[Federal Register Volume 85, Number 129 (Monday, July 6, 2020)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 40156-40158]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2020-13998]
=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
40 CFR Part 52
[EPA-R09-OAR-2020-0122; FRL-10011-39-Region 9]
Air Plan Approval; California; Butte County; El Dorado County;
Mojave Desert Air Quality Management District; San Diego County;
Ventura County
AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).
ACTION: Proposed rule.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is proposing to
approve revisions to the Butte County Air Quality Management District
(BCAQMD), El Dorado County Air Quality Management District (EDCAQMD),
Mojave Desert Air Quality Management District (MDAQMD), San Diego
County Air Pollution Control District (SDCAPCD) and Ventura County Air
Pollution Control District (VCAPCD) portions of the California State
Implementation Plan (SIP). These revisions concern rules that include
definitions for certain terms that are necessary for the implementation
of local rules that regulate sources of air pollution. We are proposing
to approve the definitions rules under the Clean Air Act (CAA or the
Act). We are taking comments on this proposal and plan to follow with a
final action.
DATES: Comments must be received on or before August 5, 2020.
ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, identified by Docket ID No. EPA-R09-
OAR-2020-0122 at https://www.regulations.gov. For comments submitted at
Regulations.gov, follow the 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: Arnold Lazarus, EPA Region IX, 75
Hawthorne St., San Francisco, CA 94105. By phone: (415) 972-2304 or by
email at [email protected].
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Throughout this document, ``we,'' ``us'' and
``our'' refer to the EPA.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ CARB submitted the amendment to BCAQMD Rule 101
electronically on May 23, 2018. CARB's submittal letter is dated May
18, 2018.
\2\ The BCAQMD amended Rule 101 on this date but took no action
on Rule 102. The date is from Enclosure A to CARB Executive Order S-
18-004, May 18, 2018, which is included in CARB's May 23, 2018 SIP
submittal.
\3\ CARB submitted the rescission of BCAQMD Rule 102
electronically on May 23, 2018. CARB's submittal letter is dated May
18, 2018.
\4\ CARB submitted the amendment to MDAQMD Rule 102
electronically on August 19, 2019. CARB's submittal letter is dated
August 16, 2019.
\5\ CARB submitted the amendment to VCAPCD Rule 2 electronically
on August 19, 2019. CARB's submittal letter is dated August 16,
2019.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
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 revisions?
II. The EPA's Evaluation and Action
A. How is the EPA evaluating the rules?
B. Do the rules meet the evaluation criteria?
C. The EPA's Recommendations to Further Improve the Rules
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
that they were adopted by the local air agencies and submitted by the
California Air Resources Board (CARB) to the EPA.
Table 1--SUBMITTED RULES
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Amended /
Local agency Rule # Rule title Rescinded revised Submitted
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
BCAQMD...................... 101 Definitions.... ............... 12/14/2017..... \1\ 5/23/2018
BCAQMD...................... 102 Definitions.... \2\ 12/14/17... ............... \3\ 5/23/2018
[[Page 40157]]
EDCAQMD..................... 101 General ............... 6/20/2017...... 8/9/2017
Provisions and
Definitions.
MDAQMD...................... 102 Definition of ............... 1/28/2019...... \4\ 8/19/2019
Terms.
SDCAPCD..................... 2 Definitions.... ............... 7/11/2017...... 11/13/2017
VCAPCD...................... 2 Definitions.... ............... 4/9/2019....... \5\ 8/19/2019
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Under CAA section 110(k)(1), the EPA must determine whether a SIP
submittal meets the minimum completeness criteria established in 40 CFR
part 51, appendix V for an official SIP submittal on which the EPA is
obligated to take action. If the EPA does not make an affirmative
determination of completeness or incompleteness within six months of
receipt of a SIP submittal, the submittal is deemed to be complete by
operation of law. The submitted rules listed in Table 1 were deemed
complete by operation of law on the following dates: February 9, 2018
(EDCAQMD Rule 101), May 13, 2018 (SDCAPCD Rule 2), November 23, 2018
(BCAQMD Rule 101 and rescission of BCAQMD Rule 102), and February 19,
2020 (MDAQMD Rule 102 and VCAPCD Rule 2).
B. Are there other versions of these rules?
We approved an earlier version of BCAQMD Rule 101 into the SIP on
June 11, 2015 (80 FR 33195).\6\ The BCAQMD adopted revisions to the
SIP-approved version on December 14, 2017, and CARB submitted them to
us on May 23, 2018. We approved BCAQMD Rule 102 into the SIP on
February 3, 1987 (52 FR 3226). Most of the definitions in BCAQMD Rule
102 have been superseded by approval of the definitions in BCAQMD Rule
101 and Rule 300 (``Open Burning Requirements, Prohibitions, and
Exemptions'').\7\ The only remaining defined terms in BCAQMD Rule 102
are ``submerged fill pipe'' and ``vapor recovery system.''
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\6\ See also 80 FR 59610 (October 2, 2015) (correcting amendment
for June 11, 2015 final rule).
\7\ We approved BCAQMD Rule 300 at 80 FR 38966 (July 8, 2015).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
We approved an earlier version of EDCAQMD Rule 101 into the SIP on
October 10, 2001 (66 FR 51578). The EDCAQMD adopted revisions to the
SIP-approved version on June 20, 2017, and CARB submitted them to us on
August 9, 2017.
We approved an earlier version of MDAQMD Rule 102 into the SIP on
July 2, 2019 (84 FR 31682). The MDAQMD adopted revisions to the SIP-
approved version on January 28, 2019, and CARB submitted them to us on
August 19, 2019.
We approved an earlier version of SDCAPCD Rule 2 into the SIP on
June 21, 2017 (82 FR 28240). The SDCAPCD adopted revisions to the SIP-
approved version on July 11, 2017, and CARB submitted them to us on
November 13, 2017.
We approved an earlier version of VCAPCD Rule 2 into the SIP on
December 7, 2012 (77 FR 72968). The VCAPCD adopted revisions to the
SIP-approved version on April 9, 2019, and CARB submitted them to us on
August 19, 2019.
C. What is the purpose of the submitted rule revisions?
The purpose of these submitted rule revisions is to clarify and
update definitions in the districts' rules. Revisions include the
following, but a more complete list and discussion can be found in the
technical support documents (TSDs) and submitted district staff reports
and rules for this rulemaking:
BCAQMD Rule 101 revisions include removal of Global
Warming Potentials table, updating the Exempt Compounds table to be
consistent with the definition of ``volatile organic compounds'' (VOC)
in 40 CFR 51.100(s), removing greenhouse gases (GHG) and carbon dioxide
equivalent emissions from the major source definition and adding
definitions for ``Submerged Fill Pipe'' and ``Vapor Recovery System.''
In its submittal letter to CARB, BCAQMD also requests that BCAQMD Rule
102 be rescinded from the SIP,\8\ and CARB included the BCAQMD's
rescission request in its May 23, 2018 SIP submittal to the EPA.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\8\ See letter from Jason Mandly, Associate Air Quality Planner,
BCAQMD, to Carol Sutkus, CARB, dated January 9, 2018.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
EDCAQMD Rule 101 revisions include updating the district's
title (previously known as El Dorado Air Pollution Control District),
updating the exempt compounds list and adding or revising definitions
for ``Global Warming Potential,'' Greenhouse Gases'', ``Owner or
Operator,'' ``PM2.5,'' ``Responsbile Official,'' and ``Short
Lived Climate Pollutants,'' and ``Volatile Organic Compounds.''
MDAQMD Rule 102 revisions include the addition of
definitions that had been included in other MDAQMD rules, the
renumbering of the definitions, and the addition of certain definitions
associated with CARB's Airborne Toxic Control Measure to reduce
emissions of hexavalent chromium and nickel from thermal spraying.
Definitions added include ``Agricultural Facility'', ``Confined Animal
Facility'', ``Detonation Gun Spraying'', ``Flame Spraying'', ``High-
Velocity Oxy-Fuel Spraying'', ``Plasma Spraying'', ``Thermal Spraying
Operation'', ``Twin-Wire Electric Arc Spraying'', and ``Volatile
Organic Compound''. In its submittal letter to CARB, MDAQMD also
requests that CARB submit amended Rule 102 to replace the SIP versions
of the rule that are in effect in the San Bernardino County and the
Blythe/Palo Verde Valley portions of the District.\9\ We have already
responded to this request through final action on an earlier version of
MDAQMD Rule 102.\10\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\9\ See letter from Alan J. De Salvio, Deputy Director, Mojave
Desert Operations, MDAQMD, to Carol Sutkus, CARB, dated April 11,
2019.
\10\ 84 FR 31682 (July 2, 2019).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
SDCAPCD Rule 2 revisions include adding the Chemical
Abstract Service (CAS) Registry Number to each of the compounds in the
table of ``exempt compounds'' at the end of Rule 2. ``Exempt
compounds'' are excluded from the definition of ``volatile organic
compounds.''
VCAPCD Rule 2 revisions include the addition of nine
compounds to the list of ``exempt organic compounds,'' as defined in
Rule 2. The revisions also include the addition of CAS Registry Numbers
to various compounds included in the list of ``exempt organic
compounds,'' and the removal of the Global Warming Potential Table at
the end of Rule.
II. The EPA's Evaluation and Action
A. How is the EPA evaluating the rules?
Rules in the SIP must be enforceable (see CAA section 110(a)(2)),
must not
[[Page 40158]]
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).
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).
B. Do the rules meet the EPA's evaluation criteria?
These rules are consistent with CAA requirements and relevant
guidance regarding enforceability. More specifically, the revisions to
the definitions rules with respect to the list of ``exempt compounds''
that are exluded from the districts' definitions of ``volatile organic
compounds'' are consistent with the definition of ``volatile organic
compounds'' in 40 CFR 51.100(s). The deletions of certain GHG-related
provisions from certain definitions rules are acceptable in light of
recent court decisions involving GHG permitting. With respect to the
rescission request for BCAQMD Rule 102, we find that the May 23, 2018
SIP submittal does not include sufficient public process documentation
to approve the request; however, approval of amended BCAQMD Rule 101,
which we propose herein, will have the effect of superseding BCAQMD
Rule 102 in the applicable SIP because the two remaining definitions
from Rule 102 will be incorporated into Rule 101 if we finalize the
action as proposed. The TSDs have more information on our evaluation.
C. The EPA Recommendations to Further Improve the Rules
The TSDs include recommendations for the next time the local
agencies modify their rules.
D. Public Comment and Proposed Action
Pursuant to section 110(k)(3) of the Act, the EPA proposes to fully
approve the submitted rules because they fulfill all relevant
requirements. We will accept comments from the public on this proposal
until August 5, 2020. If we take final action to approve the submitted
rules, our final action will incorporate these rules into the federally
enforceable SIP.
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 BCAQMD's, the EDAQMD's, the MDAQMD's, the SDCAPCD's and
the VCAPCD's 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
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 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 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 the 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 proposed 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, Incorporation by
reference, Intergovernmental relations, Nitrogen dioxide, Ozone,
Particulate matter, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements, Volatile
organic compounds.
Authority: 42 U.S.C. 7401 et seq.
Dated: June 23, 2020.
John Busterud,
Regional Administrator, Region IX.
[FR Doc. 2020-13998 Filed 7-2-20; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P