[Federal Register Volume 89, Number 172 (Thursday, September 5, 2024)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 72353-72355]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2024-19848]


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

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

40 CFR Part 52

[EPA-R09-OAR-2024-0315; FRL-12098-01-R9]


Air Plan Approval; 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 recodification of certain rules to 
replace historical Sutter County Air Pollution Control District and 
Yuba County Air Pollution Control District rules with the corresponding 
FRAQMD rules. These rules regulate pollutants under the Clean Air Act 
(CAA or ``Act''). We are taking comments on this proposal and plan to 
follow with a final action.

DATES: Comments must be received on or before October 7, 2024.

ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, identified by Docket ID No. EPA-R09-
OAR-2024-0315 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 
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 is the purpose of the submitted SIP revision?
    B. What rules did the State submit?
    C. Are there other versions of these rules?
II. The EPA's Evaluation and Action
    A. Scope of the EPA's Review
    B. Proposed Action and Public Comment
III. Incorporation by Reference
IV. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews

I. The State's Submittal

A. What is the purpose of the submitted SIP revision?

    Under the CAA, the EPA has established National Ambient Air Quality 
Standards (NAAQS) for certain pervasive air pollutants, including, 
among others, ozone and particulate matter. Under CAA section 110(a), 
states are required to adopt and submit SIPs to implement, maintain and 
enforce the NAAQS. Under CAA section 107(d), the EPA has designated all 
areas of the country as attainment, nonattainment, or unclassifiable 
for the NAAQS. Areas designated as nonattainment must adopt and submit 
SIP revisions that, among other things, provide for attainment of the 
NAAQS by the applicable attainment date.
    In 1972, when the original California SIP was submitted and 
approved by the EPA, the Sutter County Air Pollution Control District 
(SCAPCD) managed air quality programs in Sutter County, while the Yuba 
County Air Pollution Control District (YCAPCD) managed air quality 
programs in Yuba County. On various dates, the EPA approved rules and 
revisions submitted by these two districts for inclusion in the 
California SIP.
    In 1991, the SCAPCD merged with the YCAPCD to form the FRAQMD. The 
FRAQMD is a bi-county agency that administers air quality management 
programs for Sutter and Yuba counties. The newly formed FRAQMD adopted 
many rules and regulations for the District that were identical to the 
previously existing SCAPCD and YCAPCD rules and regulations, but many 
of those FRAQMD rules were not submitted for inclusion in the 
California SIP. The FRAQMD portion of the California SIP currently 
includes rules adopted by the predecessor agencies, the SCAPCD and the 
YCAPCD, to the extent that such rules have not been superseded or 
removed through EPA approval of rules or rescissions adopted by the 
FRAQMD. Thus, the SCAPCD and the YCAPCD no longer exist, but several of 
their rules remain in the California SIP while the corresponding 
locally-adopted FRAQMD rules are not included in the SIP. On May 11, 
2023, the FRAQMD submitted a request through the California Air 
Resources Board (CARB) to replace specific SCAPCD and YCAPCD rules with 
applicable FRAQMD rules. Approval of the request would revise the 
California SIP to include the FRAQMD rules and remove the historical 
SCAPCD and YCAPCD rules that are no longer needed in the SIP. The 
approval of this request would be considered administrative in nature 
and treated as a recodification of existing SIP rules to align the SIP 
version of the rules with those that are currently in effect in the 
FRAQMD.

B. What rules did the State submit?

    The following rules were locally adopted by the FRAQMD on August 
12, 1991,\1\ and submitted by CARB on May 11, 2023, for inclusion in 
the California SIP:
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ The FRAQMD rules were initially scheduled for adoption at a 
June 1991 Board Meeting, but the adoption was postponed to August 
1991. The FRAQMD ultimately adopted the rules in this section on 
August 12, 1991, but ``6/91'' remained as the adoption date printed 
on the rules. Additionally, a typographic error in Rule 3.3 was 
corrected and adopted by the FRAQMD on October 3, 2022, without 
changing the official adoption date of the rule.

Rule 3.0, Visible Emissions
Rule 3.1, Exceptions to Rule 3.0 (excluding paragraph D)
Rule 3.2, Particulate Matter Concentration
Rule 3.3, Dust and Fumes
Rule 3.4, Separation of Emissions
Rule 3.5, Combination of Emissions
Rule 3.6, Abrasive Blasting
Rule 3.7, Reduction of Animal Matter
Rule 3.10, Sulfur Oxides
Rule 3.13, Circumvention

[[Page 72354]]

Rule 9.6, Equipment Breakdown

    The following SCAPCD rules were originally adopted on December 16, 
1980, and approved into the California SIP on April 12, 1982 (47 FR 
15585). Since the SCAPCD no longer exists and there is a locally-
adopted FRAQMD rule corresponding to each of these SCAPCD rules, the 
FRAQMD requested to remove these rules from the California SIP and 
replace them with the submitted FRAQMD rules listed above. That request 
was submitted by CARB on May 11, 2023.\2\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \2\ In its May 11, 2023 submittal, the FRAQMD also requested to 
rescind SCAPCD Rule 9.5, ``Air Pollution Equipment--Scheduled 
Maintenance,'' and YCAPCD Rule 9.5, ``Air Pollution Equipment--
Scheduled Maintenance,'' without replacement. The request for 
rescission of those two rules is not being acted on in this action.

Rule 3.0, Visible Emissions
Rule 3.1, Exceptions to Rule 3.0
Rule 3.2, Particulate Matter Concentration
Rule 3.3, Dust and Fumes
Rule 3.4, Separation of Emissions
Rule 3.5, Combination of Emissions
Rule 3.6, Sand Blasting
Rule 3.7, Reduction of Animal Matter
Rule 3.10, Sulfur Oxides
Rule 3.13, Circumvention
Rule 9.6, Equipment Breakdown

    The following YCAPCD rules were originally adopted on July 24, 
1980, and approved into the California SIP on April 12, 1982 (47 FR 
15585). Since the YCAPCD no longer exists and there is a locally-
adopted FRAQMD rule corresponding to each of these YCAPCD rules, the 
FRAQMD requested to remove these rules from the California SIP and 
replace them with the submitted FRAQMD rules listed above. That request 
was submitted by CARB on May 11, 2023.\2\

Rule 3.0, Visible Emissions
Rule 3.1, Exceptions to Rule 3.0
Rule 3.2, Particulate Matter Concentration
Rule 3.3, Dust and Fumes
Rule 3.4, Separation of Emissions
Rule 3.5, Combination of Emissions
Rule 3.6, Sand Blasting
Rule 3.7, Reduction of Animal Matter
Rule 3.10, Sulfur Oxides
Rule 3.13, Circumvention
Rule 9.6, Equipment Breakdown

    On November 11, 2023, the submittal for the FRAQMD's request 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.

C. Are there other versions of these rules?

    The EPA previously approved the SCAPCD and YCAPCD rules listed in 
section B and those rules are considered as applicable in the FRAQMD 
portion of the California SIP. If the EPA finalizes this action as 
proposed, then the corresponding FRAQMD rules listed in section B will 
supersede the SCAPCD and YCAPCD rules listed above.

II. The EPA's Evaluation and Action

A. Scope of the EPA's Review

    The purpose of the submission of the FRAQMD rules is to align the 
versions of the rules that are part of the SIP with the versions found 
in the current District rulebook. The EPA is reviewing the rules 
specified herein as recodifications of existing rules and is not 
reviewing the substance of the rules at this time.\3\ The EPA approved 
these rules from the predecessor agencies, the SCAPCD and the YCAPCD, 
into the SIP via prior rulemakings. The EPA is subsequently proposing 
to approve the FRAQMD versions of rules to replace identical rules that 
were previously approved by the EPA. The EPA's proposed approval of the 
FRAQMD rules does not imply any position with respect to the 
approvability of the substance of the rules. To the extent the EPA has 
issued any SIP calls to the State with respect to the adequacy of any 
of the rules subject to this recodification, the EPA will continue to 
require the State to correct any such rule deficiencies despite the 
EPA's proposed approval of this recodification.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \3\ Memorandum dated February 12, 1990, from Johnnie L. Pearson, 
Chief, Regional Activities Section, EPA Office of Air Quality 
Planning and Standards to Chief, Air Branch, Regions I-X, Subject: 
``Review of State Regulation Recodifications.''
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

B. Proposed Action and Public Comment

    As authorized in section 110(k)(3) of the Act, the EPA proposes to 
approve the submitted FRAQMD rules because they represent 
recodifications of existing SIP rules. If approved, these rules would 
supersede the SCAPCD and YCAPCD rules of the same corresponding number. 
The EPA is therefore also proposing to approve the rescissions of the 
corresponding SCAPCD and YCAPCD rules because they mirror recodified 
rules proposed for approval. We will accept comments from the public on 
this proposal until October 7, 2024. If the EPA takes final action to 
approve the submitted rules, the final action would incorporate these 
rules into the federally enforceable SIP and would remove the preceding 
SCAPCD and YCAPCD rules that are to be rescinded or superseded in the 
California SIP as requested.

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 3.0, ``Visible Emissions''; FRAQMD Rule 3.1, 
``Exceptions to Rule 3.0'' (excluding paragraph D); FRAQMD Rule 3.2, 
``Particulate Matter Concentration''; FRAQMD Rule 3.3, ``Dust and 
Fumes''; FRAQMD Rule 3.4, ``Separation of Emissions''; FRAQMD Rule 3.5, 
``Combination of Emissions''; FRAQMD Rule 3.6, ``Abrasive Blasting''; 
FRAQMD Rule 3.7, ``Reduction of Animal Matter''; FRAQMD Rule 3.10,'' 
Sulfur Oxides''; FRAQMD Rule 3.13, ``Circumvention''; and FRAQMD Rule 
9.6, ``Equipment Breakdown,'' all adopted on August 12, 1991, which 
regulate emissions of air pollutants. 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 CAA, 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 CAA. 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. L. 104-4);

[[Page 72355]]

     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 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).
    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 communities with environmental justice 
(EJ) concerns to the greatest extent practicable and permitted by law. 
The EPA defines 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 EJ 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 EJ 
for communities with EJ concerns.

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: August 28, 2024.
Martha Guzman Aceves,
Regional Administrator, Region IX.
[FR Doc. 2024-19848 Filed 9-4-24; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P