Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).
Final rule.
The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is taking final action to approve a revision to the El Dorado County Air Quality Management District (EDCAQMD or “District”) portion of the California State Implementation Plan (SIP). This revision concerns the District's demonstration regarding reasonably available control technology (RACT) requirements for the 2008 8-hour ozone National Ambient Air Quality Standard (NAAQS) and negative declarations for several source categories. We are approving local SIP revisions to demonstrate that RACT is implemented as required under the Clean Air Act (CAA or “the Act”).
This rule is effective on January 30, 2019.
The EPA has established a docket for this action under Docket ID No. EPA–R09–OAR–2018–0602. All documents in the docket are listed on the
Stanley Tong, EPA Region IX, (415) 947–4122,
Throughout this document, “we,” “us” and “our” refer to the EPA.
On October 9, 2018 (83 FR 50548), the EPA proposed to approve EDCAQMD's “Reasonably Available Control Technology (RACT) State Implementation Plan (SIP) Update Analysis Staff Report” (“2017 RACT SIP”), submitted to the EPA by the California Air Resources Board (CARB) on January 4, 2017,
We proposed to approve the
The EPA's proposed action provided a 30-day public comment period. During this period, we received one comment that supported our proposed approval of EDCAQMD's
No comments were submitted that change our assessment of EDCAQMD's
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, the 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 Orders 12866 (58 FR 51735, October 4, 1993) and 13563 (76 FR 3821, January 21, 2011);
• Is not an Executive Order 13771 (82 FR 9339, February 2, 2017) regulatory action because SIP approvals are exempted under Executive Order 12866;
• Does not impose an information collection burden under the provisions of the Paperwork Reduction Act (44 U.S.C. 3501
• 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
• 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 the 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).
In addition, the SIP is not approved to apply on any Indian reservation land or in any other area where the 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).
The Congressional Review Act, 5 U.S.C. 801
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 March 1, 2019. 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 may not be challenged later in proceedings to enforce its requirements. (See section 307(b)(2).)
Environmental protection, Air pollution control, Incorporation by reference, Intergovernmental relations, Nitrogen dioxide, Ozone, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements, Volatile organic compounds.
Part 52, chapter I, title 40 of the Code of Federal Regulations is amended as follows:
42 U.S.C. 7401
(c) * * *
(513) The following plan was submitted on January 4, 2017 by the Governor's designee.
(i) [Reserved]
(ii)
(
(
(a) * * *
(7) * * *
(iv) The following negative declarations for the 2008 NAAQS were adopted by the El Dorado County Air Quality Management District on January 3, 2017, and submitted to the EPA on January 4, 2017.