[Federal Register Volume 81, Number 185 (Friday, September 23, 2016)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 65595-65597]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2016-22883]


=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

40 CFR Part 52

[EPA-R09-OAR-2016-0305; FRL-9952-81-Region 9]


Approval of California Air Plan Revisions, Ventura County Air 
Pollution Control District; Prevention of Significant Deterioration

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Proposed rule.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

SUMMARY: The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is proposing to 
approve revisions to the Ventura County Air Pollution Control District 
(VCAPCD or District) portion of the California State Implementation 
Plan (SIP). The State of California (State) is required under the Clean 
Air Act (CAA or Act) to adopt and implement a SIP-approved Prevention 
of Significant Deterioration (PSD) permit program. These proposed SIP 
revisions would incorporate a PSD rule for the VCAPCD into the SIP to 
establish a PSD permit program for pre-construction review of certain 
new and modified major stationary sources in attainment and 
unclassifiable areas within the District. We are taking public comments 
on this proposal and plan to follow with a final action following 
consideration of the public comments received.

DATES: Any comments must arrive by October 24, 2016.

ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, identified by Docket ID No. EPA-R09-
OAR-2016-0305 at http://www.regulations.gov, or via email to 
[email protected]. 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: Ya-Ting (Sheila) Tsai, EPA Region IX, 
(415) 972-3328, [email protected].

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 actions?
II. The EPA's Evaluation and Action
    A. How is the EPA evaluating the rule actions?
    B. Do the rules meet the evaluation criteria?
    C. Transfer of Existing Permits Issued by the EPA and Program 
Implementation
    D. Public Comment and Proposed 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 proposal with the dates 
on which they were revised or repealed by the local air agency and the 
dates of the corresponding SIP submittals to the EPA by the California 
Air Resources Board (CARB). Through these submittals, CARB is 
requesting revisions to the SIP to incorporate the PSD program for the 
VCAPCD into the SIP. The CARB's submittal of March 11, 2016 requested 
the EPA's approval of VCAPCD Rule 26.13 into the SIP, and its submittal 
dated August 23, 2011 requested that the EPA remove VCAPCD Rule 26.10 
from the SIP.

                                         Table 1--Submitted Rule Actions
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
        Rule No.                 Rule title                    Action               Action date   Submitted date
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
26.10..................  New Source Review--        Repealed....................       6/28/2011       8/23/2011
                          Prevention of
                          Significant
                          Deterioration.
26.13..................  New Source Review--        Revised.....................      11/10/2015       3/11/2016
                          Prevention of
                          Significant
                          Deterioration (PSD).
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    On April 19, 2016, the EPA determined that the March 11, 2016 CARB 
submittal requesting approval of VCAPCD Rule 26.13 into the SIP met the 
completeness criteria in 40 CFR part 51 Appendix V, which must be met 
before formal EPA review. On February 23, 2012, the CARB submittal 
requesting the removal of VCAPCD Rule 26.10 from the SIP was deemed by 
operation of law to meet the completeness criteria in 40 CFR part 51 
Appendix V.

B. Are there other versions of these rules?

    The EPA approved Rule 26.10, New Source Review--Prevention of 
Significant Deterioration into the VCAPCD portion of the California SIP

[[Page 65596]]

on December 7, 2000 (65 FR 76567); however, the EPA's approval of this 
rule was not an approval of a PSD program for the VCAPCD. Rather, 
VCAPCD Rule 26.10 simply confirmed that new major sources and major 
modifications within the District must comply with the applicable 
requirements for federal PSD permitting in 40 CFR 52.21, and provided 
that any such source must obtain separate permits from the District and 
the EPA.
    On June 28, 2011, VCAPCD adopted Rule 26.13, New Source Review--
Prevention of Significant Deterioration (PSD) with the intent to assume 
PSD permitting responsibility for sources located in Ventura County 
upon the EPA's SIP approval of the rule. On the same date, the VCAPCD 
repealed local PSD Rule 26.10 for purposes of State and local law. In a 
letter dated August 4, 2011, the VCAPCD submitted a request to CARB 
that Rule 26.13 be added to the Ventura County portion of the SIP and 
that Rule 26.10 be removed from the SIP. On August 23, 2011, CARB 
submitted a proposed SIP revision to the EPA requesting the approval of 
Rule 26.13 into the SIP and the removal of Rule 26.10 from the SIP.
    However, EPA staff subsequently determined that the version of Rule 
26.13 adopted by the District on June 28, 2011 contained certain 
deficiencies and could benefit from clarifying changes, and notified 
the District about these deficiencies. To address these deficiencies, 
the VCAPCD adopted revisions to Rule 26.13 on November 10, 2015, and 
CARB submitted the revised version of this rule to the EPA for SIP 
approval on March 11, 2016. Accordingly, the EPA's proposed action 
addresses the current version of Rule 26.13, as revised on November 10, 
2015 and submitted to the EPA on March 11, 2016. If the EPA approves 
Rule 26.13, the EPA will add revised Rule 26.13 to the SIP and Rule 
26.10 will be removed from the SIP.

C. What is the purpose of the submitted rule actions?

    Section 110(a) of the CAA requires states to adopt and submit 
regulations for the implementation, maintenance and enforcement of the 
primary and secondary NAAQS. Specifically, sections 110(a)(2)(C), 
110(a)(2)(D)(i)(II), and 110(a)(2)(J) of the Act require such state 
plans to meet the applicable requirements of section 165 relating to a 
pre-construction permit program for the prevention of significant 
deterioration of air quality and visibility protection. VCAPCD Rule 
26.13 is intended to implement a pre-construction PSD permit program as 
required by section 165 of the CAA for certain new and modified major 
stationary sources located in attainment and unclassifiable areas 
within the District. Because the State does not currently have a SIP-
approved PSD program within the VCAPCD, the EPA is currently the PSD 
permitting authority within the VCAPCD, and implements the federal PSD 
program under 40 CFR 52.21, as Rule 26.10 reiterates. Approval of 
VCAPCD Rule 26.13 into the SIP, and removal of Rule 26.10 from the SIP, 
will transfer PSD permitting authority from the EPA to the VCAPCD. The 
EPA would then assume the role of overseeing the VCAPCD's PSD 
permitting program, as intended by the CAA.

II. The EPA's Evaluation and Action

A. How is the EPA evaluating the rule actions?

    SIP rules must be enforceable (see CAA section 110(a)(2)), must not 
interfere with applicable requirements concerning attainment and 
reasonable further progress or other CAA requirements (see CAA section 
110(l)), and must not modify certain SIP control requirements in 
nonattainment areas without ensuring equivalent or greater emissions 
reductions (see CAA section 193). Other relevant statutory and 
regulatory provisions for our review of the submitted rule include CAA 
section 165 and section 51.166 of title 40 of the Code of Federal 
Regulations (40 CFR 51.166). CAA section 165 requires states to adopt a 
pre-construction permitting program for certain new and modified major 
stationary sources located in attainment areas and unclassifiable 
areas. 40 CFR 51.166 establishes the specific requirements for SIP-
approved PSD permit programs that must be met to satisfy the 
requirements of section 165 of the CAA.

B. Do the rules meet the evaluation criteria?

    With some exclusions and revisions, VCAPCD Rule 26.13, as submitted 
by the CARB in March 2016, incorporated by reference the EPA's federal 
PSD program requirements at 40 CFR 52.21, as of September 1, 2015. We 
generally consider the EPA's PSD permit program requirements at 40 CFR 
52.21 to be consistent with the criteria for SIP-approved PSD permit 
programs in 40 CFR 51.166. However, we conducted a review of VCAPCD 
Rule 26.13 to ensure that all requirements of 40 CFR 51.166 were met by 
this District rule. Our detailed evaluation is available as an 
attachment to the technical support document (TSD) for this proposed 
rulemaking action. We also reviewed the revisions that the District 
made to the provisions of 40 CFR 52.21 that were incorporated by 
reference into the rule, such as revising certain terms and definitions 
to reflect that the District, rather than the EPA, will be the PSD 
permitting authority following SIP approval of the District's PSD rule. 
We also determined that the removal of Rule 26.10 from the SIP would be 
appropriate concurrent with approval of Rule 26.13 into the SIP, 
because the applicable PSD requirements for federal PSD permitting in 
40 CFR 52.21 referenced in Rule 26.10 would no longer apply once the 
EPA approves VCAPCD's Rule 26.13 into the SIP. Based on our review of 
Rule 26.13 and the underlying statutory and regulatory requirements 
governing this action, we are proposing to find the SIP revision for 
the District's PSD rules acceptable under CAA sections 110(a), 110(l) 
and 165 and 40 CFR 51.166.
    The EPA's TSD for this rulemaking action has more information about 
Rule 26.13, including our evaluation and recommendation to approve it 
into the SIP.

C. Transfer of Existing Permits Issued by the EPA and Program 
Implementation

    The VCAPCD requested approval to exercise its authority to 
administer the PSD program with respect to those sources located in 
Ventura County that have existing PSD permits issued by the EPA. This 
would include authority to conduct general administration of these 
existing permits, authority to process and issue any and all subsequent 
PSD permit actions relating to such permits (e.g., modifications, 
amendments, or revisions of any nature), and authority to enforce such 
permits.
    Consistent with section 110(a)(2)(E)(i) of the Act, the SIP 
submittal and additional information provided by the District make 
clear that that VCAPCD has the authority under state statute and rule 
to administer the PSD permit program, including but not limited to the 
authority to administer, process and issue any and all permit 
decisions, and enforce PSD permit requirements within the District. 
This applies to PSD permits that the District will issue and to 
existing PSD permits issued by the EPA that are to be transferred to 
the District upon the effective date of the EPA's approval of the PSD 
SIP submittal.
    We have also determined that the District has adequate personnel 
and funding to administer the PSD program.

[[Page 65597]]

D. Public Comment and Proposed Action

    As authorized in section 110(k)(3) of the Act, the EPA proposes to 
fully approve District Rule 26.13 into the Ventura County portion of 
the SIP because we believe it fulfills all relevant CAA requirements. 
We also propose to remove District Rule 26.10 from the SIP concurrent 
with our final approval of Rule 26.13, for the reasons discussed above. 
If we take final action to approve Rule 26.13, our final action will 
incorporate Rule 26.13 into the federally enforceable SIP and remove 
Rule 26.10 from the SIP.
    We will accept comments from the public on this proposal until 
October 24, 2016.

III. Incorporation by Reference

    In this rule, the EPA is proposing to include in a final EPA rule 
regulatory text that includes incorporation by reference. In accordance 
with requirements of 1 CFR 51.5, the EPA is proposing to incorporate by 
reference VCAPCD Rule 26.13 as described in Table 1 of this notice. The 
EPA has made, and will continue to make, this document available 
electronically through www.regulations.gov and in hard copy at U.S. 
Environmental Protection Agency Region IX (AIR-3), 75 Hawthorne Street, 
San Francisco, CA 94105-3901.

IV. 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, the EPA's role is to approve State 
choices, provided that they meet the criteria of the Clean Air Act. 
Accordingly, this proposed action merely proposes to approve State law 
as meeting federal requirements and does not impose additional 
requirements beyond those imposed by State law. For that reason, this 
proposed 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, 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).

List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52

    Environmental protection, Air pollution control, Carbon monoxide, 
Greenhouse gases, Incorporation by reference, Intergovernmental 
relations, Lead, Nitrogen dioxide, Ozone, Particulate matter, Reporting 
and recordkeeping requirements, Sulfur oxides, Volatile organic 
compounds.

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

    Dated: September 14, 2016.
Alexis Strauss,
Acting Regional Administrator, Region IX.
[FR Doc. 2016-22883 Filed 9-22-16; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 6560-50-P