the states and EPA for 

purposes of developing programs to 

implement the NAAQS. Thus, Executive 

Order 13132 does not apply to this 

action. 

G. Executive Order 13175: Consultation 

and Coordination With Indian Tribal 

Governments 

This action does not have tribal 

implications, as specified in Executive 

Order 13175 (65 FR 67249, November 9, 

2000). This action responds to the 

requirement in the CAA for states to 

submit SIPs to satisfy the requirements 

of section 110(a)(2) of the CAA for the 


jlentini on DSK4TPTVN1PROD with RULES
43182 Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 139 / Wednesday, July 20, 2011 / Rules and Regulations 

2006 24-hour PM2.5 NAAQS. Section 

110(a)(1) of the CAA requires that states 

submit SIPs that implement, maintain, 

and enforce a new or revised NAAQS 

which satisfies the requirements of 

section 110(a)(2) within 3 years of 

promulgation of such standard, or 

shorter period as EPA may provide. The 

CAA provides for states and tribes to 

develop plans to regulate emissions of 

air pollutants within their jurisdictions. 

The regulations clarify the statutory 

obligations of states and tribes that 

develop plans to implement this rule. 

The Tribal Authority Rule (TAR) gives 

tribes the opportunity to develop and 

implement CAA programs, but it leaves 

to the discretion of the tribe whether to 

develop these programs and which 

programs, or appropriate elements of a 

program, the tribe will adopt. 

This action does not have tribal 

implications as defined by Executive 

Order 13175. It does not have a 

substantial direct effect on one or more 

Indian tribes, because no tribe has 

implemented an air quality management 

program related to the 2006 24-hour 

PM2.5 NAAQS at this time. Furthermore, 

this action does not affect the 

relationship or distribution of power 

and responsibilities between the federal 

government and Indian tribes. The CAA 

and the TAR establish the relationship 

of the federal government and Tribes in 

developing plans to attain the NAAQS, 

and this action does nothing to modify 

that relationship. Because this action 

does not have tribal implications, 

Executive Order 13175 does not apply. 

H. Executive Order 13045: Protection of 

Children From Environmental Health 

Risks and Safety Risks 

This action is not subject to EO 13045 

(62 FR 19885, April 23, 1997) because 

it is not economically significant as 

defined in EO 12866, and because the 

Agency does not believe the 

environmental health or safety risks 

addressed by this action present a 

disproportionate risk to children. 

Nonetheless, we have evaluated the 

environmental health or safety effects of 

the 2006 24-hour PM2.5 NAAQS on 

children. The results of this risk 

assessment are contained in the final 

rule for 24-hour PM2.5 NAAQS (71 FR 

61144, October 17, 2006). 

I. Executive Order 13211: Actions 

Concerning Regulations That 

Significantly Affect Energy Supply, 

Distribution, or Use 

This action is not subject to Executive 

Order 13211 (66 FR 28355 (May 22, 

2001)), because it is not a significant 

regulatory action under Executive Order 

12866. 

J. National Technology Transfer and 

Advancement Act 

Section 12(d) of the National 

Technology Transfer and Advancement 

Act of 1995 (‘‘NTTAA’’), Public Law 

104–113, 12(d) (15 U.S.C. 272 note) 

directs EPA to use voluntary consensus 

standards in its regulatory activities 

unless to do so would be inconsistent 

with applicable law or otherwise 

impractical. Voluntary consensus 

standards are technical standards (e.g., 

materials specifications, test methods, 

sampling procedures, and business 

practices) that are developed or adopted 

by voluntary consensus standards 

bodies. NTTAA directs EPA to provide 

Congress, through OMB, explanations 

when the Agency decides not to use 

available and applicable voluntary 

consensus standards. 

This action does not involve technical 

standards. Therefore, EPA did not 

consider the use of any voluntary 

consensus standards. 

K. Executive Order 12898: Federal 

Actions To Address Environmental 

Justice in Minority Populations and 

Low-Income Populations 

Executive Order (EO) 12898 (59 FR 

7629 (Feb. 16, 1994)) establishes federal 

executive policy on environmental 

justice. Its main provision directs 

federal agencies, to the greatest extent 

practicable and permitted by law, to 

make environmental justice part of their 

mission by identifying and addressing, 

as appropriate, disproportionately high 

and adverse human health or 

environmental effects of their programs, 

policies, and activities on minority 

populations and low-income 

populations in the United States. 

EPA lacks the discretionary authority 

to address environmental justice in this 

final action. This action responds to the 

requirement in the CAA for states to 

submit SIPs to satisfy the requirements 

of section 110(a)(2)(D)(i)(I) of the CAA 

for the 2006 24-hour PM2.5 NAAQS. 

Section 110(a)(1) of the CAA requires 

that states submit SIPs that implement, 

maintain, and enforce a new or revised 

NAAQS which satisfies the 

requirements of section 110(a)(2) within 

3 years of promulgation of such 

standard, or shorter period as EPA may 

provide. EPA is merely determining 

whether Tennessee has complied with 

this statutory requirement. 

L. Congressional Review Act 

The Congressional Review Act (CRA), 

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. Section 808 allows 

the issuing agency to make a rule 

effective sooner than otherwise 

provided by the CRA if the agency 

makes a good cause finding that notice 

and public procedure is impracticable, 

unnecessary or contrary to the public 

interest. This determination must be 

supported by a brief statement. 5 U.S.C. 

808(2). As stated previously, EPA has 

made such a good cause finding, 

including the reasons therefore, and 

established an effective date of August 

19, 2011. 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 action 

in the Federal Register. This action is 

not a ‘‘major rule’’ as defined by 5 

U.S.C. 808(2). 

M. Judicial Review 

Section 307(b)(1) of the CAA indicates 

which Federal Courts of Appeal have 

venue for petitions of review of final 

actions by EPA. This section provides, 

in part, that petitions for review must be 

filed in the Court of Appeals for the 

District of Columbia Circuit: (i) When 

the EPA action consists of ’’nationally 

applicable regulations promulgated, or 

final actions taken, by the 

Administrator,’’ or (ii) when such action 

is 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 Administrator is determining that 

this action making a finding of failure to 

submit SIPs related to the section 

110(a)(2)(D)(i)(I) requirements for the 

2006 24-hour PM2.5 NAAQS is of 

nationwide scope and effect for the 

purposes of section 307(b)(1). This is 

particularly appropriate because in the 

report on the 1977 Amendments that 

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

Congress noted that the Administrator’s 

determination that an action is of 

‘‘nationwide scope or effect’’ would be 

appropriate for any action that has 

‘‘scope or effect beyond a single judicial 

circuit.’’ H.R. Rep. No. 95–294 at 323, 

324, reprinted in 1977 U.S.C.C.A.N. 

1402–03. Here, the scope and effect of 

this rulemaking extends to numerous 

judicial circuits since the finding of 

failure to submit a SIP applies to a 

rulemaking of national scope and effect. 

In these circumstances, section 307(b)(1) 


jlentini on DSK4TPTVN1PROD with RULES
Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 139 / Wednesday, July 20, 2011 / Rules and Regulations 43183 

and its legislative history call for the 

Administrator to find the rule to be of 

‘‘nationwide scope or effect’’ and for 

venue to be in the District of Columbia 

Circuit. 

Thus, any petitions for review of this 

action related to a finding of failure to 

submit SIPs related to the requirements 

of section 110(a)(2)(D)(i)(I) of the CAA 

must be filed in the Court of Appeals for 

the District of Columbia Circuit within 

60 days from the date final action is 

published in the Federal Register. 

List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52 

Environmental protection, 

Administrative practice and procedure, 

Air pollution control, Incorporation by 

reference, Intergovernmental relations, 

Reporting and recordkeeping 

requirements. 

Dated: July 1, 2011. 

Gina McCarthy, 

Assistant Administrator, Office of Air and 

Radiation. 

[FR Doc. 2011–17738 Filed 7–19–11; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 6560–50–P 

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION 

AGENCY 

40 CFR Part 52 

[EPA–R09–OAR–2011–0460; FRL–9438–6] 

Revisions to the California State 

Implementation Plan, Sacramento 

Metropolitan Air Quality Management 

District 

AGENCY: Environmental Protection 

Agency (EPA). 

ACTION: Final rule. 

SUMMARY: EPA is finalizing both an 

approval and a limited approval and 

limited disapproval of permitting rules 

submitted for the Sacramento 

Metropolitan Air Quality Management 

District (SMAQMD or District) portion 

of the California State Implementation 

Plan (SIP). These revisions were 

proposed in the Federal Register on 

May 19, 2011 and concern New Source 

Review (NSR) and Prevention of 

Significant Deterioration (PSD) permit 

programs for new and modified major 

stationary sources of air pollution. We 

are approving local rules that regulate 

these emission sources under the Clean 

Air Act as amended in 1990 (CAA). 

DATES: Effective Date: This rule is 

effective on August 19, 2011. 

ADDRESSES: EPA has established docket 

number EPA–R09–OAR–2011–0460 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. While all 

documents 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 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: 

Laura Yannayon, EPA Region IX, (415) 

972–3534, yannayon.laura@epa.gov. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

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 May 19, 2011 (76 FR 28942), EPA 

proposed to approve the following rule 

that was submitted for incorporation 

into the California SIP. 

Local agency Rule No. Rule title Amended Submitted 

SMAQMD .......... 203 Prevention of Significant Deterioration ......................................................... 1/27/11 1/28/11 

We proposed to approve this rule 

because we determined that it complied 

with the applicable CAA requirements. 

Our proposed rule and related 

Technical Support Document (TSD) 

contain more information on the basis 

for this rulemaking and on our 

evaluation of the submittal. 

On May 19, 2011 (76 FR 28942), EPA 

also proposed a limited approval and 

limited disapproval of the following 

rule that was submitted for 

incorporation into the California SIP. 

Local agency Rule No. Rule title Amended Submitted 

SMAQMD .......... 214 Federal New Source Review ....................................................................... 10/28/10 12/07/10 

We proposed a limited approval 

because we determined that this rule 

improves the SIP and is largely 

consistent with the applicable CAA 

requirements. We simultaneously 

proposed a limited disapproval because 

some rule provisions do not satisfy the 

requirements of section 110 and part D 

of the CAA. 

Specifically: 

• The rule is missing definitions for 

the terms ‘‘begin actual construction,’’ 

‘‘federally enforceable’’ and ‘‘necessary 

preconstruction approvals or permits.’’ 

• The rule is missing adequate public 

notice requirements for minor sources. 

• The rule is missing provisions 

meeting the requirements of 40 CFR 

51.165(a)(5)(ii) and 40 CFR 51.307(b)(2). 

• The rule contains a cross reference 

to Rule 207—Title V—Federal Operating 

Permit Program, which is not SIP 

approved. 

Our proposed rule and related TSD 

contain more information on the basis 

for this rulemaking and on our 

evaluation of the submittal. 

II. Public Comments and EPA 

Responses 

EPA’s proposed action provided a 30- 

day public comment period. During this 

period, we received no comments. 

III. EPA Action 

No comments were submitted that 

change our assessment that the 

submitted SMAQMD Rule 203 complies 

with the applicable CAA requirements. 

Therefore, under CAA section 110(k)(3) 

and for the reasons set forth in our May 

19, 2011 proposed rule, we are 

finalizing a full approval of Rule 203. 


jlentini on DSK4TPTVN1PROD with RULES