Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 10 / Thursday, January 15, 2015 / Rules and Regulations 2013 

health or risk to safety that may 

disproportionately affect children. 

11. Indian Tribal Governments 

This rule does not have tribal 

implications under Executive Order 

13175, Consultation and Coordination 

with Indian Tribal Governments, 

because it does 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. 

12. Energy Effects 

This action is not a ‘‘significant 

energy action’’ under Executive Order 

13211, Actions Concerning Regulations 

That Significantly Affect Energy Supply, 

Distribution, or Use. 

13. Technical Standards 

This rule does not use technical 

standards. Therefore, we did not 

consider the use of voluntary consensus 

standards. 

14. Environment 

We have analyzed this rule under 

Department of Homeland Security 

Management Directive 023–01 and 

Commandant Instruction M16475.lD, 

which guide the Coast Guard in 

complying with the National 

Environmental Policy Act of 1969 

(NEPA) (42 U.S.C. 4321–4370f), and 

have made a determination that this 

action is one of a category of actions that 

do not individually or cumulatively 

have a significant effect on the human 

environment. This rule involves 

disestablishing two unused anchorage 

grounds, establishing one anchorage 

ground, and reducing the size of one 

anchorage ground resulting in a 

reduction in the overall size of the 

anchorage grounds by 7.28 square 

nautical miles in the COTP zone. This 

rule is categorically excluded from 

further review under paragraph 34(f) of 

Figure 2–1 of the Commandant 

Instruction. An environmental analysis 

checklist supporting this determination 

and a Categorical Exclusion 

Determination are available in the 

docket where indicated under 

ADDRESSES. 

List of Subjects in 33 CFR Part 110 

Anchorage grounds. 

For the reasons discussed in the 

preamble, the Coast Guard amends 33 

CFR part 110 as follows: 

PART 110—ANCHORAGE 

REGULATIONS 

■ 1. The authority citation for part 110 

continues to read as follows: 

Authority: 33 U.S.C. 471, 1221 through 

1236, 2071; 33 CFR 1.05–1; Department of 

Homeland Security Delegation No. 0170.1. 

■ 2. In § 110.155 revise paragraphs (c)(2) 

and (f) and add paragraph (c)(4) to read 

as follows: 

§ 110.155 Port of New York. 

* * * * * 

(c) * * * 

(2) Anchorage No. 17. All waters of 

the Hudson River bound by the 

following points: 40°56′26.66′′ N, 

073°55′12.06′′ W; thence to 40°56′22.54′′ 

N, 073°54′49.77′′ W; thence to 

40°55′56.00′′ N, 073°54′58.00′′ W; thence 

to 40°55′54.15′′ N, 073°54′46.96′′ W; 

thence to 40°54′18.43′′ N, 073°55′21.12′′ 

W; thence to 40°52′27.59′′ N, 

073°56′14.32′′ W; thence to 40°51′34.20′′ 

N, 073°56′52.64′′ W; thence to 

40°51′20.76′′ N, 073°57′31.75′′ W; thence 

along the shoreline to the point of origin 

(NAD 83). 

(i) When the use of Anchorage No. 17 

is required by naval vessels, the vessels 

anchored therein shall move when the 

Captain of the Port directs them. 

(ii) [Reserved] 

* * * * * 

(4) Anchorage No. 18. All waters of 

the Hudson River bound by the 

following points: 40°56′54.0′′ N, 

073°54′40.0′′ W; thence to 40°56′51.0′′ N, 

073°54′24.0′′ W; thence to 40°55′53.0′′ N, 

073°54′40.0′′ W; thence to 40°55′56.0′′ N, 

073°54′58.0′′ W; thence to the point of 

origin (NAD 83). 

(i) This anchorage ground is reserved 

for use by ships only. 

(ii) [Reserved] 

* * * * * 

(f) * * * 

(2) Anchorage No. 27. Atlantic 

Ocean— 

(i) All waters bound by the following 

points: 40°28′49.27′′ N, 074°00′12.13′′ 

W; thence to 40°28′52.12′′ N, 

074°00′00.56′′ W; thence to 40°28′40.88′′ 

N, 073°58′51.95′′ W; thence to 

40°25′57.91′′ N, 073°54′55.56′′ W; thence 

to 40°23′45.55′′ N, 073°54′54.89′′ W; 

thence to 40°23′45.38′′ N, 073°58′32.10′′ 

W; thence along the shoreline to the 

point of origin (NAD 83). 

(ii) [Reserved] 

(iii) [Reserved] 

* * * * * 

Dated: December 30, 2014. 

V.B. Gifford, 

Captain, U.S. Coast Guard, Acting 

Commander, First Coast Guard District. 

[FR Doc. 2015–00465 Filed 1–14–15; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 9110–04–P 

DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND 

SECURITY 

Coast Guard 

33 CFR Part 165 

[USCG–2014–1055] 

RIN 1625–AA87 

Security Zone, John Joseph Moakley 

United States Courthouse; Boston, MA 

AGENCY: Coast Guard, DHS. 

ACTION: Temporary final rule. 

SUMMARY: The Coast Guard is 

establishing a temporary security zone 

within Sector Boston’s Captain of the 

Port (COTP) Zone on the waters in the 

vicinity of John Joseph Moakley United 

States Courthouse, Boston, MA. 

Enforcement of this temporary security 

zone is for the high profile court 

proceeding of the Boston Marathon 

bombing suspect Dzhokhar Tsarnaev at 

the Moakley Courthouse and is 

necessary to protect people, property, 

and the port of Boston from subversive 

acts. 

DATES: This rule is effective without 

actual notice from January 15, 2015 

until December 31, 2015. For the 

purposes of enforcement, actual notice 

will be used from January 5, 2015 until 

January 15, 2015. 

ADDRESSES: Documents indicated in this 

preamble as being available in the 

docket are part of docket USCG–2014– 

1055 and are available online by going 

to http://www.regulations.gov, inserting 

USCG–2014–1055 in the ’’Keyword’’ 

box, and then clicking ‘‘Search’’. They 

are also available for inspection or 

copying at the Docket Management 

Facility (M–30), U.S. Department of 

Transportation, West Building Ground 

Floor, Room W12–140, 1200 New Jersey 

Avenue SE., Washington, DC 20590, 

between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday 

through Friday, except Federal holidays. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: If 

you have questions on this temporary 

rule, call or email Mr. Mark Cutter, 

Coast Guard Sector Boston Waterways 

Management Division, telephone (617) 

223–4000, email Mark.E.Cutter@

uscg.mil. If you have questions on 

viewing the docket, call Cheryl Collins, 

Program Manager, Docket Operations, 

telephone (202)366–9826. 


rljohnson on DSK3VPTVN1PROD with RULES
2014 Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 10 / Thursday, January 15, 2015 / Rules and Regulations 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

Table of Acronyms 

DHS Department of Homeland Security 

USCG United States Coast Guard 

U.S.C. United States Code 

CFR Code of Federal Regulations 

COTP Captain of the Port 

FR Federal Register 

NPRM Notice of Proposed Rulemaking 

TFR Temporary Final Rule 

A. Regulatory Information and 

Information 

The Coast Guard is issuing this 

temporary final rule without prior 

notice and opportunity to comment 

pursuant to authority under section 4(a) 

of the Administrative Procedure Act 

(APA) (5 U.S.C. 553(b)). This provision 

authorizes an agency to issue a rule 

without prior notice and opportunity to 

comment when the agency for good 

cause finds that those procedures are 

‘‘impracticable, unnecessary, or contrary 

to the public interest.’’ Under 5 U.S.C. 

553(b)(B), the Coast Guard finds that 

good cause exists for not publishing a 

notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM) 

with respect to this particular temporary 

final rule. Due to the nature of this high 

profile court case and the international 

interest that this trial is expected to 

generate, the security zone is necessary 

to help protect people, property, and the 

port of Boston from subversive acts. The 

trial is expected to commence on 

January 5, 2015, and therefore, it would 

be impracticable to publish an NPRM. 

Delaying this regulation’s effective date 

for comment would be contrary to the 

public interest as immediate action is 

needed to ensure the safety in the 

surrounding area. 

The Coast Guard did, however, 

publish an NPRM on November 20, 

2014 (79 FR 69078), to establish a 

permanent security zone within Sector 

Boston’s Captain of the Port (COTP) 

Zone for a five hundred (500) yard 

security zone, but granting vessels 

permission to enter the security zone as 

long as such vessels remain beyond two 

hundred and fifty (250) yards of the 

Moakley Courthouse, unless granted 

access by the COTP or the COTP’s 

representative, and as long as such 

vessels proceed through the area with 

caution and operate at a speed no faster 

than that speed necessary to maintain a 

safe course, unless otherwise required 

by the Navigation Rules. We feel we 

need more time to adequately address 

the comments received on the NPRM 

relating to the impact that a two 

hundred and fifty (250) yard restriction 

on vessels will have on businesses. 

Accordingly, we have elected to 

establish this temporary five hundred 

(500) yard security zone, but grant 

vessels permission to enter the security 

zone as long as such vessels remain 

beyond one hundred (100) yards of the 

Moakley Courthouse, unless granted 

access by the COTP or the COTP’s 

representative, and as long as such 

vessels proceed through the area with 

caution and operate at a speed no faster 

than that speed necessary to maintain a 

safe course, unless otherwise required 

by the Navigation Rules. Publishing a 

new NPRM to reflect this change and 

delaying the effective date would be 

impracticable and contrary to the public 

interest since it would inhibit the Coast 

Guard’s ability to fulfill its statutory 

missions to protect people, property, 

and the port of Boston from subversive 

acts. 

Under 5 U.S.C. 553(d)(3), the Coast 

Guard finds that good cause exists for 

making this rule effective less than 30 

days after publication in the Federal 

Register for the reason discussed above. 

For the same reasons discussed in the 

preceding paragraph, the Coast Guard 

finds that waiting 30 days to make this 

rule effective would be impracticable 

and contrary to the public interest. 

B. Basis and Purpose 

The legal basis for this rule is 33 

U.S.C. 1231; 46 U.S.C. Chapter 701, 

3306, 3703; 50 U.S.C. 191, 195; 33 CFR 

1.05–1, 6.04–1, 6.04–6, 160.5; and 

Department of Homeland Security 

Delegation No. 0170.1, which 

collectively authorize the Coast Guard 

to define security zones. 

The trial for the Boston Marathon 

bombing suspect, Dzhokhar Tsarnaev, is 

expected to begin on January 5, 2015 at 

the John Joseph Moakley United States 

Courthouse, Boston, MA. The trial is 

expected to last upwards of five months. 

Due to the nature of this high profile 

court case and the international interest 

that this trial is expected to generate, the 

Federal Protective Police have requested 

the Coast Guard issue a security zone 

around the waterside of the Courthouse 

to help protect people, property, and the 

port of Boston from subversive acts. 

C. Discussion of Rule 

For the reason discussed above, the 

COTP, Sector Boston, is establishing a 

temporary security zone. This 

temporary security zone will be 

effective and enforced starting on 

January 5, 2015, and will continue until 

the trial is completed, and if necessary, 

during the sentencing phase. This 

security zone encompasses all U.S. 

navigable waters, from surface to 

bottom, within five hundred (500) yards 

of the John Joseph Moakley United 

States Courthouse (Moakley 

Courthouse) in Boston, MA, and 

following any natural waterside seawall. 

Specific geographic locations are 

specified in the regulatory text. 

The COTP hereby grants vessels 

permission to enter this five hundred 

(500) yard security zone as long as such 

vessels remain beyond one hundred 

(100) yards of the Moakley Courthouse 

unless granted access by the COTP or 

the COTP’s representative, and as long 

as such vessels proceed through the area 

with caution and operate at a speed no 

faster than that speed necessary to 

maintain a safe course, unless otherwise 

required by the Navigation Rules. 

D. Regulatory Analyses 

We developed this rule after 

considering numerous statutes and 

executive orders related to rulemaking. 

Below we summarize our analyses 

based on these statutes and executive 

orders. 

1. Regulatory Planning and Review 

This rule is not a significant 

regulatory action under section 3(f) of 

Executive Order 12866, Regulatory 

Planning and Review, as supplemented 

by Executive Order 13563, Improving 

Regulation and Regulatory Review, and 

does not require an assessment of 

potential costs and benefits under 

section 6(a)(3) of Executive Order 12866 

or under section 1 of Executive Order 

13563. The Office of Management and 

Budget has not reviewed it under those 

Orders. 

The Coast Guard expects the 

economic impact of this rule to be so 

minimal that a full regulatory evaluation 

under the regulatory policies and 

procedures of DHS is unnecessary. First, 

based on the comments and feedback 

from the NPRM on the permanent 

security zone, we feel that decreasing 

the two hundred and fifty (250) yards to 

one hundred (100) yards will minimize 

the impact to vessels, such as commuter 

ferries servicing Rowes Wharf, because 

they will be able to transit their normal 

routes. Second, the Courthouse is likely 

to shut down the harbor dock to water 

Taxis during the trial. Third, mariners 

may still pass through the security zone, 

within one hundred (100) yards of the 

Moakley Courthouse, with authorization 

from the COTP or a designated on-scene 

representative. Finally, such notification 

of this security zone will be published 

through the local Notice to Mariners, 

Broadcast Notice to Mariners, and 

through extensive public outreach. 

2. Impact on Small Entities 

The Regulatory Flexibility Act of 1980 

(RFA), 5 U.S.C. 601–612, as amended, 

requires federal agencies to consider the 

potential impact of regulations on small 


rljohnson on DSK3VPTVN1PROD with RULES
Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 10 / Thursday, January 15, 2015 / Rules and Regulations 2015 

entities during rulemaking. The term 

‘‘small entities’’ comprises small 

businesses, not-for-profit organizations 

that are independently owned and 

operated and are not dominant in their 

fields, and governmental jurisdictions 

with populations of less than 50,000 

persons. 

The Coast Guard certifies under 5 

U.S.C. 605(b) that this rule will not have 

a significant economic impact on a 

substantial number of small entities for 

all of the reasons discussed in the 

‘‘Regulatory Planning and Review’’ 

section above. 

3. Assistance for Small Entities 

Under section 213(a) of the Small 

Business Regulatory Enforcement 

Fairness Act of 1996 (Pub. L. 104–121), 

we want to assist small entities in 

understanding this rule. If the rule will 

affect your small business, organization, 

or governmental jurisdiction and you 

have questions concerning its 

provisions or options for compliance, 

please contact the person listed in the 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT, 

above. 

4. Collection of Information 

This rule calls for no new collection 

of information under the Paperwork 

Reduction Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. 3501– 

3520). 

5. Federalism 

A rule has implications for federalism 

under Executive Order 13132, 

Federalism, if it has a substantial direct 

effect 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. We have 

analyzed this rule under that Order and 

determined that this rule does not have 

implications for federalism. 

6. Protest Activities 

The Coast Guard respects the First 

Amendment rights of protesters. 

Protesters are asked to contact the 

person listed in the FOR FURTHER

INFORMATION CONTACT section to 

coordinate protest activities so that your 

message can be received without 

jeopardizing the safety or security of 

people, places, or vessels. 

7. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act 

The Unfunded Mandates Reform Act 

of 1995 (2 U.S.C. 1531–1538) requires 

Federal agencies to assess the effects of 

their discretionary regulatory actions. In 

particular, the Act addresses actions 

that may result in the expenditure by a 

State, local, or tribal government, in the 

aggregate, or by the private sector of 

$100,000,000 (adjusted for inflation) or 

more in any one year. Though this rule 

will not result in such an expenditure, 

we do discuss the effects of this rule 

elsewhere in this preamble. 

8. Taking of Private Property 

This rule will not cause a taking of 

private property or otherwise have 

taking implications under Executive 

Order 12630, Governmental Actions and 

Interference with Constitutionally 

Protected Property Rights. 

9. Civil Justice Reform 

This rule meets applicable standards 

in sections 3(a) and 3(b)(2) of Executive 

Order 12988, Civil Justice Reform, to 

minimize litigation, eliminate 

ambiguity, and reduce burden. 

10. Protection of Children From 

Environmental Health Risks 

We have analyzed this rule under 

Executive Order 13045, Protection of 

Children from Environmental Health 

Risks and Safety Risks. This rule is not 

an economically significant rule and 

does not create an environmental risk to 

health or risk to safety that may 

disproportionately affect children. 

11. Indian Tribal Governments 

This rule does not have tribal 

implications under Executive Order 

13175, Consultation and Coordination 

with Indian Tribal Governments, 

because it does 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. 

12. Energy Effects 

This action is not a ‘‘significant 

energy action’’ under Executive Order 

13211, Actions Concerning Regulations 

That Significantly Affect Energy Supply, 

Distribution, or Use. 

13. Technical Standards 

This rule does not use technical 

standards. Therefore, we did not 

consider the use of voluntary consensus 

standards. 

14. Environment 

We have analyzed this rule under 

Department of Homeland Security 

Management Directive 023–01 and 

Commandant Instruction M16475.lD, 

which guide the Coast Guard in 

complying with the National 

Environmental Policy Act of 1969 

(NEPA) (42 U.S.C. 4321–4370f), and 

have concluded that this action is one 

of a category of actions that do not 

individually or cumulatively have a 

significant effect on the human 

environment. This temporary final rule 

involves the establishment of a 

temporary security zone. This rule is 

categorically excluded from further 

review under, paragraph 34(g) of figure 

2–1 of the Commandant Instruction. An 

environmental analysis checklist and a 

categorical exclusion determination are 

available in the docket where indicated 

under ADDRESSES. We seek any 

comments or information that may lead 

to the discovery of a significant 

environmental impact from this rule. 

List of Subjects in 33 CFR Part 165 

Harbors, Marine safety, Navigation 

(water), Reporting and recordkeeping 

requirements, Security measures, 

Waterways. 

For the reasons discussed in the 

preamble, the Coast Guard amends 33 

CFR part 165 as follows: 

PART 165—REGULATED NAVIGATION 

AREAS AND LIMITED ACCESS AREAS 

■ 1. The authority citation for part 165 

continues to read as follows: 

Authority: 33 U.S.C., 1231; 46 U.S.C. 

Chapter 701, 3306, 3703; 50 U.S.C. 191, 195; 

33 CFR 1.05–1, 6.04–1, 6.04–6, and 160.5; 

Pub. L. 107–295, 116 Stat. 2064; Department 

of Homeland Security Delegation No. 0170.1. 

■ 2. Add § 165.T01–1055 to read as 

follows: 

§ 165.T01–1055 Security Zone, John 

Joseph Moakley United States Courthouse, 

Boston, MA. 

(a) Location. This security zone 

encompasses all U.S. navigable waters, 

from surface to bottom, within five 

hundred (500) yards of the John Joseph 

Moakley United States Courthouse 

(Moakley Courthouse) in Boston, MA, 

and following any natural waterside 

seawall configuration enclosed by a line 

connecting the following points: 

Latitude Longitude 

42°21′15′′ N 71°02′54′′ W; Bounded by 

the curvature of the seawall, thence to 

42°21′13′′ N 71°02′27′′ W; thence to 

42°21′25′′ N 71°02′17′′ W; thence to 

42°21′32′′ N 71°02′54′′ W; Bounded by 

the curvature of the seawall, thence to 

42°21′18′′ N 71°03′01′′ W; thence to 

point of origin. 

(b) Regulations. While this security 

zone is being enforced, the following 

regulations, along with those contained 

in 33 CFR 165.33, apply: 

(1) No person or vessel may enter or 

remain in this security zone without the 


rljohnson on DSK3VPTVN1PROD with RULES
2016 Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 10 / Thursday, January 15, 2015 / Rules and Regulations 

permission of the Captain of the Port 

(COTP), Sector Boston. However, the 

COTP hereby grants vessels permission 

to enter this security zone as long as 

such vessels remain beyond one 

hundred (100) yards of the Moakley 

Courthouse and as long as such vessels 

proceed through the area with caution 

and operate at a speed no faster than 

that speed necessary to maintain a safe 

course, unless otherwise required by the 

Navigation Rules. 

(2) Although vessels have permission 

to enter the security zone under the 

conditions mentioned in the preceding 

paragraph, no person or vessel may 

come within one hundred (100) yards of 

the Moakley Courthouse under any 

conditions unless given express 

permission from the COTP or the 

COTP’s designated representatives. 

(3) Any person or vessel permitted to 

enter the security zone shall comply 

with the directions and orders of the 

COTP or the COTP’s representatives. 

Upon being hailed by a U.S. Coast 

Guard vessel by siren, radio, flashing 

lights, or other means, the operator of a 

vessel within the zone shall proceed as 

directed. Any person or vessel within 

the security zone shall exit the zone 

when directed by the COTP or the 

COTP’s representatives. 

(4) To obtain permissions required by 

this regulation, individuals may reach 

the COTP or a COTP representative via 

VHF channel 16 or 617–223–5757 

(Sector Boston Command Center) to 

obtain permission. 

(5) Penalties. Those who violate this 

section are subject to the penalties set 

forth in 33 U.S.C. 1232 and 50 U.S.C. 

192. 

(c) Effective and Enforcement Period. 

This rule is effective and will be 

enforced with actual notice starting 

12:01 a.m. on Monday, January 5, 2015 

to 11:59 p.m. December 31, 2015. 

(d) Notification. Coast Guard Sector 

Boston will give actual notice to 

mariners for the purpose of enforcement 

of this temporary security zone. Also, 

Sector Boston will notify the public to 

the greatest extent possible of any 

period in which the Coast Guard will 

suspend enforcement of this security 

zone. 

(e) COTP Representative. The COTP’s 

representative may be any Coast Guard 

commissioned, warrant, or petty officer 

or any Federal, state, or local law 

enforcement officer who has been 

designated by the COTP to act on the 

COTP’s behalf. The COTP’s 

representative may be on a Coast Guard 

vessel, a Coast Guard Auxiliary vessel, 

a state or local law enforcement vessel, 

or a location on shore. 

Dated: December 22, 2014. 

J.C. O’Connor III, 

Captain, U.S. Coast Guard, Captain of the 

Port Boston. 

[FR Doc. 2015–00327 Filed 1–14–15; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 9110–04–P 

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION 

AGENCY 

40 CFR Part 52 

[EPA–R09–OAR–2014–0696; FRL–9921–38– 

Region 9] 

Revisions to the California State 

Implementation Plan, Ventura County 

Air Pollution Control District 

AGENCY: Environmental Protection 

Agency. 

ACTION: Final rule. 

SUMMARY: The Environmental Protection 

Agency (EPA) is taking final action to 

approve a revision to the Ventura 

County Air Pollution Control District 

(VCAPCD) portion of the California 

State Implementation Plan (SIP). This 

revision concerns the District’s 

reasonably available control technology 

(RACT) requirements under the 2008 8- 

hour ozone National Ambient Air 

Quality Standards (NAAQS). We are 

approving this document under the 

Clean Air Act (CAA or the Act). 

DATES: This rule will be effective on 

February 17, 2015. 

ADDRESSES: EPA has established docket 

number EPA–R09–OAR–2014–0696 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 94105–3901. 

While all documents in the docket 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 available in either location (e.g., 

confidential business information 

(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: 

Stanley Tong, EPA Region IX, (415) 

947–4122, tong.stanley@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 October 29, 2014 (79 FR 64353), 

EPA proposed to approve the following 

document into the California SIP. 

Local 

agency Document Adopted Submitted 

VCAPCD 2014 Reasonably Available Control Technology (RACT) State Implementation Plan (SIP) Revision 

(‘‘2014 RACT SIP’’).

6/10/14 7/18/14 

VCAPCD’s submittal also included 

the following negative declarations 

which the District certified that it had 

no sources subject to the control 

techniques guidelines (CTG) documents. 

CTG source category CTG reference document 

Aerospace ....................................... EPA–453/R–97–004, Aerospace CTG and MACT 

Automobile and Light-duty Trucks, 

Surface Coating of.

EPA–450/2–77–008, Control of Volatile Organic Emissions from Existing Stationary Sources—Volume II: 

Surface Coating of Cans, Coils, Paper, Fabrics, Automobiles, and Light-Duty Trucks. 

EPA 453/R–08–006, Control Techniques Guidelines for Automobile and Light-Duty Truck Assembly Coatings. 

Cans and Coils, Surface Coating of EPA–450/2–77–008, Control of Volatile Organic Emissions from Existing Stationary Sources—Volume II: 

Surface Coating of Cans, Coils, Paper, Fabrics, Automobiles, and Light-Duty Trucks. 


rljohnson on DSK3VPTVN1PROD with RULES