39208 Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 116 / Thursday, June 16, 2016 / Rules and Regulations 

Rule title State effective 

date Final rule citation, date Comments 

X. Vehicle Inspection and Maintenance Program 

Section X.A. General Requirements and Applicability ............................... 12/5/2012 80 FR 54237, 9/9/2015 ..

Section X.B. Davis County ......................................................................... 2/14/1997 62 FR 38213, 7/17/1997 

Section X.C. Salt Lake County ................................................................... 10/7/2004 70 FR 44055, 8/1/2005 ..

Section X.D. Utah County .......................................................................... 5/18/2004 70 FR 66264, 11/2/2005 

Section X.E. Weber County ........................................................................ 11/4/2004 70 FR 54267, 9/14/2005 

Section X.F. Cache County ........................................................................ 11/6/2013 80 FR 54237, 9/9/2015 ..

Section XI. Other Control Measures for Mobile Sources ........................... 11/12/1993 68 FR 37744, 6/25/2003 

Section XII. Transportation Conformity Consultation ................................. 5/2/2007 73 FR 51222, 9/2/2008 ..

Section XIII. Analysis of Plan Impact ......................................................... 11/12/1993 68 FR 37744, 6/25/2003

Section XIV. Emission Inventory Development .......................................... 2/25/2000 68 FR 37744, 6/25/2003 

Section XV. Title 19, Chapter 2 Utah Code Annotated, 1993 ................... 11/12/1993 68 FR 37744, 6/25/2003 

Section XVI. Public Notification .................................................................. 11/12/1993 68 FR 37744, 6/25/2003 

XVII. Visibility Protection 

Section XVII.A. Introduction ........................................................................ 2/25/2000 68 FR 37744, 6/25/2003 

Section XVII.B. Background ....................................................................... 4/12/1993 68 FR 37744, 6/25/2003 

Section XVII.C. Visibility Protection ............................................................ 4/12/1993 68 FR 37744, 6/25/2003 

Section XVII.D. Visibility Monitoring ........................................................... 2/25/2000 68 FR 37744, 6/25/2003 

Section XVII.E. New or Modified Source Analysis of Visibility Impact ....... 2/25/2000 68 FR 37744, 6/25/2003 

Section XVII.F. Existing Source Visibility Impact and BART ..................... 4/12/1993 68 FR 37744, 6/25/2003 

Section XVII.G. Regional Haze .................................................................. 4/12/1993 68 FR 37744, 6/25/2003

Section XVII.H. Long Term Plan to Show Progress Toward Improved 

Visibility.

4/12/1993 68 FR 37744, 6/25/2003 

Section XVII.I. Visibility Progress Report ................................................... 4/12/1993 68 FR 37744, 6/25/2003 

Section XVII.J. Policy of the Air Conservation Committee Concerning the 

Protection of Scenic Views Associated with Mandatory Class I Areas 

from Signficant Impairment for Visibility.

4/12/1993 68 FR 37744, 6/25/2003 

Section XVIII. Demonstration of GEP Stack Height ................................... 2/25/2000 68 FR 37744, 6/25/2003 

Section XIX. Small Business Assistance Program ..................................... 11/12/1993 68 FR 37744, 6/25/2003 

Section XX.G. Long-Term Strategy for Fire Programs .............................. 4/7/2011 78 FR 4071, 1/18/2013 ..

Section XXII. General Conformity .............................................................. 1/1/2003 68 FR 37744, 6/25/2003 

Section XXIII. Interstate Transport ............................................................. 2/9/2007 73 FR 16543, 3/28/2008

Maintenance Plans 

Ogden Carbon Monoxide (CO) Maintenance Plan Summary.

Salt Lake and Davis County Ozone Maintenance Plan Summary.

Salt Lake and Tooele Counties Sulfur Dioxide (SO2) Plan Summary.

Salt Lake City Carbon Monoxide (CO) Maintenance Plan.

Salt Lake County Particulate Matter (PM¥10) Attainment Plan Summary.

Utah County Particulate Matter (PM¥10) Attainment Plan Summary.

[FR Doc. 2016–14099 Filed 6–15–16; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 6560–50–P 

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION 

AGENCY 

40 CFR Part 52 

[EPA–R03–OAR–2015–0838; FRL–9947–76– 

Region 3] 

Approval and Promulgation of Air 

Quality Implementation Plans; Virginia 

Infrastructure Requirements for the 

2012 Fine Particulate Matter National 

Ambient Air Quality Standards 

AGENCY: Environmental Protection 

Agency (EPA). 

ACTION: Final rule. 

SUMMARY: The Environmental Protection 

Agency (EPA) is approving a state 

implementation plan (SIP) revision 

submitted by the Commonwealth of 

Virginia (Virginia) pursuant to the Clean 

Air Act (CAA). Whenever new or 

revised national ambient air quality 

standards (NAAQS) are promulgated, 

the CAA requires states to submit a plan 

to address basic program elements, 

including but not limited to regulatory 

structure, monitoring, modeling, legal 

authority, and adequate resources 

necessary to assure implementation, 

maintenance, and enforcement of the 

NAAQS. These elements are referred to 

as infrastructure requirements. The 

Commonwealth of Virginia made a 

submittal addressing the infrastructure 

requirements for the 2012 fine 

particulate matter (PM2.5) NAAQS. 

DATES: This final rule is effective on July 

18, 2016. 

ADDRESSES: EPA has established a 

docket for this action under Docket ID 

Number EPA–R03–OAR–2015–0838. All 

documents in the docket are listed in 

the www.regulations.gov Web site. 

Although listed in the electronic docket, 

some information is not publicly 

available, i.e., 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 www.regulations.gov 

or may be viewed during normal 

business hours at the Air Protection 

Division, U.S. Environmental Protection 

Agency, Region III, 1650 Arch Street, 

Philadelphia, Pennsylvania 19103. 

Copies of the state submittal are 

available at Virginia Department of 

Environmental Quality, 629 East Main 

Street, Richmond, Virginia 23219. 


jstallworth on DSK7TPTVN1PROD with RULES
Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 116 / Thursday, June 16, 2016 / Rules and Regulations 39209 

1 In EPA’s 2012 PM2.5 NAAQS revision, EPA left 

unchanged the existing welfare (secondary) 

standards for PM2.5 to address PM related effects 

such as visibility impairment, ecological effects, 

damage to materials and climate impacts. This 

includes an annual secondary standard of 15 mg/m3

and a 24-hour standard of 35 mg/m3. 

2To clarify, the ‘‘2013 PM2.5 NAAQS’’ referred to 

in the Virginia SIP submittal is the same as the 

‘‘2012 PM2.5 NAAQS’’ EPA refers to in this 

rulemaking action. The final rule for this NAAQS 

was signed by the EPA Administrator on December 

14, 2012, thereby it has been called the ‘‘2012 PM2.5

NAAQS.’’ However, the final rule was published in 

the Federal Register on January 15, 2013, with an 

effective date of March 13, 2013, resulting in it also 

being referred to as the ‘‘2013 PM2.5 NAAQS.’’ 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Ellen Schmitt, (215) 814–5787, or by 

email at schmitt.ellen@epa.gov. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

I. Background 

On July 18, 1997, the EPA 

promulgated a new 24-hour and a new 

annual NAAQS for PM2.5 (62 FR 38652). 

Subsequently, on December 14, 2012, 

the EPA revised the level of the health 

based (primary) annual PM2.5 standard 

to 12 micrograms per cubic meter (mg/ 

m3). See 78 FR 3086 (January 15, 2013).1

Pursuant to section 110(a)(1) of the 

CAA, states are required to submit SIPs 

meeting the applicable requirements of 

section 110(a)(2) within three years after 

promulgation of a new or revised 

NAAQS or within such shorter period 

as EPA may prescribe. Section 110(a)(2) 

requires states to address basic SIP 

elements such as requirements for 

monitoring, basic program 

requirements, and legal authority that 

are designed to assure attainment and 

maintenance of the NAAQS. Section 

110(a) imposes the obligation upon 

states to make a SIP submission to EPA 

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 affect the 

content of the submission. The content 

of such SIP submission may also vary 

depending upon what provisions the 

state’s existing SIP already contains. 

II. Summary of SIP Revision 

On July 16, 2015, the Commonwealth 

of Virginia, through the Virginia 

Department of Environmental Quality 

(VADEQ), submitted a SIP revision that 

addresses the infrastructure elements 

specified in section 110(a)(2) of the CAA 

necessary to implement, maintain, and 

enforce the 2012 PM2.5 NAAQS.2 On 

March 7, 2016 (81 FR 11711), EPA 

published a notice of proposed 

rulemaking (NPR) proposing approval of 

the Virginia July 16, 2015 submittal. In 

the NPR, EPA proposed approval of the 

following infrastructure elements: 

Section 110(a)(2)(A), (B), (C), (D)(i)(II) 

(prevention of significant deterioration), 

(D)(ii), (E), (F), (G), (H), (J), (K), (L), and 

(M). 

At this time, EPA is not taking action 

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

relating to interstate transport of 

emissions because Virginia’s July 16, 

2016 infrastructure SIP submittal did 

not include provisions for this element; 

therefore EPA will take later, separate 

action on section 110(a)(2)(D)(i)(I) for 

the 2012 PM2.5 NAAQS for Virginia as 

explained in the NPR. Additionally, 

EPA is not at this time taking action on 

section 110(a)(2)(D)(i)(II) for visibility 

protection for the 2012 PM2.5 NAAQS as 

explained in the NPR. Although 

Virginia’s infrastructure SIP submittal 

for the 2012 PM2.5 NAAQS referred to 

Virginia’s regional haze SIP for section 

110(a)(2)(D)(i)(II) for visibility 

protection, EPA intends to take later, 

separate action on Virginia’s submittal 

for these elements as explained in the 

NPR and the Technical Support 

Document (TSD) which accompanied 

the NPR. Finally, Virginia did not 

submit section 110(a)(2)(I) which 

pertains to the nonattainment 

requirements of part D, Title I of the 

CAA, because this element is not 

required to be submitted by the 3-year 

submission deadline of section 110(a)(1) 

and will be addressed in a separate 

process if necessary. 

The rationale supporting EPA’s 

proposed rulemaking action, including 

the scope of infrastructure SIPs in 

general, is explained in the published 

NPR and the TSD accompanying the 

NPR and will not be restated here. The 

NPR and TSD are available in the docket 

for this rulemaking at 

www.regulations.gov, Docket ID Number 

EPA–R03–OAR–2015–0838. No public 

comments were received on the NPR. 

III. Final Action 

EPA is approving, as a revision to the 

Virginia SIP, the following elements of 

Virginia’s July 16, 2015 SIP revision for 

the 2012 PM2.5 NAAQS: Section 

110(a)(2)(A), (B), (C), (D)(i)(II) 

(prevention of significant deterioration), 

(D)(ii), (E), (F), (G), (H), (J), (K), (L), and 

(M). Virginia’s SIP revision provides the 

basic program elements specified in 

section 110(a)(2) necessary to 

implement, maintain, and enforce the 

2012 PM2.5 NAAQS. This final 

rulemaking action does not include 

action on sections 110(a)(2)(D)(i)(I) 

(interstate transport of emissions), and 

(D)(i)(II) (visibility protection) for the 

2012 PM2.5 NAAQS as previously 

discussed. Additionally, EPA is not 

taking action on section 110(a)(2)(I) 

which pertains to the nonattainment 

planning requirements of part D, title I 

of the CAA, because this element is not 

required to be submitted by the 3-year 

submission deadline of section 110(a)(1) 

of the CAA, and will be addressed in a 

separate process if necessary. 

IV. General Information Pertaining to 

SIP Submittals From the 

Commonwealth of Virginia 

In 1995, Virginia adopted legislation 

that provides, subject to certain 

conditions, for an environmental 

assessment (audit) ‘‘privilege’’ for 

voluntary compliance evaluations 

performed by a regulated entity. The 

legislation further addresses the relative 

burden of proof for parties either 

asserting the privilege or seeking 

disclosure of documents for which the 

privilege is claimed. Virginia’s 

legislation also provides, subject to 

certain conditions, for a penalty waiver 

for violations of environmental laws 

when a regulated entity discovers such 

violations pursuant to a voluntary 

compliance evaluation and voluntarily 

discloses such violations to the 

Commonwealth and takes prompt and 

appropriate measures to remedy the 

violations. Virginia’s Voluntary 

Environmental Assessment Privilege 

Law, Va. Code Sec. 10.1–1198, provides 

a privilege that protects from disclosure 

documents and information about the 

content of those documents that are the 

product of a voluntary environmental 

assessment. The Privilege Law does not 

extend to documents or information 

that: (1) Are generated or developed 

before the commencement of a 

voluntary environmental assessment; (2) 

are prepared independently of the 

assessment process; (3) demonstrate a 

clear, imminent and substantial danger 

to the public health or environment; or 

(4) are required by law. 

On January 12, 1998, the 

Commonwealth of Virginia Office of the 

Attorney General provided a legal 

opinion that states that the Privilege 

law, Va. Code Sec. 10.1–1198, precludes 

granting a privilege to documents and 

information ‘‘required by law,’’ 

including documents and information 

‘‘required by federal law to maintain 

program delegation, authorization or 

approval,’’ since Virginia must ‘‘enforce 

federally authorized environmental 

programs in a manner that is no less 

stringent than their federal counterparts. 

. . .’’ The opinion concludes that 

‘‘[r]egarding § 10.1–1198, therefore, 

documents or other information needed 

for civil or criminal enforcement under 

one of these programs could not be 

privileged because such documents and 


jstallworth on DSK7TPTVN1PROD with RULES
39210 Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 116 / Thursday, June 16, 2016 / Rules and Regulations 

information are essential to pursuing 

enforcement in a manner required by 

federal law to maintain program 

delegation, authorization or approval.’’ 

Virginia’s Immunity law, Va. Code 

Sec. 10.1–1199, provides that ‘‘[t]o the 

extent consistent with requirements 

imposed by federal law,’’ any person 

making a voluntary disclosure of 

information to a state agency regarding 

a violation of an environmental statute, 

regulation, permit, or administrative 

order is granted immunity from 

administrative or civil penalty. The 

Attorney General’s January 12, 1998 

opinion states that the quoted language 

renders this statute inapplicable to 

enforcement of any federally authorized 

programs, since ‘‘no immunity could be 

afforded from administrative, civil, or 

criminal penalties because granting 

such immunity would not be consistent 

with federal law, which is one of the 

criteria for immunity.’’ 

Therefore, EPA has determined that 

Virginia’s Privilege and Immunity 

statutes will not preclude the 

Commonwealth from enforcing its 

program consistent with the federal 

requirements. In any event, because 

EPA has also determined that a state 

audit privilege and immunity law can 

affect only state enforcement and cannot 

have any impact on federal enforcement 

authorities, EPA may at any time invoke 

its authority under the CAA, including, 

for example, sections 113, 167, 205, 211 

or 213, to enforce the requirements or 

prohibitions of the state plan, 

independently of any state enforcement 

effort. In addition, citizen enforcement 

under section 304 of the CAA is 

likewise unaffected by this, or any, state 

audit privilege or immunity law. 

V. Statutory and Executive Order 

Reviews 

A. General Requirements 

Under the CAA, the Administrator is 

required to approve a SIP submission 

that complies with the provisions of the 

CAA 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 CAA. 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); 

• 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 CAA; and 

• 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). 

The SIP is not approved to apply on 

any Indian reservation land as defined 

in 18 U.S.C. 1151 or in any other area 

where 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). 

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 August 15, 2016. 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, which 

satisfies certain infrastructure 

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

CAA for the 2012 PM2.5 NAAQS for the 

Commonwealth of Virginia, 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, Reporting 

and recordkeeping requirements. 

Dated: May 27, 2016. 

Shawn M. Garvin, 

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 VV—Virginia 

■ 2. In § 52.2420, the table in paragraph 

(e) is amended by adding, to the end of 

the table, an entry for ‘‘Section 110(a)(2) 

Infrastructure Requirements for the 2012 

Particulate Matter NAAQS.’’ The added 

text reads as follows: 

§ 52.2420 Identification of plan. 

* * * * * 

(e) * * * 


jstallworth on DSK7TPTVN1PROD with RULES
Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 116 / Thursday, June 16, 2016 / Rules and Regulations 39211 

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 Particulate 

Matter NAAQS.

Statewide ....... 7/16/15 6/16/16, [Insert Federal 

Register citation].

Docket #2015–0838. This action addresses the following CAA elements, or portions thereof: 

110(a)(2)(A), (B), (C), (D)(i)(II)(PSD), (D)(ii), (E), 

(F), (G), (H), (J), (K), (L), and (M). 

[FR Doc. 2016–14181 Filed 6–15–16; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 6560–50–P 

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION 

AGENCY 

40 CFR Part 52 

[EPA–R09–OAR–2016–0124; FRL–9946–38– 

Region 9] 

Approval of California Air Plan 

Revisions, Eastern Kern Air Pollution 

Control District and Yolo-Solano 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 YoloSolano Air Quality Management District 

(YSAQMD) and Eastern Kern Air 

Pollution Control District (EKAPCD) 

portions of the California State 

Implementation Plan (SIP). These 

revisions concern, respectively, the 

definition of volatile organic 

compounds (VOCs), and emissions of 

VOCs from the surface coating 

operations of wood products. 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 August 

15, 2016 without further notice, unless 

the EPA receives adverse comments by 

July 18, 2016. 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 your comments, 

identified by Docket ID No. EPA–R09– 

OAR–2016–0124 at http://

www.regulations.gov, or via email to 

Steckel.Andrew@epa.gov. For comments 

submitted at Regulations.gov, follow the 

online instructions for submitting 

comments. Once submitted, comments 

cannot be edited or removed from 

Regulations.gov. For either manner of 

submission, the EPA may publish any 

comment received to its public docket. 

Do not submit electronically any 

information you consider to be 

Confidential Business Information (CBI) 

or other information whose disclosure is 

restricted by statute. Multimedia 

submissions (audio, video, etc.) must be 

accompanied by a written comment. 

The written comment is considered the 

official comment and should include 

discussion of all points you wish to 

make. The EPA will generally not 

consider comments or comment 

contents located outside of the primary 

submission (i.e. on the web, cloud, or 

other file sharing system). For 

additional submission methods, please 

contact the person identified in the FOR

FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section. 

For the full EPA public comment policy, 

information about CBI or multimedia 

submissions, and general guidance on 

making effective comments, please visit 

http://www2.epa.gov/dockets/

commenting-epa-dockets. 

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. 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 and rule revision? 

II. The EPA’s Evaluation and Action 

A. How is the 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. Incorporation by Reference 

IV. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews 

I. The State’s Submittal 

A. What rules did the State submit? 

Table 1 lists the rules addressed by 

this action with the dates that they were 

adopted by the local air agencies and 

submitted by the California Air 

Resources Board (CARB). 

TABLE 1—SUBMITTED RULES

Local agency Rule No. Rule title 

Adopted/

amended/ 

revised 

Submitted 

EKAPCD ......... 410.9 Wood Products Surface Coating Operations ................................................. 3/13/2014 7/25/2014 

YSAQMD ........ 1.1 General Provisions and Definitions ................................................................ 7/08/2015 11/13/2015 

On September 11, 2014, and January 

19, 2016, the EPA determined that the 

submittals for EKAPCD Rule 410.9 and 

YSAQMD Rule 1.1 respectively 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 these 

rules? 

There are no previous versions of 

Rule 410.9 in the SIP. We approved an 

earlier version of Rule 1.1 into the SIP 

on April 28, 2015 (80 FR 23449). 

C. What is the purpose of the submitted 

rule and rule revision? 

VOCs help produce ground-level 

ozone, smog and PM, which harm 

human health and the environment. 

Section 110(a) of the CAA requires 

States to submit regulations that control 


jstallworth on DSK7TPTVN1PROD with RULES