### 72968 Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 236 / Friday, December 7, 2012 / Rules and Regulations

Name of non-regulatory SIP revision Applicable geographic area State submittal date EPA approval date Additional explanation

*******

2002 Base Year Emissions Inventory for the 1997 fine particulate matter (PM 2.5 ) standard. Washington County, Maryland 1997 PM 2.5 nonattainment area. 6/6/08 12/7/12 [ Insert page number where the document begins ]. § 52.1075(m)

■ 3. In § 52.1075, paragraph (m) is added to read as follows:

**§ 52.1075 Base year emissions inventory.**
* * * * *

(m) EPA approves as a revision to the Maryland State Implementation Plan the 2002 base year emissions inventory for the Washington County, Maryland 1997 fine particulate matter (PM 2.5 ) nonattainment area submitted by the Maryland Department of Environment on June 6, 2008. The 2002 base year emissions inventory includes emissions estimates that cover the general source categories of point sources, non-road mobile sources, area sources, on-road mobile sources, and biogenic sources. The pollutants that comprise the inventory are nitrogen oxides (NO X), volatile organic compounds (VOCs), PM 2.5 , coarse particles (PM 10), ammonia (NH 3 ), and sulfur dioxide (SO 2). [FR Doc. 2012–29611 Filed 12–6–12; 8:45 am]

**BILLING CODE 6560–50–P**

**ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY** 

**40 CFR Part 52**

**[EPA–R09–OAR–2012–0120; FRL–9710–3]**

**Revisions to the California State Implementation Plan, for Imperial**  **County, Placer County and Ventura County Air Pollution Control Districts** 

**AGENCY :**  Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

**ACTION :**  Direct final rule.

**SUMMARY :**  EPA is taking direct final action to approve revisions to the Imperial County Air Pollution Control District (ICAPCD), Placer County Air Pollution Control District (PCAPCD) and Ventura County Air Pollution Control District (PCAPCD) portions of the California State Implementation Plan (SIP). Under authority of the Clean Air Act as amended in 1990 (CAA or the Act), we are approving local rules that address emission statements for ICAPCD and PCAPCD and definitions for VCAPCD.

**DATES :**  This rule is effective on February 5, 2013 without further notice, unless EPA receives adverse comments by January 7, 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–2012–0120, 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.

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. 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 :**  Cynthia 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

rules 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 with the dates that they were adopted by the local air agencies and submitted by the California Air Resources Board (CARB).



### TABLE 

### 1—S UBMITTED 

### R ULES

Local agency Rule No. Rule title Adopted/ amended Submitted

ICAPCD ........... 116 Emissions Statement and Certification .......................................................... 02/23/10 07/20/10


### 72969 Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 236 / Friday, December 7, 2012 / Rules and Regulations

TABLE 

### 1—S UBMITTED 

### R ULES

### —Continued

Local agency Rule No. Rule title Adopted/ amended Submitted

PCAPCD ......... 503 Emission Statement ....................................................................................... 08/ 10/10 12/10/10 VCAPCD ......... 2 Definitions ................................................................................................... .... 04/12/11 09/27/11

On August 25, 2010, EPA determined that the submittal for ICAPCD Rule 116 met the completeness criteria in 40 CFR Part 51 Appendix V, which must be met before formal EPA review. On January 13, 2011, and October 24, 2011, respectively, the submittals of PCAPCD Rule 503 and VCAPCD Rule 2 were determined to meet the completeness criteria. B. Are there other versions of these rules?

There are no previous versions of ICAPCD Rule 116 and PCAPCD Rule 503 in the SIP. We approved an earlier version of VCAPCD Rule 2 into the SIP on March 7, 2011 (76 FR 12280). C. What is the purpose of the submitted rules 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.

ICAPCD Rule 116 will require owners and/or operators of stationary sources emitting VOC or NO X emissions to provide the ICAPCD with an annual statement of actual emissions of these pollutants certified by a responsible official of the company.

PCAPCD Rule 503 details how every stationary source permitted by the District with actual or potential emissions in excess of 10 tons per year or more of NO X or VOC report their actual emissions. The rule describes the District’s current emissions reporting system using the Renewal Information Request.

VCAPCD Rule 2 is being amended by adding new definitions and revisions to existing definitions.

EPA’s technical support documents (TSD) have more information about these rules.

II. EPA’s Evaluation and Action A. How is EPA evaluating the rules?

These rules describe administrative provisions and definitions that support emission controls found in other local agency requirements. In combination with the other requirements, these rules 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 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 rules are consistent with the relevant policy and guidance regarding enforceability and SIP relaxations. The TSDs have 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 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 7, 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 February 5, 2013. 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 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


### 72970 Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 236 / Friday, December 7, 2012 / Rules and Regulations

1 This rulemaking responds to the uncertainty created by the Ninth Circuit’s holding in NEDC that certain channeled discharges of stormwater from logging roads constitute point source discharges, bringing them within the Section 402 NPDES 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 5, 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: July 19, 2012. 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)(381)(i)(A)( 6), (389)(i)(B)( 4 ), and (404)(i)(C) to read as follows:

**§ 52.220 Identification of plan.**
* * * * *

(c) * * * (381) * * * (i) * * * (A) * * * ( 6) Rule 116, ‘‘Emissions Statement and Certification,’’ adopted on February 23, 2010.
* * * * *

(389) * * * (i) * * * (B) * * * ( 4 ) Rule 503, ‘‘Emission Statement,’’ amended on August 12, 2010.

* * * * *

(404) * * * (i) * * * (C) Ventura County Air Pollution Control District.

( 1 ) Rule 2, ‘‘Definitions,’’ adopted on October 22, 1968, as revised through April 12, 2011.

* * * * * [FR Doc. 2012–29117 Filed 12–6–12; 8:45 am]

**BILLING CODE 6560–50–P**

**ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY** 

**40 CFR Part 122**

**[EPA–HQ–OW–2012–0195; FRL–9758–9]**

**RIN 2040–AF42**

**Revisions to Stormwater Regulations To Clarify That an NPDES Permit Is Not**  **Required for Stormwater Discharges From Logging Roads** 

**AGENCY :**  Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

**ACTION :**  Final rule.

**SUMMARY :**  The EPA is revising its Phase I stormwater regulations to clarify that stormwater discharges from logging roads do not constitute stormwater discharges associated with industrial activity and that a National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) permit is not required for these stormwater discharges. **DATES :**  This final rule is effective on January 7, 2013.

**ADDRESSES :**  The record for this rulemaking is available for inspection and copying at the Water Docket, located at the EPA Docket Center (EPA/ DC), EPA West 1301 Constitution Avenue NW., Washington, DC 20004. The record is also available via the EPA Dockets at http://www.regulations.gov under docket number EPA–HQ–OW–
2012–0195.

**FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT :**  For further information on this notice, you may contact Jeremy Bauer, EPA Headquarters, Office of Water, Office of Wastewater Management via email at bauer.jeremy@epa.gov or telephone at
202–564–2775.

**SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION :** 
I. General Information A. Applicability

This action does not impose requirements on any entity. The action clarifies the status of stormwater discharges from logging roads. Those with an interest in such discharges may be interested in this action. If you have questions regarding the applicability of this rule, consult the person listed in the preceding **FOR FURTHER INFORMATION**
**CONTACT** section. B. Copies of This Document and Other Information

This document is available for download at http://www.epa.gov/npdes/ stormwater/forestroads or under docket EPA–HQ–OW–2012–0195. II. Background
A. Purpose

The EPA is promulgating this final rule to address the stormwater discharges identified under Northwest Environmental Defense Center v. Brown, 640 F.3d 1063 (9th Cir. 2011) ( NEDC ). The final rule clarifies that, for the purposes of assessing whether stormwater discharges are ‘‘associated with industrial activity,’’ the only facilities under SIC code 2411 that are ‘‘industrial’’ are: rock crushing, gravel washing, log sorting, and log storage. This clarifies, contrary to the Ninth Circuit’s decision in NEDC, that discharges of stormwater from silviculture facilities other than the four specifically named silviculture facilities identified above do not require an NPDES permit. 1