[Federal Register Volume 84, Number 184 (Monday, September 23, 2019)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 49699-49704]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2019-20425]
=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
40 CFR Part 52
[EPA-R09-OAR-2019-0493; FRL-9999-98-Region 9]
Air Plan Conditional Approval; Arizona; Maricopa County
AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).
ACTION: Proposed rule.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is proposing to
conditionally approve revisions to the Maricopa County Air Quality
Department (MCAQD or the County) portion of the Arizona State
Implementation Plan (SIP). These revisions concern emissions of
volatile organic compounds (VOCs) from organic liquid and gasoline
storage and transfer operations. We are proposing to conditionally
approve local rules to regulate these emission sources under the Clean
Air Act (CAA or the Act) and conditionally approve the County's
demonstration regarding Reasonably Available Control Technology (RACT)
requirements for the 2008 8-hour ozone National Ambient Air Quality
Standards (NAAQS) in the Phoenix-Mesa ozone nonattainment area, with
respect to petroleum liquid storage and gasoline transfer and
transport. We are taking comments on this proposal and plan to follow
with a final action.
DATES: Any comments must arrive by October 23, 2019.
ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, identified by Docket ID No. EPA-R09-
OAR-2019-0493 at https://www.regulations.gov. For comments submitted at
Regulations.gov, follow the
[[Page 49700]]
online instructions for submitting comments. Once submitted, comments
cannot be edited or removed from Regulations.gov. 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 https://www.epa.gov/dockets/commenting-epa-dockets.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Rebecca Newhouse, EPA Region IX, 75
Hawthorne St., San Francisco, CA 94105, (415) 972-3004,
[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 did the State submit?
B. Are there earlier versions of the submitted documents in the
SIP?
C. What is the purpose of the submitted documents?
II. The EPA's Evaluation and Action
A. How is the EPA evaluating the submitted documents?
B. Do the submitted documents meet the evaluation criteria?
C. What are the deficiencies?
D. What are the commitments to remedy the deficiencies?
E. The EPA's Recommendations To Further Improve the Submitted
Rules
F. Public Comment and Proposed Action
III. Incorporation by Reference
IV. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews
I. The State's Submittal
A. What did the State submit?
Table 1 lists the documents addressed by this proposal with the
dates that they were adopted by the local air agency and submitted by
the Arizona Department of Environmental Quality (ADEQ or the State).
Table 1--Submitted Documents
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Local agency Document Revised Submitted
------------------------------------------------------------------------
MCAQD............ Analysis of \1\ 06/16/2017 06/22/2017
Reasonably Available
Control Technology
for the 2008 8-Hour
Ozone National
Ambient Air Quality
Standard (NAAQS)
State Implementation
Plan (RACT SIP).
MCAQD............ Rule 350: Storage and 11/02/2016 06/22/2017
Transfer of Organic
Liquids (Non-
Gasoline) at an
Organic Liquid
Distribution
Facility.
MCAQD............ Rule 351: Storage and 11/02/2016 06/22/2017
Loading of Gasoline
at Bulk Gasoline
Plants and Bulk
Gasoline Terminals.
MCAQD............ Rule 352: Gasoline 11/02/2016 06/22/2017
Cargo Tank Testing
and Use.
MCAQD............ Rule 353: Storage and 11/02/2016 06/22/2017
Loading of Gasoline
at Gasoline
Dispensing
Facilities.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
On December 22, 2017, the submittal containing the documents listed
in Table 1 was deemed by operation of law to meet the completeness
criteria in 40 CFR part 51 Appendix V, which must be met before formal
EPA review.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ This document is dated December 5, 2016. It was adopted by
the County on June 16, 2017.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
In addition to these SIP submittals, the County and the ADEQ
transmitted letters to the EPA 2 3 committing to adopt and
submit specific enforceable measures within a year of our final action
that would remedy the deficiencies identified in this notice and
further described in the associated technical support documents (TSDs)
for this action.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\2\ Letter dated January 28, 2019, from Philip A. McNeely,
Director, MCAQD, to Misael Cabrera, Director, ADEQ.
\3\ Letter dated February 25, 2019, from Misael Cabrera,
Director, ADEQ, to Michael Stoker, Regional Administrator, EPA,
Region IX.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The County's submittal states that Rules 350, 351, 352 and 353 were
submitted to regulate sources associated with the Control Techniques
Guidelines (CTGs) shown in Table 2:
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\4\ See RACT SIP, Appendix C: CTG RACT Spreadsheet.
Table 2--Rules and Associated CTGs \4\
------------------------------------------------------------------------
County rule Associated CTGs
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Rule 350.......................... Control of Volatile Organic
Emissions from Storage of Petroleum
Liquids in Fixed-Roof Tanks (EPA-
450/2-77-036).
Control of Volatile Organic
Emissions from Petroleum Liquid
Storage in External Floating Roof
Tanks (EPA-450/2-78-047).
Rule 351.......................... Control of Volatile Organic
Emissions from Storage of Petroleum
Liquids in Fixed-Roof Tanks (EPA-
450/2-77-036).
Control of Volatile Organic
Emissions from Petroleum Liquid
Storage in External Floating Roof
Tanks (EPA-450/2-78-047).
Control of Hydrocarbons from Tank
Truck Gasoline Loading Terminals
(EPA-450/2-77-026).
Control of Volatile Organic
Emissions from Bulk Gasoline Plants
(EPA-450/2-77-035).
Rule 352.......................... Control of Volatile Organic Compound
Leaks from Gasoline Tank Trucks and
Vapor Collection Systems (EPA-450/2-
78-051).
Rule 353.......................... Design Criteria for Stage I Vapor
Control Systems--Gasoline Service
Stations (EPA-450/R-75-102).
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[[Page 49701]]
B. Are there earlier versions of the submitted documents in the SIP?
We approved earlier versions of the rules listed in Table 1 into
the SIP on September 5, 1995 (Rules 350 and 352) (60 FR 46024),
February 9, 1998 (Rule 351) (63 FR 6489), and on February 1, 1996 (Rule
353) (61 FR 3578). There is no previously approved version of the RACT
SIP for the 2008 8-hour ozone standard in the MCAQD portion of the
Arizona SIP. The ADEQ previously submitted the documents in Table 1 in
a SIP revision on December 19, 2016, along with the County's RACT SIP.
However, this submittal did not include documentation that showed the
entirety of the County's SIP revision had met the public notice
requirements required for completeness under 40 CFR part 51 Appendix V.
The County's June 22, 2017 submittal was provided in response to this
feedback, and the State withdrew the December 19, 2016 submittal on May
17, 2019.\5\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\5\ Letter dated May 17, 2019, from Timothy S. Franquist,
Director, Air Quality Division, ADEQ, to Michael Stoker, Regional
Administrator, Region IX.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
C. What is the purpose of the submitted documents?
Emissions of VOCs contribute to the production of ground-level
ozone, smog and particulate matter, which harm human health and the
environment. Section 110(a) of the CAA requires states to submit
regulations that control VOC emissions. Section 182(b)(2) requires that
SIPs for ozone nonattainment areas classified as Moderate or above
implement RACT for any source covered by a CTG document and for any
major sources of VOCs. The MCAQD is subject to this requirement as it
regulates a portion of the Phoenix-Mesa ozone nonattainment area, which
is classified as Moderate for the 2008 8-hr ozone NAAQS (40 CFR
81.303).
Section III.D of the preamble to the EPA's final rule to implement
the 2008 ozone 8-hour ozone NAAQS (80 FR 12264, March 6, 2015)
discusses RACT requirements. It states in part that RACT SIPs must
contain adopted RACT regulations, certifications where appropriate that
existing provisions are RACT, and/or negative declarations that there
are no sources in the nonattainment areas covered by a specific CTG
category. The County's RACT SIP provides MCAQD's analyses of its
compliance with the CAA section 182 RACT requirements for the 2008 8-
hour ozone NAAQS. As a result of this analysis, the County revised and
submitted the rules listed in Table 1 to establish RACT-level controls
for VOC emissions from the petroleum liquid storage and gasoline
transfer and transport CTG source categories shown in Table 2.
The EPA's TSDs have more information about the submitted rules and
RACT SIP.
II. The EPA's Evaluation and Action
A. How is the EPA evaluating the submitted documents?
Rules in the SIP 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).
Generally, SIP rules must require RACT for each category of sources
covered by a CTG document as well as each major source of VOCs in ozone
nonattainment areas classified as Moderate or above (see CAA section
182(b)(2)). The MCAQD regulates a portion of the Phoenix-Mesa ozone
nonattainment area, which is classified as Moderate for the 2008 8-hr
ozone NAAQS 40 CFR 81.303. Therefore, these rules must implement RACT.
The County's RACT SIP explains that Rules 350, 351, 352, and 353
were revised and submitted in order to meet the RACT requirement for
the source categories listed in Table 2. Accordingly, our evaluation of
whether these rules establish RACT levels of control also constitutes
our evaluation of the approvability of the MCAQD RACT SIP, with respect
to those CTG source categories.
Guidance and policy documents that we used to evaluate
enforceability, revision/relaxation and rule stringency requirements
for the applicable criteria pollutants include the following:
1. ``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).
2. ``Issues Relating to VOC Regulation Cutpoints, Deficiencies, and
Deviations,'' EPA, May 25, 1988 (the Bluebook, revised January 11,
1990).
3. ``Guidance Document for Correcting Common VOC & Other Rule
Deficiencies,'' EPA Region 9, August 21, 2001 (the Little Bluebook).
4. ``Control of Volatile Organic Emissions from Storage of
Petroleum Liquids in Fixed-Roof Tanks,'' EPA-450/2-77-036, December
1977.
5. ``Control of Volatile Organic Emissions from Petroleum Liquid
Storage in External Floating Roof Tanks,'' EPA-450/2-78-047, December
1978.
6. ``Control of Volatile Organic Emissions from Bulk Gasoline
Plants,'' EPA-450/2-77-035, December 1977.
7. ``Control of Hydrocarbons from Tank Truck Gasoline Loading
Terminals,'' EPA-450/2-77-026, October 1977.
8. ``Control of Volatile Organic Compound Leaks from Gasoline Tank
Trucks and Vapor Collection Systems,'' EPA-450/2-78-051, December 1978.
9. ``Design Criteria for Stage I Vapor Control Systems-Gasoline
Service Stations,'' EPA-450/R-75-102, November 1975.
10. ``Alternative Control Techniques Document: Volatile Organic
Liquid Storage in Floating and Fixed Roof Tanks,'' EPA-453/R-94-001,
January 1994.
B. Do the submitted documents meet the evaluation criteria?
Rules 350, 351, 352, and 353 apply to sources of VOC emissions from
organic liquid storage and gasoline transfer and storage operations in
the Phoenix-Mesa area. The four rules are generally more stringent than
the applicable CTGs, have requirements for organic liquid and gasoline
storage and transfer that are generally consistent with other local air
district rules for these source categories, and are largely consistent
with the applicable CAA requirements. However, as identified below, the
rules contain deficiencies that preclude full approval. In a letter
dated January 28, 2019 (the ``commitment letter''), the County
identified certain rule deficiencies and committed to revise those
provisions in accordance with EPA guidance, and submit the revised
rules within eleven months of a conditional approval.\6\ On February
25, 2019, the ADEQ provided its own commitment to submit the County's
revised rules to the EPA within one month after the County's action and
request for SIP revision.\7\ Because the commitments by the County and
ADEQ would remedy the identified rule deficiencies, we propose to
conditionally approve Rules 350, 351, 352, and 353, and the RACT SIP
with respect to the VOC source categories covered by Rules 350, 351,
352, 353 (as provided in Table 2). Summaries of the specific rule
deficiencies and the County's commitments to address those
[[Page 49702]]
deficiencies are included in the following sections.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\6\ Letter dated January 28, 2019, from Philip A. McNeely,
Director, MCAQD, to Misael Cabrera, Director, ADEQ.
\7\ Letter dated February 25, 2019, from Misael Cabrera,
Director, ADEQ, to Michael Stoker, Region Administrator, EPA, Region
IX.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Our TSDs for Rules 350, 351, 352, and 353 provide further details
on our evaluation for these proposed conditional approvals.
C. What are the deficiencies?
The following provisions of Rules 350, 351, 352, and 353 do not
fully satisfy the requirements of section 110 and part D of title I of
the Act and prevent full approval of the SIP revision.
1. Rule 350 Deficiencies \8\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\8\ Rule deficiencies throughout this section marked with an
asterisk (*) also apply to Rule 351; those marked with a dagger
([dagger]) also apply to Rule 352.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
(a) Rule 350 includes exemptions from rule requirements for fuel
consumed or dispensed at the facility directly to users, hazardous
waste, which is undefined, and wastewater and ballast water, none of
which are exempted from the applicable CTGs.
(b) The rule lacks an emissions limit for bulk terminals
transferring organic liquid. The SIP-approved version requires an
emissions limit of 0.08 lbs VOCs/1000 gallons transferred.\9\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\9\ The 0.08 lbs VOC/1000 gallons limit is included in SIP-
approved Rule 351, which contains transfer requirements for organic
liquid and gasoline.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
(c) The rule contains inappropriate use of director's discretion
with respect to the opening of hatches or seals on cargo tanks.*
[dagger]
(d) Several sections do not clearly state rule prohibitions, and
instead require owners and operators with particular types of tanks to
put some amount of liquid into tanks that meet certain requirements.
Section 301.3, in particular, appears to be missing the word ``not'' in
a way that impacts the effectiveness of the requirement.*
(e) The rule exempts roofs from the requirement that they always be
floating on liquid when the tank is being filled, instead of only while
filling after the tank has been emptied completely.*
(f) The rule is not clear regarding which external floating roof
tanks are exempt from the rule's requirements.*
(g) The rule does not clearly specify vapor control requirements
for internal floating roof tanks.
(h) The rule contains an overly broad provision, allowing the
opening of hatches, vent valves, or vapor sealing devices for vacuum
relief when organic liquid is transferred from the cargo tank or
railcar into a storage tank.*
2. Rule 351 Deficiencies \10\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\10\ For additional Rule 351 deficiencies, please see Rule 350
deficiencies (c)-(f) and (h).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
(a) The rule allows the use of a less stringent compliance option
than the SIP-approved rule for controlling VOC vapors from gasoline
storage.\11\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\11\ The vapor loss control requirement is included in SIP-
approved Rule 350, which contains storage requirements for organic
liquid and gasoline.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
(b) Rule 351 requirements for gasoline transfers at bulk plants are
not as strict as requirements that have been demonstrated to be
reasonably available in other air districts, as there is no emissions
limit or vapor recovery efficiency requirement when vapor balance
systems are used.
(c) The rule exempts the loading of aviation gasoline at airports
from the rule's gasoline transfer requirements, which is not exempted
from applicable CTGs or other analogous SIP-approved district
rules.\12\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\12\ This deficiency also applies to Rule 352 and Rule 353.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
3. Rule 352 Deficiencies \13\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\13\ For additional Rule 352 deficiencies, please see Rule 350
deficiency (c), and Rule 351 deficiency (c).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
(a) The rule exempts cargo tanks with gasoline loads that
originated outside of Arizona, and gasoline loads delivered outside
Maricopa County, from the rule's gasoline cargo tank vapor tightness
requirements. Exemptions from vapor tightness requirements based on
where the cargo tank is initially filled or where it ultimately
delivers gasoline are not provided for in the applicable CTG.
(b) The rule provides inappropriate discretion to unspecified
agencies to certify cargo tanks vapor tight.
(c) The rule allows gasoline cargo tank vapor tightness tests to
remain valid for up to two years, whereas the CTG and rules from other
air districts require more frequent testing.
(d) The rule allows inappropriate discretion for the opening of
cargo tank hatches during loading.
(e) No test method is specified for determining compliance with the
provision requiring a 90% reduction in VOC emissions by weight when
purging cargo tank vapors.
(f) The rule does not clearly prohibit purging of gasoline vapors
from cargo tanks, including during switch loading, and may relax
purging provisions as compared to the SIP-approved rule.
4. Rule 353 Deficiencies \14\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\14\ For an additional Rule 353 deficiency, please see Rule 351
deficiency (c).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
(a) The rule exempts an owner or operator from certain rule
requirements if the gasoline dispensing facility (GDF) is unattended or
there is only one owner or operator present. As there may be one
attendant at a GDF in many instances for a variety of reasons, this
exemption is overly broad and presents enforceability challenges.
D. What are the commitments to remedy the deficiencies?
The County's commitment letter includes specific and enforceable
commitments, outlined below, to address the above deficiencies for
Rules 350, 351, 352, and 353.
1. Rule 350 Commitments \15\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\15\ Rule commitments throughout this section marked with an
asterisk (*) also apply to Rule 351; those marked with a dagger
([dagger]) also apply to Rule 352.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
(a) Removing the exemptions for fuel consumed or dispensed at the
facility directly to users, hazardous waste, wastewater, and ballast
water, to address section II.C.1.a, above.
(b) Adding an emissions limit for organic liquid distribution
facilities transferring over 600,000 gallons per 30-day period of
organic liquid, based on a RACT analysis, to address II.C.1.b, above.
(c) Deleting the provision that allows Control Officer discretion
for approval of hatch or seal opening, to address II.C.1.c, above.*
[dagger]
(d) Rephrasing and restructuring the requirements for organic
liquid storage tanks to clarify the specified requirements without
weakening any substantive requirements, to address II.C.1.d, above.*
(e) Clarifying that the floating roof exemption will only apply
when the tank is filled initially, after it is drained completely and
subsequently refilled, or when undergoing maintenance requiring the
roof be rested on its leg supports, to address II.C.1.e, above.*
(f) Removing the specified exemption for external floating roof
tanks, to address II.C.1.f, above.*
(g) Deleting the specified section, and adding requirements for
internal floating roof organic liquid storage tanks that match SIP-
approved requirements, to address II.C.1.g, above.
(h) Limiting the conditions under which a hatch, vent valve, or
vapor sealing device may be open during the organic liquid transfer
from the cargo tank to the storage tank to those necessary to avoid
unsafe operating conditions, to address II.C.1.h, above.*
2. Commitments for Rule 351 \16\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\16\ For additional Rule 351 commitments, please see Rule 350
commitments (c)-(f) and (h), above.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
(a) Adding vapor loss control requirements that will be at least as
stringent as the SIP-approved version, to address II.C.2.a above.
(b) Revising Rule 351 to include an emissions limit or vapor
recovery efficiency for loading at a bulk gasoline plant, based on a
RACT analysis, to address II.C.2.b, above.
[[Page 49703]]
(c) Removing the exemption for aviation gasoline loading at
airports, to address II.C.2.c, above.\17\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\17\ This commitment also applies to Rule 352 and Rule 353.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
3. Commitments for Rule 352 \18\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\18\ For additional Rule 352 commitments, please see Rule 350
commitment (c), and Rule 351 commitment (c).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
(a) Removing the vapor tightness test exemption for cargo tanks
with gasoline loads that originated outside of Arizona and gasoline
loads delivered outside Maricopa County, to address II.C.3.a, above.
(b) Requiring that a gasoline cargo tank tested outside Maricopa
County be tested and verified vapor tight using methods at least as
stringent as those found in the County's rule, and that testing
documentation be submitted to the MCAQD, to address II.C.3.b.
(c) Revising vapor tightness certification expiration requirements
to shorten the maximum testing interval, to address II.C.3.c.
(d) Revising to clarify and limit the conditions under which a
hatch, vent valve, or vapor sealing device may be open during the
transfer of gasoline from the cargo tank, to address II.C.3.d.
(e) Including appropriate EPA-approved test methods to determine
compliance with at least a 90% reduction in VOC emissions by weight, to
address II.C.3.e.
(f) Revising the purging requirements to include a prohibition on
purging that is at least as stringent as the SIP-approved version, to
address II.C.3.f.
4. Commitments for Rule 353 \19\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\19\ For an additional Rule 353 commitment, please see Rule 351
commitment (c).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
(a) Deleting the exemption for unattended GDFs, or GDFs where there
is only one owner or operator present, to address II.C.4.a.
E. The EPA's Recommendations To Further Improve the Submitted Rules
The TSDs for Rule 350, 351, 352, and 353 describe additional rule
revisions that we recommend for the next time the County modifies the
rules.
F. Public Comment and Proposed Action
Rules 350, 351, 352, and 353 largely fulfill the relevant CAA Sec.
110 and part D requirements, but the deficiencies, as discussed in
section C, preclude full SIP approval pursuant to 110(k)(3) of the Act.
Section 110(k)(4) authorizes the EPA to conditionally approve SIP
revisions based on a commitment by the state to adopt specific
enforceable measures by a date certain but not later than one year
after the date of the plan approval.\20\ Because the MCAQD and the ADEQ
have committed to provide the EPA with a SIP submission within one year
of this final action that will include specific rule revisions that
would adequately address the identified deficiencies, we are proposing
to conditionally approve Rules 350, 351, 352, and 353, pursuant to
section 110(k)(4) of the Act. We are also proposing to conditionally
approve MCAQD's RACT demonstrations for the 2008 8-hr ozone NAAQS with
respect to the VOC source categories covered by Rules 350, 351, 352,
and 353, as specified in Table 2. If the MCAQD and the ADEQ submit the
required rule revisions by the specified deadline, and the EPA approves
the submission, then the identified deficiencies will be cured.
However, if these proposed conditional approvals are finalized, and
MCAQD, through the ADEQ, fails to submit these revisions within the
required timeframe, the conditional approval would be treated as a
disapproval for those rules for which the revisions are not submitted
(and the associated RACT SIP CTG source categories). We will accept
comments from the public on this proposal until October 23, 2019. If we
take final action to approve the submitted rules, our final action will
incorporate these rules into the federally enforceable SIP.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\20\ 42 U.S.C. 7410(k)(4).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
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 the MCAQD rules described in Table 1 of this preamble. The
EPA has made, and will continue to make, these materials available
through https://www.regulations.gov and at the EPA Region IX Office
(please contact the person identified in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION
CONTACT section of this preamble for more information).
IV. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews
Additional information about these statutes and Executive Orders
can be found at https://www.epa.gov/laws-regulations/laws-and-executive-orders.
A. Executive Order 12866: Regulatory Planning and Review and Executive
Order 13563: Improving Regulation and Regulatory Review
This action is not a significant regulatory action and was
therefore not submitted to the Office of Management and Budget (OMB)
for review.
B. Executive Order 13771: Reducing Regulations and Controlling
Regulatory Costs
This action is not an Executive Order 13771 regulatory action
because actions such as SIP approvals are exempted under Executive
Order 12866.
C. Paperwork Reduction Act (PRA)
This action does not impose an information collection burden under
the PRA, because the proposed conditional approvals, if finalized, will
not in-and-of themselves create any new information collection burdens,
but will simply conditionally approve certain State requirements for
inclusion in the SIP.
D. Regulatory Flexibility Act (RFA)
I certify that this action will not have a significant economic
impact on a substantial number of small entities under the RFA. This
action will not impose any requirements on small entities. These
proposed conditional approvals, if finalized, will not in-and-of
themselves create any new requirements but will simply conditionally
approve certain State requirements for inclusion in the SIP.
E. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act (UMRA)
This action does not contain any unfunded mandate as described in
UMRA, 2 U.S.C. 1531-1538, and does not significantly or uniquely affect
small governments. This action proposes to conditionally approve pre-
existing requirements under State or local law, and imposes no new
requirements. Accordingly, no additional costs to State, local, or
tribal governments, or to the private sector, result from this action.
F. 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 states, or on the distribution of power
and responsibilities among the various levels of government.
G. Executive Order 13175: Coordination With Indian Tribal Governments
This action does not have tribal implications, as specified in
Executive Order 13175, because the SIP revisions that the EPA is
proposing to conditionally approve would not 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, and will not impose
substantial direct costs on tribal
[[Page 49704]]
governments or preempt tribal law. Thus, Executive Order 13175 does not
apply to this action.
H. Executive Order 13045: Protection of Children From Environmental
Health Risks and Safety Risks
The EPA interprets Executive Order 13045 as applying only to those
regulatory actions that concern environmental health or safety risks
that the EPA has reason to believe may disproportionately affect
children, per the definition of ``covered regulatory action'' in
section 2-202 of the Executive Order. This action is not subject to
Executive Order 13045 because the proposed conditional approvals, if
finalized, will not in-and-of themselves create any new regulations,
but will simply conditionally approve certain State requirements for
inclusion in the SIP.
I. Executive Order 13211: Actions That Significantly Affect Energy
Supply, Distribution, or Use
This action is not subject to Executive Order 13211, because it is
not a significant regulatory action under Executive Order 12866.
J. National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act (NTTAA)
Section 12(d) of the NTTAA directs the EPA to use voluntary
consensus standards in its regulatory activities unless to do so would
be inconsistent with applicable law or otherwise impractical. The EPA
believes that this action is not subject to the requirements of section
12(d) of the NTTAA because application of those requirements would be
inconsistent with the CAA.
K. Executive Order 12898: Federal Actions To Address Environmental
Justice in Minority Populations and Low-Income Population
The EPA lacks the discretionary authority to address environmental
justice in this rulemaking.
List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52
Environmental protection, Air pollution control, Incorporation by
reference, Intergovernmental relations, Ozone, Reporting and
recordkeeping requirements, Volatile organic compounds.
Authority: 42 U.S.C. 7401 et seq.
Dated: September 6, 2019.
Deborah Jordan,
Acting Regional Administrator, Region IX.
[FR Doc. 2019-20425 Filed 9-20-19; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P