[Federal Register Volume 89, Number 29 (Monday, February 12, 2024)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 9813-9815]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2024-02770]


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

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

40 CFR Part 52

[EPA-R09-OAR-2023-0649; FRL-11647-01-R9]


Air Plan Revisions; California; Feather River Air Quality 
Management District

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Proposed rule.

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

SUMMARY: The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is proposing to 
approve a revision to the Feather River Air Quality Management District 
(FRAQMD or ``District'') portion of the California State Implementation 
Plan (SIP). This revision concerns a rule submitted to address section 
185 of 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 March 13, 2024.

ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, identified by Docket ID No. EPA-R09-
OAR-2023-0649 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. If you need assistance in a 
language other than English or if you are a person with a disability 
who needs a reasonable accommodation at no cost to you, please contact 
the person identified in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Kira Wiesinger, EPA Region IX, 75

[[Page 9814]]

Hawthorne St., San Francisco, CA 94105; phone: (415) 972-3827; email: 
[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 rule did the State submit?
    B. Are there other versions of this rule?
    C. What is the purpose of the submitted rule?
II. The EPA's Evaluation and Action
    A. How is the EPA evaluating the rule?
    B. Does the rule meet the evaluation criteria?
    C. The EPA's recommendations to further improve the rule
    D. Proposed action and public comment
III. Incorporation by Reference
IV. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews

I. The State's Submittal

A. What rule did the State submit?

    Table 1 lists the rule addressed by this proposal with the dates 
that it was amended by the local air agency and submitted by the 
California Air Resources Board.

                                             Table 1--Submitted Rule
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
             Local agency                  Rule No.            Rule title             Amended        Submitted
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
FRAQMD................................            7.15  Clean Air Act                 04/04/2022      07/05/2022
                                                         Nonattainment Fees.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    On October 28, 2022, the EPA determined that the submittal for Rule 
7.15 met the completeness criteria in 40 CFR part 51 Appendix V, which 
must be met before formal EPA review.

B. Are there other versions of this rule?

    There are no previous versions of Rule 7.15 in the California SIP. 
The FRAQMD originally adopted an earlier version of this rule on 
December 6, 2010, but that version of the rule was never submitted for 
inclusion in the SIP. The FRAQMD amended Rule 7.15 on April 4, 2022. If 
we take final action to approve the April 4, 2022 version of Rule 7.15, 
this version will be incorporated into the SIP.

C. What is the purpose of the submitted rule?

    Under sections 182(d)(3), (e), (f) and 185 of the Act, states with 
ozone nonattainment areas classified as ``Severe'' or ``Extreme'' are 
required to submit a SIP revision that requires major stationary 
sources of volatile organic compounds (VOC) or oxides of nitrogen (NOx) 
emissions in the area to pay a fee if the area fails to attain the 
standard by the attainment date. The required SIP revision must provide 
for annual payment of the fees, computed in accordance with CAA section 
185(b).
    The Sacramento Metro, CA ozone nonattainment area has been 
classified as Severe for the 1979 1-hour, 1997 8-hour, and 2008 8-hour 
ozone National Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS). The Sacramento 
Metro area includes a portion of Sutter County that is under the 
jurisdiction of the FRAQMD. The EPA has previously issued a finding 
that the State of California had failed to submit the required 
revisions for the 1-hour ozone NAAQS for portions of the Sacramento 
Metro area, including the portion under the jurisdiction of the 
FRAQMD.\1\ The FRAQMD submitted Rule 7.15 for the portion of the 
Sacramento Metro area under the jurisdiction of the District to satisfy 
the requirement to submit a CAA section 185 fee program for each 
federal ozone NAAQS for which the Sacramento Metro area is classified 
as Severe or Extreme.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ January 5, 2010 (75 FR 232). Although the imposition of 
sanctions due to this finding was deferred on May 18, 2011 (76 FR 
28661), and was permanently stopped with our October 28, 2022 
completeness letter, there remains an obligation for the EPA to 
promulgate a federal implementation plan (FIP) associated with the 
January 5, 2010 action.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

II. The EPA's Evaluation and Action

A. How is the EPA evaluating the rule?

    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). The EPA is also evaluating the rule 
for consistency with the statutory requirements of CAA section 185.
    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. Does the rule meet the evaluation criteria?

    This rule meets CAA requirements and is consistent with relevant 
guidance regarding enforceability and SIP revisions. The EPA's 
technical support document (TSD) has more information on our 
evaluation.

C. The EPA's Recommendations To Further Improve the Rule

    The TSD includes recommendations for the next time the local agency 
amends the rule.

D. Proposed Action and Public Comment

    As authorized in section 110(k)(3) of the Act, the EPA proposes to 
approve submitted Rule 7.15 because it fulfills all relevant 
requirements. The rule is not limited to a particular ozone NAAQS, and 
we therefore propose to find that it satisfies the District's 
obligations under the 1979 1-hour, 1997 8-hour, and 2008 8-hour ozone 
NAAQS. We will accept comments from the public on this proposal until 
March 13, 2024. If we take final action to approve the submitted rule, 
our final action will incorporate this rule into the federally 
enforceable SIP and address the EPA's obligation to promulgate a FIP 
arising from our previous finding that the State of California has 
failed to submit the required CAA section 185 SIP revisions for the 1-
hour ozone NAAQS for the portion of the Sacramento Metro area under the 
jurisdiction of the FRAQMD.

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 FRAQMD Rule 7.15, ``Clean Air Act

[[Page 9815]]

Nonattainment Fees,'' amended on April 4, 2022, which addresses the CAA 
section 185 fee program requirements. 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 14094 (88 FR 21879, April 11, 2023);
     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. Law 104-4);
     Does not have federalism implications as specified in 
Executive Order 13132 (64 FR 43255, August 10, 1999);
     Is not subject to Executive Order 13045 (62 FR 19885, 
April 23, 1997) because it proposes to approve a state program;
     Is not a significant regulatory action subject to 
Executive Order 13211 (66 FR 28355, May 22, 2001); and
     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.
    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).
    Executive Order 12898 (Federal Actions To Address Environmental 
Justice in Minority Populations and Low-Income Populations, 59 FR 7629, 
Feb. 16, 1994) directs Federal agencies to identify and address 
``disproportionately high and adverse human health or environmental 
effects'' of their actions on minority populations and low-income 
populations to the greatest extent practicable and permitted by law. 
The EPA defines environmental justice (EJ) as ``the fair treatment and 
meaningful involvement of all people regardless of race, color, 
national origin, or income with respect to the development, 
implementation, and enforcement of environmental laws, regulations, and 
policies.'' The EPA further defines the term fair treatment to mean 
that ``no group of people should bear a disproportionate burden of 
environmental harms and risks, including those resulting from the 
negative environmental consequences of industrial, governmental, and 
commercial operations or programs and policies.''
    The State did not evaluate environmental justice considerations as 
part of its SIP submittal; the CAA and applicable implementing 
regulations neither prohibit nor require such an evaluation. The EPA 
did not perform an EJ analysis and did not consider EJ in this action. 
Consideration of EJ is not required as part of this action, and there 
is no information in the record inconsistent with the stated goal of 
E.O. 12898 of achieving environmental justice for people of color, low-
income populations, and Indigenous peoples.

List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52

    Environmental protection, Air pollution control, Incorporation by 
reference, Intergovernmental relations, Nitrogen oxides, Ozone, 
Reporting and recordkeeping requirements, Volatile organic compounds.

    Dated: February 5, 2024.
Martha Guzman Aceves,
Regional Administrator, Region IX.
[FR Doc. 2024-02770 Filed 2-9-24; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P