Skip to Content

During the funding lapse, is not being supported. If data feeds are not available from GPO, will not be updated, so please use the official edition of the Federal Register on Govinfo ( If there is a technical issue with the Public Inspection List, you can view the documents on public inspection at our office in Washington, DC or on


Revisions to California State Implementation Plan, Antelope Valley Air Quality Management District and Ventura County Air Pollution Control District

Document Details

Information about this document as published in the Federal Register.

Document Statistics
Document page views are updated periodically throughout the day and are cumulative counts for this document including its time on Public Inspection. Counts are subject to sampling, reprocessing and revision (up or down) throughout the day.
Enhanced Content

Relevant information about this document from provides additional context. This information is not part of the official Federal Register document.

Published Document

This document has been published in the Federal Register. Use the PDF linked in the document sidebar for the official electronic format.

Start Preamble


Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).


Direct final rule.


EPA is taking direct final action to approve revisions to the Antelope Valley Air Quality Air Management District (AVAQMD) and Ventura County Air Pollution Control District (VCAPCD) portions of the California State Implementation Plan (SIP). Under authority of the Clean Air Act (CAA or the Act), we are rescinding local rules that concern sulfur oxide emissions from lead smelters for AVAQMD and volatile organic compounds (VOC) emissions from the data storage for VCAPCD and vacuum producing device industries for VCAPCD.


These rules are effective on October 15, 2013 without further notice, unless EPA receives adverse comments by September 16, 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.


Submit comments, identified by docket number EPA-R09-OAR-2013-0394, by one of the following methods:

1. Federal eRulemaking Portal: Follow the on-line instructions.

2. Email:

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 Start Printed Page 49926change and may be made available online at, 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 or email. 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 and in hard copy at EPA Region IX, 75 Hawthorne Street, San Francisco, California. While all documents in the docket are listed at, 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.

Start Further Info


Robert Marinaro, EPA Region IX, (415) 972-3019,

End Further Info End Preamble Start Supplemental 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?

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 rule rescissions we are approving with the dates that they were rescinded by the local air agencies and submitted by the California Air Resources Board.

Table 1—Submitted Rules

Local agencyRule #Rule titleAdopted/ revisedRescindedSubmitted
AVAQMD1101Secondary Lead Smelters/Sulfur Oxides (rescinded)10/07/772/21/1202/06/13
VCAPCD37Project XL (rescinded)09/14/996/12/1202/06/13
VCAPCD67Vacuum Producing Devices (rescinded)07/05/836/12/1202/06/13

On April 9, 2013, EPA determined that the submittal for AVAQMD Rule 1101, and VCAPCD Rules 37 and 67 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?

We approved versions of AVAQMD Rule 1101 into the SIP on September 2, 1981 (46 FR 43968), VCAPCD Rule 37 on December 13, 1999 (64 FR 69404), and VCAPCD Rule 67 on April 17, 1987 (52 FR 12522).

C. What is the purpose of the submitted rules?

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.

AVAQMD Rule 1101, Secondary Lead Smelters/Sulfur Oxides; VCAPCD Rule 37, Project XL; and VCAPCD Rule 67, Vacuum Producing Devices were originally adopted to help reduce these various air pollutants but are being rescinded because there are no longer any sources in the Districts subject to them and none are anticipated in the future.

II. EPA's Evaluation and Action

A. How is EPA evaluating the rules?

These rules describe requirements intended to help control emissions from lead smelters in AVAQMD, data storage in VCAPCD and vacuum producing devices in VCAPCD. These rule rescissions must not relax existing requirements consistent with CAA sections 110(l) and 193. EPA policy that we used to evaluate these rule revisions includes “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).

B. Do the rules meet the evaluation criteria?

The Districts have requested rescission because they no longer have any sources subject to these rules, they do not expect any new sources in the future, and any new sources would be subject to restrictive NSR permitting requirements. The Districts have reviewed permit databases, emission inventories, and trade group contacts to determine that they have no sources, and we have reviewed their analysis and have no basis to question their analysis. Therefore, we believe these rule rescissions are consistent with relevant policy and guidance.

C. Public Comment and Final Action.

As authorized in section 110(k)(3) of the Act, EPA is fully approving the submitted rule rescissions 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 rule rescissions. If we receive adverse comments by September 16, 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 October 15, 2013. This will remove these rules from 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 Start Printed Page 49927remainder 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 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 October 15, 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)).

Start List of Subjects

List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52

End List of Subjects Start Signature

Dated: July 26, 2013.

Jared Blumenfeld,

Regional Administrator, Region IX.

End Signature

Part 52, Chapter I, Title 40 of the Code of Federal Regulations is amended as follows:

Start Part


End Part Start Amendment Part

1. The authority citation for Part 52 continues to read as follows:

End Amendment Part Start Authority

Authority: 42 U.S.C. 7401 et seq.

End Authority

Subpart F—California

Start Amendment Part

2. Section 52.220, is amended by adding paragraphs (c)(70)(i)(B)(

End Amendment Part
Identification of plan.
* * * * *

(c) * * *

(70) * * *

(i) * * *

(B) * * *

(1) Previously approved on September 2, 1981 in paragraph (c)(70)(i)(B) of this section and now deleted without replacement, for the Antelope Valley area only, Antelope Valley Rule 1101, previously South Coast Rule 1101. South Coast Rule 1101 remains in effect for the South Coast area.

* * * * *

(164) * * *

(i) * * *

(C) * * *

(5) Previously approved on April 17, 1987 in paragraph (c)(164)(i)(C)(1) of this section and now deleted without replacement, Ventura County Rule 67.

* * * * *

(270) * * *

(i) * * *

(A) * * *

(2) Previously approved on December 13, 1999 in paragraph (c)(270)(i)(A)(1) of this section and now deleted without replacement, Ventura County Rule 37.

* * * * *
End Supplemental Information

[FR Doc. 2013-19872 Filed 8-15-13; 8:45 am]