[Federal Register Volume 77, Number 227 (Monday, November 26, 2012)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 70376-70380]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2012-28217]
=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
40 CFR Part 52
[EPA-R09-OAR-2012-0734; FRL-9753-4]
Withdrawal of Approval of Air Quality Implementation Plans and
Findings of Failure To Submit Required Plans; California; San Joaquin
Valley; 1-Hour and 8-Hour Ozone Extreme Area Plan Elements
AGENCY: U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).
ACTION: Final rule.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: EPA is withdrawing its March 8, 2010 final action approving
State Implementation Plan (SIP) revisions submitted by California to
provide for attainment of the 1-hour ozone National Ambient Air Quality
Standards (NAAQS) in the San Joaquin Valley extreme ozone nonattainment
area. In addition, EPA is withdrawing its March 1, 2012 determination
that the California SIP satisfies the requirement regarding offsetting
emissions growth caused by growth in vehicle miles traveled (VMT) under
the Clean Air Act (CAA) for the 1997 8-hour ozone NAAQS in the San
Joaquin Valley. Finally, EPA is finding that California has failed to
submit required SIP revisions to provide for attainment of the 1-hour
ozone NAAQS and to address the VMT emissions offset requirement for the
1997 8-hour ozone NAAQS in the San Joaquin Valley. Under the CAA, these
findings of failure to submit trigger the 18-month time clock for
mandatory imposition of sanctions and the two-year time clock for EPA
to promulgate federal implementation plans.
DATES: The rule is effective November 26, 2012.
ADDRESSES: EPA has established docket number EPA-R09-OAR-2012-0734 for
this action. The index to the docket is available electronically at
www.regulations.gov and in hard copy at EPA Region 9, 75 Hawthorne
Street, San Francisco, California. While all documents in the docket
are listed in the index, some may be publicly available only at the
hard copy location (e.g., copyrighted material) and some may not be
publicly available at 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: Frances Wicher, Air Planning Office
(AIR-2), (415) 972-3957, [email protected].
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Throughout this document, ``we'', ``us'' and
``our'' refer to EPA.
Table of Contents
I. San Joaquin Valley 2004 1-Hour Ozone Plan
A. Withdrawal of EPA's Approval of the 2004 1-Hour Ozone Plan
B. Finding of Failure To Submit a SIP To Provide for Attainment
of the 1-Hour Ozone Standards in the SJV Extreme 1-Hour Ozone
Nonattainment Area
II. VMT Emissions Offset Requirement for the 1997 8-Hour Ozone
Standards
[[Page 70377]]
A. Withdrawal of EPA's Determination That the 2007 8-Hour Ozone
Plan Satisfies the VMT Emissions Offset Requirement in CAA Section
182(d)(1)(A)
B. Finding of Failure To Submit a SIP Meeting the CAA Section
182(d)(1)(A) VMT Emissions Offset Requirement for the SJV Extreme 8-
Hour Ozone Nonattainment Area
III. Final Actions
IV. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews
I. San Joaquin Valley 2004 1-Hour Ozone Plan
A. Withdrawal of EPA's Approval of the 2004 1-Hour Ozone Plan
EPA is withdrawing its March 8, 2010 final action approving SIP
revisions submitted by California under the CAA to provide for
attainment of the 1-hour ozone national ambient air quality standards
(NAAQS) in the San Joaquin Valley (SJV) extreme ozone nonattainment
area (2004 1-Hour Ozone Plan) (75 FR 10420). The effect of this action
is to entirely withdraw the 2004 1-Hour Ozone Plan from the applicable
California SIP. We proposed this action on September 19, 2012 (77 FR
58078) and provided a 30-day period for the public to submit comments.
We received no comments.
EPA is taking this action in response to a decision of the U.S.
Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit in Sierra Club et. al v. EPA,
671 F.3d 955 (9th Cir. 2012) (Sierra Club). For further background on
this court decision and EPA's rationale for today's action, please see
our proposed rule at 77 FR 58078.
B. Finding of Failure To Submit a SIP To Provide for Attainment of the
1-Hour Ozone Standards in the SJV Extreme 1-Hour Ozone Nonattainment
Area
Following our proposed rule to withdraw our March 8, 2010 approval
of the 2004 1-Hour Ozone Plan into the SIP, California submitted a
letter stating its intention to withdraw its submission of this plan to
EPA, effective immediately upon EPA's final withdrawal of the March 8,
2010 approval. See letter dated October 15, 2012, from James N.
Goldstene, Executive Officer, California Air Resources Board, to Jared
Blumenfeld, Regional Administrator, EPA Region 9. As a consequence of
EPA's final withdrawal of our approval of the 2004 1-Hour Ozone Plan
and California's simultaneous withdrawal of the 2004 1-Hour Ozone Plan
from EPA, the State is now in default of its obligation to submit a SIP
to provide for attainment of the 1-hour ozone NAAQS in the SJV extreme
ozone nonattainment area.\1\ Therefore, simultaneously with this
withdrawal of approval, EPA is finding that California has failed to
submit an extreme area plan to provide for attainment of the 1-hour
ozone NAAQS in the SJV nonattainment area.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ California was obligated to submit SIP revisions to address
the requirement in CAA section 182(d)(1)(A) regarding offsetting
emissions growth caused by growth in VMT for the 1-hour ozone
standard in SJV no later than May 31, 2002, and additional SIP
revisions meeting the CAA's extreme area requirements for the 1-hour
ozone standard in SJV no later than November 15, 2004. See 66 FR
56476, 56481 (November 8, 2001) (final rule finding that SJV failed
to attain 1-hour ozone NAAQS by applicable attainment date and
reclassifying SJV from ``serious'' to ``severe'' nonattainment,
effective December 10, 2001) and 69 FR 20550 (April 16, 2004) (final
rule reclassifying SJV from ``severe'' to ``extreme'' nonattainment
for 1-hour ozone NAAQS, effective May 17, 2004).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
As explained in our proposed rule (77 FR at 58079-80), the plan
elements under subparts 1 and 2 of part D, title I of the CAA that
California is required to submit for the 1-hour ozone NAAQS for the SJV
are as follows: (1) A rate of progress (ROP) demonstration meeting the
requirements of CAA sections 172(c)(2) and 182(c)(2); (2) ROP
contingency measures meeting the requirements of CAA sections 172(c)(9)
and 182(c)(9); (3) an attainment demonstration meeting the requirements
of CAA sections 182(c)(2)(A) and 172(a)(2); (4) attainment contingency
measures meeting the requirements of CAA sections 172(c)(9); (5) a
reasonably available control measures (RACM) demonstration meeting the
requirements of CAA section 172(c)(1); (6) provisions satisfying the
requirements for clean fuels/clean technologies for boilers in CAA
182(e)(3); and (7) provisions satisfying the vehicle miles traveled
(VMT) provisions of CAA section 182(d)(1)(A). See 40 CFR 51.905(a)(1)
and 51.900(f); see also 75 FR 10420, 10436-37.
This finding of failure to submit is not subject to the notice-and-
comment requirements of the Administrative Procedure Act (APA), 5
U.S.C. 553(b). EPA believes that because of the limited time provided
by the CAA to make findings of failure to submit, Congress did not
intend such findings to be subject to notice-and-comment rulemaking.
However, to the extent such findings are subject to notice-and-comment
rulemaking, we invoke the good cause exception pursuant to APA section
553(b)(3)(B). Notice and comment are unnecessary because no EPA
judgment is involved in making a non-substantive finding of failure to
submit SIPs required by the CAA. Furthermore, notice and comment would
be contrary to the public interest because it would divert EPA
resources from the critical substantive review of complete SIPs. See 58
FR 51270, 51272, note 7 (October 1, 1993); 59 FR 39832, 39853 (August
4, 1994).
II. VMT Emissions Offset Requirement for 1997 8-Hour Ozone Standards
A. Withdrawal of EPA's Determination That the 2007 8-Hour Ozone Plan
Satisfies the VMT Emissions Offset Requirement in CAA Section
182(d)(1)(A)
EPA is withdrawing its March 1, 2012 determination that
California's SIP to provide for attainment of the 1997 8-hour ozone
NAAQS \2\ in the SJV extreme ozone nonattainment area (2007 8-Hour
Ozone Plan) satisfies the requirement regarding emissions growth caused
by growth in vehicle miles traveled in CAA section 182(d)(1)(A) for the
1997 8-hour ozone NAAQS. Section 182(d)(1)(A) of the Act requires, in
relevant part, that each state containing a ``severe'' or ``extreme''
ozone nonattainment area submit a SIP revision that identifies and
adopts specific enforceable transportation control strategies and
measures to offset any growth in emissions from growth in vehicle miles
traveled or numbers of vehicle trips in the area (VMT emissions offset
requirement).\3\ We proposed this action on September 19, 2012 (77 FR
58078) and provided a 30-day period for the public to submit comments.
We received no comments.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\2\ All references in this preamble to the 8-hour NAAQS are to
the 0.08 parts per million standards established in 1997 at 40 CFR
50.10(b).
\3\ CAA section 182(d)(1)(A) also requires states to adopt
transportation control strategies and measures as necessary to
demonstrate attainment and reasonable further progress. These
requirements of section 182(d)(1)(A) are not at issue in this
action.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
EPA is taking this action in response to a decision of the U.S.
Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit in Association of Irritated
Residents v. EPA, 632 F.3d 584 (9th Cir. 2011), reprinted as amended on
January 27, 2012, 686 F.3d 668, further amended February 13, 2012
(AIR). For further background on this court decision and EPA's
rationale for today's action, please see our proposed rule at 77 FR
58078.
This withdrawal of approval is limited to our determination that
the 2007 8-Hour Ozone Plan satisfies the VMT emissions offset
requirement in CAA section 182(d)(1)(A) for the 1997 8-hour ozone
NAAQS. All other determinations in our March 1, 2012 final rule
approving the 2007 8-Hour Ozone Plan at 77 FR 12652 remain unchanged
and in effect.
[[Page 70378]]
B. Finding of Failure To Submit a SIP Meeting the CAA Section
182(d)(1)(A) VMT Emissions Offset Requirement for the SJV 8-Hour Ozone
Nonattainment Area
EPA's determination that the 2007 8-Hour Ozone Plan satisfies the
VMT emissions offset requirement for the 1997 8-hour ozone NAAQS was
made in the absence of any specific demonstration submitted by the
State for this purpose and was based on EPA's evaluation of emissions
inventory data submitted as part of the 2007 8-Hour Ozone Plan. See 76
FR 57846, 57863 (September 16, 2011) and 77 FR 12652, 12666 and 12670
(March 1, 2012). Thus, as a consequence of our withdrawal of our
determination that the 2007 8-Hour Ozone Plan satisfies the VMT
emissions offset requirement in CAA section 182(d)(1)(A), California is
now in default of its obligation to submit a SIP revision meeting this
CAA requirement for the 1997 8-hour ozone NAAQS in the SJV extreme
ozone nonattainment area.\4\ Therefore, simultaneously with this
withdrawal of approval, EPA is finding that California has failed to
submit a required SIP revision to meet the VMT emissions offset
requirement in CAA section 182(d)(1)(A) for the 1997 8-hour ozone NAAQS
in the SJV extreme ozone nonattainment area.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\4\ Consistent with CAA section 182(d)(1)(A) and EPA's
implementation regulations for the 1997 8-hour ozone NAAQS at 40 CFR
part 51, subpart X, we interpret the 2-year timeframe for submission
of the VMT emissions offset SIP for the 1997 8-hour ozone NAAQS to
run from the effective date of EPA's reclassification of SJV from
``serious'' to ``extreme'' nonattainment for this standard.
Accordingly, California was obligated to submit a VMT emissions
offset SIP for the 1997 8-hour ozone NAAQS for the SJV area no later
than June 4, 2012. See 75 FR 24409 (May 5, 2010) (final rule
reclassifying SJV from ``serious'' to ``extreme'' nonattainment for
1997 8-hour ozone NAAQS, effective June 4, 2010).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
This finding of failure to submit is not subject to the notice-and-
comment requirements of the APA. EPA believes that because of the
limited time provided by the CAA to make findings of failure to submit,
Congress did not intend such findings to be subject to notice-and-
comment rulemaking. However, to the extent such findings are subject to
notice-and-comment rulemaking, we invoke the good cause exception
pursuant to APA section 553(b)(3)(B). Notice and comment are
unnecessary because no EPA judgment is involved in making a non-
substantive finding of failure to submit SIPs required by the CAA.
Furthermore, notice and comment would be contrary to the public
interest because it would divert EPA resources from the critical
substantive review of complete SIPs. See 58 FR 51270, 51272, note 7
(October 1, 1993); 59 FR 39832, 39853 (August 4, 1994).
III. Final Actions
A. Withdrawals of Approvals
EPA is withdrawing its March 8, 2010 final action approving the
2004 1-Hour Ozone Plan, which California submitted to provide for
attainment of the 1-hour ozone NAAQS in the SJV extreme ozone
nonattainment area (75 FR 10420, March 8, 2010).
In addition, EPA is withdrawing its March 1, 2012 determination
that the 2007 8-Hour Ozone Plan, which California submitted to provide
for attainment of the 1997 8-hour ozone NAAQS in the SJV, satisfies the
VMT emissions offset requirement in CAA section 182(d)(1)(A) for the
1997 8-hour ozone NAAQS in the SJV extreme ozone nonattainment area (77
FR 12652 at 12670, March 1, 2012).
B. Findings of Failure To Submit Required SIP Revisions
As a consequence of EPA's final withdrawal of our previous approval
of the 2004 1-Hour Ozone Plan and California's simultaneous withdrawal
of its submission of the 2004 1-Hour Ozone Plan, EPA is finding that
California has failed to submit a required SIP revision to provide for
attainment of the 1-hour ozone NAAQS in the SJV extreme ozone
nonattainment area.
In addition, as a consequence of EPA's withdrawal of our
determination that the 2007 8-Hour Ozone Plan satisfies the VMT
emissions offset requirement in CAA section 182(d)(1)(A) for the 1997
8-hour ozone NAAQS, EPA is finding that California has failed to submit
a required SIP revision that identifies and adopts transportation
control strategies and measures to offset any growth in emissions from
growth in VMT or the numbers of vehicle trips as required by CAA
section 182(d)(1)(A) for the 1997 8-hour ozone NAAQS in the SJV extreme
ozone nonattainment area.
Under CAA section 179(a), a finding of failure to submit a plan or
plan element required by part D of title I of the Act triggers sanction
clocks under CAA section 179(b). These clocks run from the effective
date of EPA's finding. The first sanction, the offset sanction in CAA
section 179(b)(2), will apply in the SJV extreme ozone nonattainment
area 18 months from November 26, 2012. The second sanction, highway
funding sanctions in CAA section 179(b)(1), will apply in the area six
months after the offset sanction is imposed, in accordance with 40 CFR
52.31. The State can end these sanction clocks or lift any imposed
sanctions by making complete SIP submittals addressing the CAA's
extreme area requirements for the 1-hour ozone NAAQS and the VMT
emissions offset requirement for the 1997 8-hour ozone NAAQS in the SJV
area.
In addition to these sanctions, CAA section 110(c)(1) provides that
EPA must promulgate a federal implementation plan addressing the CAA's
extreme area requirements for the 1-hour ozone NAAQS and the VMT
emissions offset requirement for the 1997 8-hour ozone NAAQS in the SJV
area, no later than two years after November 26, 2012, unless the State
submits and EPA approves SIP revisions addressing these requirements
before that date.
C. Effective Date Under the Administrative Procedure Act
These actions will be effective on November 26, 2012. Under APA
section 553(d)(3), an agency rulemaking may take effect before 30 days
after the date of publication in the Federal Register if an agency has
good cause to specify an earlier effective date. Today's actions to
withdraw EPA's previous approval of the 2004 1-Hour Ozone Plan and to
withdraw EPA's previous determination that the 2007 8-Hour Ozone Plan
satisfies the VMT emissions offset requirement in CAA section
182(d)(1)(A) for the 1997 8-hour ozone NAAQS are being taken in
response to the Ninth Circuit's decisions in the Sierra Club and AIR
decisions, as discussed above and in our proposed rule. The purpose of
a delayed effective date is to ensure that regulated entities have
advance notice of obligations with which they must comply. Because
today's withdrawal actions do not place a burden on any entity, a
delayed compliance date is unnecessary. Moreover, because the court has
ruled that these prior determinations were inconsistent with the CAA,
it is in the public interest for the effective date of our actions
withdrawing these approvals to become effective immediately. These
reasons support an effective date prior to 30 days after the date of
publication of these withdrawals of approval.
In addition, EPA's finding that California has failed to submit an
extreme area plan to provide for attainment of the 1-hour ozone NAAQS
in the SJV is a necessary consequence of EPA's withdrawal of approval
of the 2004 1-Hour Ozone Plan and California's simultaneous withdrawal
of this plan from EPA. Similarly, EPA's
[[Page 70379]]
finding that California has failed to submit a VMT emissions offset SIP
under CAA section 182(d)(1)(A) for the 1997 8-hour ozone NAAQS for the
SJV is a necessary consequence of EPA's withdrawal of its determination
that the 2007 8-Hour Ozone Plan satisfies this requirement. These
findings of failure to submit concern required CAA submittals that are
overdue. We previously cautioned California and the public that we
would make such findings and that these findings would be effective
upon publication in the Federal Register. See 77 FR 58078 at 58079,
58080. Finally, these findings of failure to submit simply start clocks
that will not result in sanctions against the State for 18 months and
that the State may turn off by making complete SIP submittals. These
reasons support an effective date prior to 30 days after the date of
publication of these findings.
IV. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews
A. Executive Order 12866, Regulatory Planning and Review
This action is not a ``significant regulatory action'' under the
terms of Executive Order 12866 and is therefore not subject to review
under it.
B. Paperwork Reduction Act
This action does not impose an information collection burden under
the provisions of the Paperwork Reduction Act, 44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.
Burden is defined at 5 CFR 1320.3(b).
C. Regulatory Flexibility Act
The Regulatory Flexibility Act (RFA) generally requires an agency
to conduct a regulatory flexibility analysis of any rule subject to
notice and comment rulemaking requirements unless the agency certifies
that the rule will not have a significant economic impact on a
substantial number of small entities. Small entities include small
businesses, small not-for-profit enterprises, and small governmental
jurisdictions.
This action to withdraw previous EPA approvals and determinations
and to make findings of failure to submit under the CAA will not have a
significant impact on a substantial number of small entities because
this action does not create any new requirements. This action relates
to the existing requirements in the CAA that states submit SIPs to
provide for attainment and to meet other applicable CAA requirements in
each of their 1-hour ozone nonattainment areas and to submit
transportation control strategies and measures to offset emissions
growth from growth in VMT or the numbers of vehicle trips in each of
their severe and extreme 8-hour ozone nonattainment areas. Therefore,
because this action does not create any new requirements, I certify
that this action will not have a significant economic impact on a
substantial number of small entities.
D. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act
Under sections 202 of the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995
(``Unfunded Mandates Act''), signed into law on March 22, 1995, EPA
must prepare a budgetary impact statement to accompany any proposed or
final rule that includes a Federal mandate that may result in estimated
costs to State, local, or tribal governments in the aggregate; or to
the private sector, of $100 million or more. Under section 205, EPA
must select the most cost-effective and least burdensome alternative
that achieves the objectives of the rule and is consistent with
statutory requirements. Section 203 requires EPA to establish a plan
for informing and advising any small governments that may be
significantly or uniquely impacted by the rule.
EPA has determined that this action to withdraw previous EPA
approvals and determinations and to make findings of failure to submit
under the CAA does not include a Federal mandate that may result in
estimated costs of $100 million or more to either State, local, or
tribal governments in the aggregate, or to the private sector. This
action relates to the existing requirements in the CAA that states
submit SIPs to provide for attainment and to meet other applicable CAA
requirements in each of their 1-hour ozone nonattainment areas and to
submit transportation control strategies and measures to offset
emissions growth from growth in VMT or the numbers of vehicle trips in
each of their severe and extreme 8-hour ozone nonattainment areas.
Accordingly, no additional costs to State, local, or tribal
governments, or to the private sector, result from this action.
E. Executive Order 13132, Federalism
This action does not have federalism implications. It will not have
substantial direct effects on the States, on the relationship between
the national government and the State, or on the distribution of power
and responsibilities among the various levels of government, as
specified in Executive Order 13132. The CAA establishes the scheme
whereby states take the lead in developing SIPs including SIPs to
attain the NAAQS and to meet other applicable CAA requirements
including the VMT emissions offset requirement in CAA section
182(d)(1)(A)). This action will not modify this relationship. Thus,
Executive Order 13132 does not apply to this action.
F. Executive Order 13175, Coordination With Indian Tribal Governments
This final action does not have tribal implications, as specified
in Executive Order 13175. It will not have substantial direct effects
on tribal governments, 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.
Thus, Executive Order 13175 does not apply to this final action.
G. Executive Order 13045, Protection of Children From Environmental
Health Risks and Safety Risks
EPA interprets Executive Order 13045 (62 FR 19885, April 23, 1997)
as applying only to those regulatory actions that concern health or
safety risks, such that the analysis required under section 5-501 of
the Executive Order has the potential to influence the regulation. This
action is not subject to Executive Order 13045 because it is
withdrawing previous EPA approvals and determinations and making
findings that California has failed to submit a SIP that meets the
requirements of CAA the SJV extreme ozone nonattainment area. The
findings of failure to submit establish a 24-month deadline for EPA to
promulgate a FIP to address the outstanding SIP requirements unless,
prior to that time, California submits, and EPA approves, the required
SIPs.
H. Executive Order 13211, Actions That Significantly Affect Energy
Supply, Distribution, or Use
This rule is not subject to Executive Order 13211, ``Actions
Concerning Regulations That Significantly Affect Energy Supply,
Distribution, or Use'' (66 FR 28355, May 22, 2001) because it is not a
significant regulatory action under Executive Order 12866.
I. National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act
Section 12 of the National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act
(NTTAA) of 1995 requires Federal agencies to evaluate existing
technical standards when developing a new regulation. To comply with
NTTAA, EPA must consider and use ``voluntary consensus standards''
(VCS) if available and applicable when developing programs and policies
unless doing so would be inconsistent with applicable law or otherwise
impractical.
[[Page 70380]]
EPA believes that VCS are inapplicable to this action. Today's
action does not require the public to perform activities conducive to
the use of VCS.
J. Executive Order 12898: Federal Actions To Address Environmental
Justice in Minority Populations and Low-Income Populations
Executive Order 12898 (59 FR 7629 (February 16, 1994)) establishes
federal executive policy on environmental justice. Its main provision
directs federal agencies, to the greatest extent practicable and
permitted by law, to make environmental justice part of their mission
by identifying and addressing, as appropriate, disproportionately high
and adverse human health or environmental effects of their programs,
policies, and activities on minority populations and low-income
populations in the United States.
EPA has determined that this final action will not have
disproportionately high and adverse human health or environmental
effects on minority or low-income populations because it does not
directly affect the level of protection provided to human health or the
environment. This notice is withdrawing previous EPA approvals and
determinations and making findings that California has failed to submit
SIPs that meet certain requirements of CAA for the SJV extreme ozone
nonattainment area.
K. Congressional Review Act
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 rule 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.
section 804(2). This rule is effective on November 26, 2012.
L. Petitions for Judicial Review
Under CAA section 307(b)(1), petitions for judicial review of this
action must be filed in the United States Court of Appeals for the
appropriate circuit by January 25, 2013. Filing a petition for
reconsideration by the Administrator of this final action does not
affect the finality of this rule 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)).
List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52
Environmental protection, Air pollution control, Incorporation by
reference, Intergovernmental relations, Nitrogen dioxide, Ozone,
Volatile organic compounds.
Authority: 42 U.S.C. 7401 et seq.
Dated: November 9, 2012.
Jared Blumenfeld,
EPA Regional Administrator, Region 9.
For the reasons discussed in the preamble, EPA amends 40 CFR part
52 to read as follows:
PART 52--APPROVAL AND PROMULGATION OF IMPLEMENTATION PLANS
0
1. The authority citation for part 52 continues to read as follows:
Authority: 42 U.S.C. 7401 et seq.
Subpart F--California
0
2. Section 52.220 is amended by:
0
a. Removing and reserving paragraphs (c)(317)(i)(B) and (c)(339)(i)(B);
0
b. Removing paragraph (c)(339)(ii)(C); and
0
c. Removing and reserving paragraphs (c)(369) and (c)(370) to read as
follows:
Sec. 52.220 Identification of plan.
* * * * *
(c) * * *
(317) * * *
(i) * * *
(B) [Reserved]
* * * * *
(339) * * *
(i) * * *
(B) [Reserved]
* * * * *
(369) [Reserved]
(370) [Reserved]
* * * * *
[FR Doc. 2012-28217 Filed 11-23-12; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P