37130 Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 119 / Thursday, June 20, 2013 / Rules and Regulations 

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION 

AGENCY 

40 CFR Part 52 

[EPA–R09–OAR–2013–0362; FRL–9815–5] 

Revisions to the California State 

Implementation Plan, San Diego Air 

Pollution Control District 

AGENCY: Environmental Protection 

Agency (EPA). 

ACTION: Direct final rule. 

SUMMARY: EPA is taking direct final 

action to approve a revision to the San 

Diego Air Pollution Control District 

(SDAPCD) portion of the California 

State Implementation Plan (SIP). This 

revision concerns volatile organic 

compound (VOC) emissions from 

architectural coatings. We are approving 

a local rule that regulates this emission 

source under the Clean Air Act (CAA or 

the Act). 

DATES: This rule is effective on August 

19, 2013 without further notice, unless 

EPA receives adverse comments by July 

22, 2013. 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–2013–0362, by one of the 

following methods: 

1. Federal eRulemaking Portal: 

www.regulations.gov. Follow the online 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: 

Nicole Law, EPA Region IX, (415) 947– 

4126, law.nicole@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? 

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 Air Resources Board (CARB). 

TABLE 1—SUBMITTED RULES

Local agency Rule No. Rule title Adopted Submitted 

SDAPCD .......................................... 67.0 Architectural Coatings ................................................... 12/12/01 03/07/08 

On April 17, 2008, EPA determined 

that the submittal for SDAPCD Rule 67.0 

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? 

We approved an earlier version of 

Rule 67.0 into the SIP on March 27, 

1997 (62 FR 14639). The SDAPCD 

adopted revisions to the SIP-approved 

version on December 12, 2001 and 

CARB submitted them to us on March 

7, 2008. While we can act on only the 

most recently submitted version, we 

have reviewed materials provided with 

previous submittals. 

C. What is the purpose of the submitted 

rule? 

VOCs help produce ground-level 

ozone and smog, which harm human 

health and the environment. Section 

110(a) of the CAA requires States to 

submit regulations that control VOC 

emissions. SDAPCD Rule 67.0 adds 

several new coating categories and 

lowers existing VOC limits. 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), must require Reasonably Available 

Control Technology (RACT) for each 

category of sources covered by a Control 

Techniques Guidelines (CTG) document 

as well as each VOC major stationary 

source in ozone nonattainment areas 

classified as moderate or above (see 

sections 182(b)(2)), and must not relax 

existing requirements (see sections 

110(l) and 193). Because SDAPCD Rule 

67.0 covers an area source and not a 

stationary source and does not have a 

CTG, it does not need to require RACT 

controls. 

Guidance and policy documents that 

we use to evaluate enforceability and 

stringency requirements consistently 

include the following: 

1. ‘‘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). 

mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with RULES

Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 119 / Thursday, June 20, 2013 / Rules and Regulations 37131 

2. ‘‘Issues Relating to VOC Regulation 

Cutpoints, Deficiencies, and 

Deviations,’’ EPA, May 25, 1988 (the 

Bluebook). 

3. ‘‘Guidance Document for Correcting 

Common VOC & Other Rule 

Deficiencies,’’ EPA Region 9, August 21, 

2001 (the Little Bluebook). 

4. ‘‘Suggested Control Measure for 

Architectural Coatings,’’ CARB, October 

2007. 

B. Does the rule meet the evaluation 

criteria? 

We believe this rule is consistent with 

the relevant policy and guidance 

regarding enforceability, stringency, 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 

Federal Register, we are simultaneously 

proposing approval of the same 

submitted rule. If we receive adverse 

comments by July 22, 2013, 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 August 19, 

2013. This will incorporate the rule into 

the federally enforceable SIP. 

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 August 19, 2013. 

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, 

Ozone, Reporting and recordkeeping 

requirements, Volatile organic 

compounds. 

Dated: May 6, 2013. 

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)(354)(i)(F)(3) to 

read as follows: 

§ 52.220 Identification of plan. 

* * * * * 

(c) * * * 

(354) * * * 

(i) * * * 

(F) * * * 

mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with RULES

37132 Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 119 / Thursday, June 20, 2013 / Rules and Regulations 

(3) Rule 67.0, ‘‘Architectural 

Coatings,’’ adopted on December 12, 

2001. 

* * * * * 

[FR Doc. 2013–14511 Filed 6–19–13; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 6560–50–P 

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION 

AGENCY 

40 CFR Part 52 

[EPA–R04–OAR–2012–0385; FRL–9824–2] 

Approval and Promulgation of 

Implementation Plans; Revised Format 

for Materials Being Incorporated by 

Reference for Florida; Approval of 

Recodification of the Florida 

Administrative Code; Correcting 

Amendments 

AGENCY: Environmental Protection 

Agency (EPA). 

ACTION: Correcting amendments. 

SUMMARY: On June 16, 1999, EPA 

published a final rule in the Federal 

Register approving a Florida State 

Implementation Plan (SIP) revision, 

submitted through the Florida 

Department of Environmental Protection 

(FDEP) on April 15, 1996. The 

submission related to miscellaneous 

changes and the recodification of the 

Florida Administrative Code (F.A.C.). In 

addition, the submittal also contained 

several regulations that were supposed 

to be removed from the SIP. EPA’s June 

16, 1999, action approved the 

miscellaneous rule revisions, repeals 

and corrections; however, it failed to 

ensure the regulatory text reflected all of 

the repeals. This correcting amendment 

corrects and clarifies errors in the 

regulatory language in paragraph (c) of 

EPA’s June 16, 1999, final rule. 

DATES: Effective on June 20, 2013. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Kelly Sheckler, Air Quality Modeling 

and Transportation Section, Air 

Planning Branch, Air, Pesticides and 

Toxics Management Division, U.S. 

Environmental Protection Agency, 

Region 4, 61 Forsyth Street SW., 

Atlanta, Georgia 30303–8960. The 

telephone number is (404) 562–9222. 

Ms. Sheckler can be reached via 

electronic mail at 

sheckler.kelly@epa.gov. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Today’s 

action corrects inadvertent errors in 

EPA’s June 16, 1999, final rulemaking. 

Specifically, this correcting amendment 

clarifies that EPA’s June 16, 1999, action 

approved the State’s implementation 

plan revision that repealed F.A.C. rules 

62–297.411 (DEP Method 1), 62–297.412 

(DEP Method 2), 62–297.413 (DEP 

Method 3), 62–297.415 (DEP Method 5), 

62–297.416 (DEP Method 5A), 62– 

297.417 (DEP Method 6) and, 62– 

297.423 (EPA Method 12-Determination 

of Inorganic Lead Emissions from 

Stationary Emission Units). The June 16, 

1999, final rule approved the removal of 

the test method rules from the SIP. 

These rules were repealed because they 

were obsolete. Another rule change 

provided for the incorporation of the 

federally approved American Society for 

Testing and Materials (ASTM) methods. 

However, EPA’s regulatory text did not 

properly indicate that the rules were 

repealed. This action corrects these 

inadvertent errors. 

EPA has determined that today’s 

actions fall under the ‘‘good cause’’ 

exemption in section 553(b)(3)(B) of the 

Administrative Procedure Act (APA) 

which, upon finding ‘‘good cause,’’ 

authorizes agencies to dispense with 

public participation where public notice 

and comment procedures are 

impracticable, unnecessary, or contrary 

to the public interest. Public notice and 

comment for this action is unnecessary 

because today’s action to correct 

inadvertent regulatory text errors 

included with EPA’s June 16, 1999, final 

rule are consistent with the substantive 

revisions to the Florida SIP described in 

the direct final rule addressing the 

miscellaneous revisions and the 

recodification of F.A.C. to make the SIP 

less complex and correct typographical 

errors. In addition, EPA can identify no 

particular reason why the public would 

be interested in being notified of the 

correction, or in having the opportunity 

to comment on the correction prior to 

this action being finalized, since this 

correction action does not change the 

meaning of EPA’s analysis or action 

addressing the recodification and 

miscellaneous revisions to the Florida 

SIP. EPA also finds that there is good 

cause under APA section 553(d)(3) for 

this correction to become effective on 

the date of publication of this action. 

Section 553(d)(3) of the APA allows an 

effective date less than 30 days after 

publication ‘‘as otherwise provided by 

the agency for good cause found and 

published with the rule.’’ 5 U.S.C. 

553(d)(3). The purpose of the 30-day 

waiting period prescribed in APA 

section 553(d)(3) is to give affected 

parties a reasonable time to adjust their 

behavior and prepare before the final 

rule takes effect. Today’s rule, however, 

does not create any new regulatory 

requirements such that affected parties 

would need time to prepare before the 

rule takes effect. Rather, today’s action 

merely corrects inadvertent errors in the 

regulatory text of EPA’s prior 

rulemaking for the Florida SIP. For 

these reasons, EPA finds good cause 

under APA section 553(d)(3) for this 

correction to become effective on the 

date of publication of this action. 

Statutory and Executive Order Reviews 

Under Executive Order 12866 (58 FR 

51735, October 4, 1993), this action is 

not a ‘‘significant regulatory action’’ and 

therefore is not subject to review by the 

Office of Management and Budget. For 

this reason, this action is also not 

subject to Executive Order 13211, 

‘‘Actions Concerning Regulations That 

Significantly Affect Energy Supply, 

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

22, 2001). This action merely corrects an 

inadvertent omission in the regulatory 

text of EPA’s June 16, 1999, final rule 

addressing the recodification of the 

Florida SIP, and miscellaneous changes 

and imposes no additional requirements 

beyond those already imposed by state 

law. Accordingly, the Administrator 

certifies that this rule will not have a 

significant economic impact on a 

substantial number of small entities 

under the Regulatory Flexibility Act (5 

U.S.C. 601 et seq.). Because this rule 

merely corrects an inadvertent omission 

in the regulatory text of EPA’s June 16, 

1999, final rules addressing 

miscellaneous revisions and the 

recodification of F.A.C. to make the SIP 

less complex and to correct 

typographical errors, and does not 

impose any additional enforceable duty 

beyond that already required by state 

law, it 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). 

This rule also does not have tribal 

implications because it will not have a 

substantial direct effect on one or more 

Indian tribes, 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, 

as specified by Executive Order 13175 

(65 FR 67249, November 9, 2000). This 

rule also does not have Federalism 

implications because it does 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 (64 FR 43255, 

August 10, 1999). This rule merely 

corrects inadvertent errors in the 

regulatory text of EPA’s June 16, 1999, 

final rule by removing certain repealed 

rules from the regulatory text, and does 

mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with RULES