Approval of California Air Plan Revisions, Placer County Air Pollution Control District, 27456-27460 [2017-12344]
Download as PDF
27456
Federal Register / Vol. 82, No. 114 / Thursday, June 15, 2017 / Proposed Rules
comments on our previous proposed
action and believe that those comments
remain relevant, you will need to
resubmit your comments within the
public comment period for today’s
proposed action.
We will accept comments from the
public on this proposal until July 17,
2017. If we take final action to approve
the submitted documents, our final
action will incorporate them into the
federally-enforceable SIP.
pmangrum on DSK3GDR082PROD with PROPOSALS
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
certain permit conditions for two
stationary sources in Coachella Valley
as described above in preamble. The
EPA has made, and will continue to
make, these materials available through
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 SIP
revisions 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);
• 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
that summarizes our evaluation of SCAQMD’s 2016
AQMP RACT SIP.
VerDate Sep<11>2014
14:02 Jun 14, 2017
Jkt 241001
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, Reporting and
recordkeeping requirements, Volatile
organic compounds.
Authority: 42 U.S.C. 7401 et seq.
Dated: June 7, 2017.
Alexis Strauss,
Acting Regional Administrator, Region IX.
[FR Doc. 2017–12469 Filed 6–14–17; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560–50–P
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION
AGENCY
40 CFR Part 52
[EPA–R09–OAR–2017–0218; FRL–9963–56–
Region 9]
Approval of California Air Plan
Revisions, Placer County Air Pollution
Control District
Environmental Protection
Agency (EPA).
AGENCY:
PO 00000
Frm 00013
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
ACTION:
Proposed rule.
The Environmental Protection
Agency (EPA) is proposing to approve
revisions to the Placer County Air
Pollution Control District (PCAPCD or
‘‘the District’’) portion of the California
State Implementation Plan (SIP). These
revisions concern the District’s
demonstration regarding Reasonably
Available Control Technology (RACT)
requirements for the 1997 and 2008 8hour ozone National Ambient Air
Quality Standards (NAAQS), and
negative declarations for the polyester
resin source category for the 2008 8hour ozone standard. We are proposing
action on local SIP revisions 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: Any comments must arrive by
July 17, 2017.
ADDRESSES: Submit your comments,
identified by Docket ID No. EPA–R09–
OAR–2017–0218 at https://
www.regulations.gov, or via email to
Andrew Steckel, Rulemaking Office
Chief at steckel.andrew@epa.gov. For
comments submitted at Regulations.gov,
follow the online instructions for
submitting comments. Once submitted,
comments cannot be removed or edited
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
https://www2.epa.gov/dockets/
commenting-epa-dockets.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Nicole Law, EPA Region IX, (415) 947–
4126, law.nicole@epa.gov or Stanley
Tong, EPA Region IX, (415) 947–4122,
tong.stanley@epa.gov.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Throughout this document, ‘‘we,’’ ‘‘us’’
and ‘‘our’’ refer to the EPA.
SUMMARY:
E:\FR\FM\15JNP1.SGM
15JNP1
27457
Federal Register / Vol. 82, No. 114 / Thursday, June 15, 2017 / Proposed Rules
Table of Contents
I. The State’s Submittal
A. What documents did the State submit?
B. Are there other versions of these
documents?
C. What is the purpose of the RACT SIP
submissions?
II. The EPA’s Evaluation and Proposed
Action
A. How is the EPA evaluating the RACT
SIP submissions?
B. Do the RACT SIP submissions meet the
evaluation criteria?
C. EPA’s Recommendations To Strengthen
the RACT SIP
D. Proposed Action and Public Comment
III. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews
I. The State’s Submittal
A. What documents 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 California Air
Resources Board (CARB).
TABLE 1—SUBMITTED DOCUMENTS
Local agency
Document
PCAPCD ...................
2006 Reasonably Available Control Technology State Implementation Plan Update
Analysis (‘‘2006 RACT SIP’’).
2014 Reasonably Available Control Technology State Implementation Plan Analysis
(‘‘2014 RACT SIP’’).
PCAPCD ...................
On January 11, 2008, the submittal for
PCAPCD’s 2006 RACT SIP Analysis for
the 1997 8-hour ozone NAAQS was
deemed by operation of law to meet the
completeness criteria in Title 40 of the
Code of Federal Regulations (CFR) Part
51 Appendix V, which must be met
before formal EPA review. On January
18, 2015, the submittal for PCAPCD’s
2014 RACT SIP Analysis for the 2008 8hour ozone NAAQS was deemed by
operation of law to meet the
completeness criteria as well.
pmangrum on DSK3GDR082PROD with PROPOSALS
B. Are there other versions of these
documents?
There are no previous versions of
these documents in the PCAPCD portion
of the California SIP for the 1997 or
2008 8-hour ozone standards.
C. What is the purpose of the RACT SIP
submissions?
Volatile organic compounds (VOCs)
and nitrogen oxides (NOX) help produce
ground-level ozone and smog, which
harm human health and the
environment. Section 110(a) of the CAA
requires states to submit enforceable
regulations that control VOC and NOX
emissions. Sections 182(b)(2) and (f)
require that SIPs for ozone
nonattainment areas classified as
moderate or above require
implementation of RACT for any source
covered by a Control Techniques
Guidelines (CTG) document and for any
major source of VOCs or NOX. The
PCAPCD is subject to this requirement
because it contains an area designated
and classified as severe-15
nonattainment for the 1997 and 2008 8hour ozone NAAQS.1 Therefore, the
1 40 CFR 81.305; 75 FR 24409 at 24419 (May 5,
2010) (final rule reclassifying the Sacramento Metro
area as severe-15 nonattainment for the 1997 8-hour
ozone NAAQS); and 77 FR 30088 at 30104–05 (May
21, 2012) (final rule designating and classifying the
Sacramento Metro area as severe-15 nonattainment
for the 2008 8-hour ozone NAAQS).
VerDate Sep<11>2014
14:02 Jun 14, 2017
Jkt 241001
Adopted
PCAPCD must, at a minimum, adopt
RACT-level controls for all sources
covered by a CTG document and for all
major non-CTG sources of VOCs or NOX
within the nonattainment area. Any
stationary source that emits or has the
potential to emit at least 25 tons per
year of VOCs or NOX is a major
stationary source in a severe ozone
nonattainment area (CAA sections
182(d) and (f)).
Section IV.G of the preamble to the
EPA’s final rule to implement the 1997
8-hour ozone NAAQS (70 FR 71612,
71652–61 November 29, 2005) discusses
RACT requirements. It states in part that
where a RACT SIP is required, states
implementing the 8-hour standard
generally must assure that RACT is met
either through a certification that
previously required RACT controls
represent RACT for 8-hour
implementation purposes or through a
new RACT determination. Section III.D
of the preamble to the EPA’s final rule
to implement the 2008 ozone NAAQS
(80 FR 12264, 12278–83 March 6, 2015)
discusses similar requirements for
RACT. The submitted documents
provide PCAPCD’s analyses of its
compliance with the CAA section 182
RACT requirements for the 1997 and
2008 8-hour ozone NAAQS. The EPA’s
technical support documents (TSDs)
have more information about the
District’s submissions and the EPA’s
evaluations thereof.
II. The EPA’s Evaluation and Proposed
Action
A. How is the EPA evaluating the RACT
SIP submissions?
Generally, SIP rules must require
RACT for each category of sources
covered by a CTG document as well as
each major source of VOCs or NOX in
ozone nonattainment areas classified as
moderate or above (see CAA section
182(b)(2), (f)). The PCAPCD regulates a
PO 00000
Frm 00014
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
Submitted
8/10/06
7/11/07
4/10/14
7/18/14
severe ozone nonattainment area (see 40
CFR 81.305), so the District’s rules must
implement RACT.
Guidance and policy documents that
we use to evaluate CAA section 182
RACT requirements for the applicable
criteria pollutants include the following:
1. ‘‘Final Rule to Implement the 8hour Ozone National Ambient Air
Quality Standard—Phase 2’’ (70 FR
71612; November 29, 2005).
2. ‘‘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).
3. ‘‘Issues Relating to VOC Regulation
Cutpoints, Deficiencies, and
Deviations,’’ EPA, May 25, 1988 (the
Bluebook).
4. ‘‘Guidance Document for Correcting
Common VOC & Other Rule
Deficiencies,’’ EPA Region 9, August 21,
2001 (the Little Bluebook).
5. ‘‘State Implementation Plans;
Nitrogen Oxides Supplement to the
General Preamble; Clean Air Act
Amendments of 1990 Implementation of
Title I; Proposed Rule,’’ (the NOX
Supplement), 57 FR 55620, November
25, 1992.
6. Memorandum from William T.
Harnett to Regional Air Division
Directors, (May 18, 2006), ‘‘RACT Qs &
As—Reasonably Available Control
Technology (RACT) Questions and
Answers’’.
7. RACT SIPs, Letter dated March 9,
2006 from EPA Region IX (Andrew
Steckel) to CARB (Kurt Karperos)
describing Region IX’s understanding of
what constitutes a minimally acceptable
RACT SIP.
8. RACT SIPs, Letter dated April 4,
2006 from EPA Region IX (Andrew
Steckel) to CARB (Kurt Karperos) listing
EPA’s current CTGs, Alternative Control
Techniques (ACTs), and other
E:\FR\FM\15JNP1.SGM
15JNP1
27458
Federal Register / Vol. 82, No. 114 / Thursday, June 15, 2017 / Proposed Rules
documents which may help to establish
RACT.
9. ‘‘Implementation of the 2008
National Ambient Air Quality Standards
for Ozone: State Implementation Plan
Requirements’’ (80 FR 12264; March 6,
2015).
With respect to major stationary
sources, even though the PCAPCD
nonattainment area was classified as
‘‘serious’’ nonattainment for the 1997 8hour ozone NAAQS at the time the
District adopted its 2006 RACT SIP, the
District performed its 2006 RACT SIP
demonstration as though it were
classified as a ‘‘severe’’ nonattainment
area by analyzing for major VOC/NOX
sources that emit or have the potential
to emit at least 25 tons per year (tpy) as
opposed to the 50 tpy threshold
associated with major sources in
‘‘serious’’ ozone nonattainment areas.2
CAA section 182(c), (d), and (f).
On May 5, 2010 (75 FR 24409), EPA
granted the State of California’s request
to reclassify the Sacramento
Metropolitan ozone nonattainment area,
which includes parts of the PCAPCD,
from ‘‘serious’’ to ‘‘severe-15’’ for the
1997 8-hour ozone NAAQS. The
Sacramento Metropolitan ozone
nonattainment area is also classified as
severe-15 for the 2008 8-hour ozone
standard. 40 CFR 81.305. We evaluated
both PCAPCD’s 2006 RACT SIP and its
2014 RACT SIP based on a ‘‘severe-15’’
classification.
B. Do the RACT SIP submissions meet
the evaluation criteria?
PCAPCD’s 2006 and 2014 RACT SIPs
provide the District’s demonstration and
certification that the applicable SIP for
the Placer County APCD satisfies CAA
section 182 RACT requirements for the
1997 and 2008 8-hour ozone NAAQS.
This conclusion is based on the
District’s analysis of SIP-approved
requirements that apply to: (1) CTG
source categories; and (2) major nonCTG stationary sources of NOX or VOC
emissions. See PCAPCD’s 2006 RACT
SIP Tables A and B and 2014 RACT SIP
Table 1.
With respect to the 2006 RACT SIP,
Table A in the appendix to the 2006
RACT SIP identifies the CTG and nonCTG categories with the applicable
district rules. The District did identify
in Table D–1 of the 2006 RACT SIP
several rules that required re-submittal
since newer versions of the rules had
been adopted. We reviewed the
submittal status of the rules in Table D–
1 and conclude that the rules have been
submitted and approved into the SIP as
meeting RACT.
Table B in the appendix to the 2006
RACT SIP lists major sources of VOC
and NOX in the District and includes a
statement that all the major stationary
sources have adopted District rules that
satisfy RACT requirements. We
reviewed CARB’s emissions inventory
database for other potential CTG and/or
major non-CTG sources not included in
PCAPCD’s analysis and identified one
major point source in the District that is
subject to section 182 RACT but was not
identified by the District. Capital Drum
Inc., in Roseville, CA is a drum
manufacturer/refurbisher and emitted
34 tpy of VOCs in 2007. We determined
the source is covered by District Rule
223 ‘‘Metal Container Coating,’’ which
meets current RACT.
With respect to the 2014 RACT SIP,
Table 1 of the 2014 RACT SIP lists
existing District rules that have been
determined to meet RACT and also lists
the applicable CTGs. PCAPCD
compared its rules to the CTGs and
rules of other air districts to determine
if they satisfied RACT. We conclude the
PCAPCD rules meet RACT.
The 2014 RACT SIP identified three
major stationary point sources of NOX or
VOC: Two biomass boilers and a natural
gas turbine. PCAPCD’s 2014 RACT SIP
states the biomass boilers and natural
gas turbine are subject to District RACT
rules.
We reviewed CARB’s emissions
inventory database for other potential
CTG and/or major non-CTG sources not
included in PCAPCD’s analysis and did
not identify any other major sources in
the District. However, CARB’s emissions
inventory identified one potential CTG
source under standard industrial
classification (SIC) code 2821 for the
manufacture of high-density
polyethylene, polypropylene, and
polystyrene CTG—for which PCAPCD’s
2014 RACT SIP indicated it had no
subject sources. Further investigation
revealed that the SIC listed in CARB’s
emissions inventory database for Sak
Construction LLC was incorrect and that
Sak Construction LLC does not
manufacture high-density polyethylene,
polypropylene, and polystyrene and
therefore is not subject to the CTG. The
TSD contains further details.
Where there are no existing sources
covered by a particular CTG document,
states may, in lieu of adopting RACT
requirements for those sources, adopt
negative declarations certifying that
there are no such sources in the relevant
nonattainment area. Table C of
PCAPCD’s 2006 RACT SIP and Table 2
of PCAPCD’s 2014 RACT SIP lists the
District’s negative declarations where it
had no sources subject to the applicable
CTGs for the 1997 and 2008 8-hour
ozone standards respectively. The
District based its conclusions on a
review of its permit database, internet
search, business listings, SIC codes,
industrial trade association records, and
yellow pages. We summarized the
District’s negative declarations in Table
2 below.
TABLE 2—PCAPCD NEGATIVE DECLARATIONS
CTG Source category
CTG Reference document
2006 RACT
SIP
2014 RACT
SIP
Aerospace Coatings ..................
EPA–453/R–97–004, Control of Volatile Organic Compound Emissions from Coating Operations at
Aerospace Manufacturing and Rework Operations.
EPA–450/2–77–008, Control of Volatile Organic Emissions from Existing Stationary Sources—Volume II: Surface Coating of Cans, Coils, Paper, Fabrics, Automobiles, and Light-Duty Trucks.
EPA 453/R–08–006, Control Techniques Guidelines for Automobile and Light-Duty Truck Assembly
Coatings.
EPA–450/3–82–009, Control of Volatile Organic Compound Emissions from Large Petroleum Dry
Cleaners.
EPA 453/R–08–004, Control Techniques Guidelines for Fiberglass Boat Manufacturing Materials .......
EPA–453/R–06–003, Control Techniques Guidelines for Flexible Package Printing ..............................
EPA–450/2–77–034, Control of Volatile Organic Emissions from Existing Stationary Sources—Volume V: Surface Coating of Large Appliances.
EPA 453/R–07–004, Control Techniques Guidelines for Large Appliance Coatings ...............................
X
X
X
X
N/A*
X
X
X
N/A*
N/A*
X
X
X
X
N/A*
X
Automobile and Light-duty
Truck Assembly Coatings.
pmangrum on DSK3GDR082PROD with PROPOSALS
Dry Cleaning (Petroleum) .........
Fiberglass Boat Manufacturing
Flexible Packaging Printing .......
Large Appliances Surface Coatings.
2 Major stationary sources of VOC or NO in
X
serious ozone nonattainment are those sources that
emit or have the potential to emit at least 50 tons
per year.
VerDate Sep<11>2014
14:02 Jun 14, 2017
Jkt 241001
3 Based on PCAPCD’s 2014 RACT SIP, Table 2, a
negative declaration was required for the Polyester
Resin CTG. PCAPCD adopted the required negative
PO 00000
Frm 00015
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
declaration and submitted it with its 2014 RACT
SIP.
E:\FR\FM\15JNP1.SGM
15JNP1
27459
Federal Register / Vol. 82, No. 114 / Thursday, June 15, 2017 / Proposed Rules
TABLE 2—PCAPCD NEGATIVE DECLARATIONS—Continued
CTG Source category
CTG Reference document
2006 RACT
SIP
2014 RACT
SIP
Magnet Wire ..............................
EPA–450/2–77–033, Control of Volatile Organic Emissions from Existing Stationary Sources—Volume IV: Surface Coating of Insulation of Magnet Wire.
EPA–450/2–77–032, Control of Volatile Organic Emissions from Existing Stationary Sources—Volume III: Surface Coating of Metal Furniture.
EPA 453/R–07–005, Control Techniques Guidelines for Metal Furniture Coatings ................................
EPA–450/3–83–007 Control of Volatile Organic Compound Equipment Leaks from Natural Gas/Gasoline Processing Plants.
EPA–450/2–77–008, Control of Volatile Organic Emissions from Existing Stationary Sources—Volume II: Surface Coating of Cans, Coils, Paper, Fabrics, Automobiles, and Light-Duty Trucks.
EPA 453/R–07–003, Control Techniques Guidelines for Paper, Film, and Foil Coatings .......................
EPA–450/2–78–029, Control of Volatile Organic Emissions from Manufacture of Synthesized Pharmaceutical Products.
EPA–450/3–83–008, Control of Volatile Organic Compound Emissions from Manufacture of HighDensity Polyethylene, Polypropylene, and Polystyrene Resins.
EPA–450/3–83–006, Control of Volatile Organic Compound Leaks from Synthetic Organic Chemical
Polymer and Resin Manufacturing Equipment.
EPA–450/2–77–025, Control of Refinery Vacuum Producing Systems, Wastewater Separators, and
Process Unit Turnarounds.
EPA–450/2–78–036, Control of Volatile Organic Compound Leaks from Petroleum Refinery Equipment.
EPA–450/2–78–030, Control of Volatile Organic Emissions from Manufacture of Pneumatic Rubber
Tires.
61 FR 44050, 08/27/96, Control Techniques Guidelines for Shipbuilding and Ship Repair Operations
(Surface Coating).
EPA–450/3–84–015, Control of Volatile Organic Compound Emissions from Air Oxidation Processes
in Synthetic Organic Chemical Manufacturing Industry.
EPA–450/4–91–031, Control of Volatile Organic Compound Emissions from Reactor Processes and
Distillation Operations in Synthetic Organic Chemical Manufacturing Industry.
X
X
X
X
N/A*
X
X
X
....................
X
N/A*
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
Metal Furniture Coatings ...........
Natural Gas/Gasoline ................
Paper and Fabric ......................
Paper, Film and Foil Coatings ..
Pharmaceutical Products ..........
Polyester Resin 3 .......................
Refineries ..................................
Rubber Tire ...............................
Ships/Marine Coating ................
Synthetic Organic Chemicals ....
* These CTGs were issued between 2006–2008 and are not a requirement for the 1997 8-hour ozone standard.
PCAPCD provided its 2006 and 2014
RACT SIPs for public comment prior to
the public hearing for adoption. No
written comments were received by the
District.
We are proposing to find that
PCAPCD’s 2006 and 2014 RACT SIP
submissions, including the above
negative declarations, adequately
demonstrate that its rules satisfy RACT
for the 1997 and 2008 8-hour ozone
NAAQS. Our TSDs have more
information on our evaluation.
pmangrum on DSK3GDR082PROD with PROPOSALS
C. EPA Recommendations To
Strengthen the RACT SIP
The TSD for the 2014 RACT SIP
describes recommendations for
potential future emission reductions the
next time the District opens the rules for
amendment.
D. Proposed Action and Public
Comment
Based on the evaluations discussed
above and more fully in our TSDs, we
are proposing to conclude that
PCAPCD’s 2006 and 2014 RACT SIPs
satisfy CAA section 182 RACT
requirements for the 1997 and 2008
8-hour ozone NAAQS and to fully
approve these submissions into the
California SIP pursuant to section
110(k)(3) of the Act.
We are also proposing to approve the
submitted negative declarations for the
polyester resins CTGs for the 2008 8-hr
Ozone NAAQS. We will accept
comments from the public on this
VerDate Sep<11>2014
14:02 Jun 14, 2017
Jkt 241001
proposal for the next 30 days. Unless we
receive convincing new information
during the comment period, we intend
to publish a final approval action that
will incorporate these RACT
submissions into the federally
enforceable SIP.
III. 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);
• 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
PO 00000
Frm 00016
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
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 (2 U.S.C. 1531–1538);
• 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 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
E:\FR\FM\15JNP1.SGM
15JNP1
27460
Federal Register / Vol. 82, No. 114 / Thursday, June 15, 2017 / Proposed Rules
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, Reporting and
recordkeeping requirements, Volatile
organic compounds.
Authority: 42 U.S.C. 7401 et seq.
Dated: May 16, 2017.
Alexis Strauss,
Acting Regional Administrator, Region IX.
[FR Doc. 2017–12344 Filed 6–14–17; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560–50–P
DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND
SECURITY
Federal Emergency Management
Agency
44 CFR Chapter I
[Docket ID FEMA–2017–0023]
Evaluation of Existing Regulations,
Policies, and Information Collections
Federal Emergency
Management Agency, DHS.
ACTION: Request for comment.
AGENCY:
As part of its implementation
of Executive Order 13771, ‘‘Reducing
Regulation and Controlling Regulatory
Costs,’’ issued by the President on
January 30, 2017, and Executive Order
13777, ‘‘Enforcing the Regulatory
Reform Agenda,’’ issued by the
President on February 24, 2017, the
Federal Emergency Management Agency
(FEMA) is seeking input on regulations,
policies, and information collections
that may be appropriate for repeal,
replacement, or modification.
DATES: Comments must be received by
August 14, 2017.
ADDRESSES: Comments must be
identified by docket ID FEMA–2017–
0023 and may be submitted by one of
the following methods:
Federal eRulemaking Portal: https://
www.regulations.gov. Follow the
instructions for submitting comments.
Mail: Regulatory Affairs Division,
Office of Chief Counsel, Federal
Emergency Management Agency, 8NE,
500 C Street SW., Washington, DC
20472–3100.
Instructions: All submissions received
must include the agency name and
docket ID. Regardless of the method
used for submitting comments or
pmangrum on DSK3GDR082PROD with PROPOSALS
SUMMARY:
VerDate Sep<11>2014
14:02 Jun 14, 2017
Jkt 241001
material, all submissions will be posted,
without change, to the Federal
eRulemaking Portal at https://
www.regulations.gov, and will include
any personal information you provide.
Therefore, submitting this information
makes it public. You may wish to read
the Privacy Act notice, which can be
viewed by clicking on the ‘‘Privacy and
Security Notice’’ link on the homepage
of www.regulations.gov.
Please submit your comments and any
supporting material by only one means
to avoid the receipt and review of
duplicate submissions.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Liza
Davis, Associate Chief Counsel,
Regulatory Affairs, Federal Emergency
Management Agency, 500 C Street SW.,
Washington, DC 20472, 202–646–4046.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: On
January 30, 2017, the President issued
Executive Order 13771, ‘‘Reducing
Regulation and Controlling Regulatory
Costs’’ (82 FR 9339). That Order stated
the policy of the executive branch is to
be prudent and financially responsible
in the expenditure of funds, from both
public and private sources. The Order
stated it is essential to manage the costs
associated with the governmental
imposition of private expenditures
required to comply with Federal
regulations. Toward that end, for fiscal
year 2017, Executive Order 13771
requires:
(1) ‘‘Unless prohibited by law,
whenever an executive department or
agency . . . publicly proposes for notice
and comment or otherwise promulgates
a new regulation, it shall identify at
least two existing regulations to be
repealed.’’ Sec. 2(a).
(2) ‘‘For fiscal year 2017, . . . the
heads of all agencies are directed that
the total incremental cost of all new
regulations, including repealed
regulations, to be finalized this year
shall be no greater than zero, unless
otherwise required by law or consistent
with advice provided in writing by the
Director of the Office of Management
and Budget . . . .’’ Sec. 2(b).
(3) ‘‘In furtherance of the requirement
of subsection (a) of this section, any new
incremental costs associated with new
regulations shall, to the extent permitted
by law, be offset by the elimination of
existing costs associated with at least
two prior regulations.’’ Sec. 2(c).
Further, the Executive Order requires
that for fiscal year 2018, and for each
fiscal year thereafter, the head of each
agency shall identify, for each
regulation that increases incremental
cost, offsetting regulations, and provide
the agency’s best approximation of the
total costs or savings associated with
PO 00000
Frm 00017
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
each new regulation or repealed
regulation. During the Presidential
budget process beginning in fiscal year
2018 and for each year thereafter, the
Director of the Office of Management
and Budget (Director) will identify to
each agency a total amount of
incremental costs that will be allowed
for such agency in issuing new
regulations and repealing regulations for
the next fiscal year. No regulations
exceeding the agency’s total incremental
cost allowance will be permitted in that
fiscal year, unless required by law or
approved in writing by the Director. The
total incremental cost allowance may
allow an increase or require a reduction
in total regulatory cost.
Additionally, on February 24, 2017,
the President issued Executive Order
13777, ‘‘Enforcing the Regulatory
Reform Agenda’’ (82 FR 12285). The
Order established a Federal policy to
alleviate unnecessary regulatory
burdens placed on the American people.
Section 3(a) of the Executive Order
directs Federal agencies to establish a
Regulatory Reform Task Force (Task
Force). One of the duties of the Task
Force is to evaluate existing regulations
and make recommendations to the
agency head regarding their repeal,
replacement, or modification. The
Executive Order further asks that each
Task Force attempt to identify
regulations that:
(i) Eliminate jobs, or inhibit job
creation;
(ii) Are outdated, unnecessary, or
ineffective;
(iii) Impose costs that exceed benefits;
(iv) Create a serious inconsistency or
otherwise interfere with regulatory
reform initiatives and policies;
(v) Are inconsistent with the
requirements of section 515 of the
Treasury and General Government
Appropriations Act, 2001 (44 U.S.C.
3516 note), or the guidance issued
pursuant to that provision in particular
those regulations that rely in whole or
in part on data, information, or methods
that are not publicly available or that are
insufficiently transparent to meet the
standard of reproducibility; or
(vi) Derive from or implement
Executive Orders or other Presidential
directives that have been subsequently
rescinded or substantially modified.
The Office of Management and Budget
has directed that agency policies (such
as guidance and interpretative
documents) and information collections
that impose costs on the public may also
be identified under the above criteria, in
addition to regulations.
Section 3(e) of the Executive Order
calls on the Task Force to seek input
and other assistance on this task, as
E:\FR\FM\15JNP1.SGM
15JNP1
Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 82, Number 114 (Thursday, June 15, 2017)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 27456-27460]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2017-12344]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
40 CFR Part 52
[EPA-R09-OAR-2017-0218; FRL-9963-56-Region 9]
Approval of California Air Plan Revisions, Placer County Air
Pollution Control District
AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).
ACTION: Proposed rule.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is proposing to
approve revisions to the Placer County Air Pollution Control District
(PCAPCD or ``the District'') portion of the California State
Implementation Plan (SIP). These revisions concern the District's
demonstration regarding Reasonably Available Control Technology (RACT)
requirements for the 1997 and 2008 8-hour ozone National Ambient Air
Quality Standards (NAAQS), and negative declarations for the polyester
resin source category for the 2008 8-hour ozone standard. We are
proposing action on local SIP revisions 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: Any comments must arrive by July 17, 2017.
ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, identified by Docket ID No. EPA-R09-
OAR-2017-0218 at https://www.regulations.gov, or via email to Andrew
Steckel, Rulemaking Office Chief at steckel.andrew@epa.gov. For
comments submitted at Regulations.gov, follow the online instructions
for submitting comments. Once submitted, comments cannot be removed or
edited 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 https://www2.epa.gov/dockets/commenting-epa-dockets.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Nicole Law, EPA Region IX, (415) 947-
4126, law.nicole@epa.gov or Stanley Tong, EPA Region IX, (415) 947-
4122, tong.stanley@epa.gov.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Throughout this document, ``we,'' ``us'' and
``our'' refer to the EPA.
[[Page 27457]]
Table of Contents
I. The State's Submittal
A. What documents did the State submit?
B. Are there other versions of these documents?
C. What is the purpose of the RACT SIP submissions?
II. The EPA's Evaluation and Proposed Action
A. How is the EPA evaluating the RACT SIP submissions?
B. Do the RACT SIP submissions meet the evaluation criteria?
C. EPA's Recommendations To Strengthen the RACT SIP
D. Proposed Action and Public Comment
III. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews
I. The State's Submittal
A. What documents 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 California Air Resources Board (CARB).
Table 1--Submitted Documents
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Local agency Document Adopted Submitted
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
PCAPCD..................................... 2006 Reasonably Available Control 8/10/06 7/11/07
Technology State Implementation
Plan Update Analysis (``2006 RACT
SIP'').
PCAPCD..................................... 2014 Reasonably Available Control 4/10/14 7/18/14
Technology State Implementation
Plan Analysis (``2014 RACT SIP'').
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
On January 11, 2008, the submittal for PCAPCD's 2006 RACT SIP
Analysis for the 1997 8-hour ozone NAAQS was deemed by operation of law
to meet the completeness criteria in Title 40 of the Code of Federal
Regulations (CFR) Part 51 Appendix V, which must be met before formal
EPA review. On January 18, 2015, the submittal for PCAPCD's 2014 RACT
SIP Analysis for the 2008 8-hour ozone NAAQS was deemed by operation of
law to meet the completeness criteria as well.
B. Are there other versions of these documents?
There are no previous versions of these documents in the PCAPCD
portion of the California SIP for the 1997 or 2008 8-hour ozone
standards.
C. What is the purpose of the RACT SIP submissions?
Volatile organic compounds (VOCs) and nitrogen oxides
(NOX) help produce ground-level ozone and smog, which harm
human health and the environment. Section 110(a) of the CAA requires
states to submit enforceable regulations that control VOC and
NOX emissions. Sections 182(b)(2) and (f) require that SIPs
for ozone nonattainment areas classified as moderate or above require
implementation of RACT for any source covered by a Control Techniques
Guidelines (CTG) document and for any major source of VOCs or
NOX. The PCAPCD is subject to this requirement because it
contains an area designated and classified as severe-15 nonattainment
for the 1997 and 2008 8-hour ozone NAAQS.\1\ Therefore, the PCAPCD
must, at a minimum, adopt RACT-level controls for all sources covered
by a CTG document and for all major non-CTG sources of VOCs or
NOX within the nonattainment area. Any stationary source
that emits or has the potential to emit at least 25 tons per year of
VOCs or NOX is a major stationary source in a severe ozone
nonattainment area (CAA sections 182(d) and (f)).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ 40 CFR 81.305; 75 FR 24409 at 24419 (May 5, 2010) (final
rule reclassifying the Sacramento Metro area as severe-15
nonattainment for the 1997 8-hour ozone NAAQS); and 77 FR 30088 at
30104-05 (May 21, 2012) (final rule designating and classifying the
Sacramento Metro area as severe-15 nonattainment for the 2008 8-hour
ozone NAAQS).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Section IV.G of the preamble to the EPA's final rule to implement
the 1997 8-hour ozone NAAQS (70 FR 71612, 71652-61 November 29, 2005)
discusses RACT requirements. It states in part that where a RACT SIP is
required, states implementing the 8-hour standard generally must assure
that RACT is met either through a certification that previously
required RACT controls represent RACT for 8-hour implementation
purposes or through a new RACT determination. Section III.D of the
preamble to the EPA's final rule to implement the 2008 ozone NAAQS (80
FR 12264, 12278-83 March 6, 2015) discusses similar requirements for
RACT. The submitted documents provide PCAPCD's analyses of its
compliance with the CAA section 182 RACT requirements for the 1997 and
2008 8-hour ozone NAAQS. The EPA's technical support documents (TSDs)
have more information about the District's submissions and the EPA's
evaluations thereof.
II. The EPA's Evaluation and Proposed Action
A. How is the EPA evaluating the RACT SIP submissions?
Generally, SIP rules must require RACT for each category of sources
covered by a CTG document as well as each major source of VOCs or
NOX in ozone nonattainment areas classified as moderate or
above (see CAA section 182(b)(2), (f)). The PCAPCD regulates a severe
ozone nonattainment area (see 40 CFR 81.305), so the District's rules
must implement RACT.
Guidance and policy documents that we use to evaluate CAA section
182 RACT requirements for the applicable criteria pollutants include
the following:
1. ``Final Rule to Implement the 8-hour Ozone National Ambient Air
Quality Standard--Phase 2'' (70 FR 71612; November 29, 2005).
2. ``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).
3. ``Issues Relating to VOC Regulation Cutpoints, Deficiencies, and
Deviations,'' EPA, May 25, 1988 (the Bluebook).
4. ``Guidance Document for Correcting Common VOC & Other Rule
Deficiencies,'' EPA Region 9, August 21, 2001 (the Little Bluebook).
5. ``State Implementation Plans; Nitrogen Oxides Supplement to the
General Preamble; Clean Air Act Amendments of 1990 Implementation of
Title I; Proposed Rule,'' (the NOX Supplement), 57 FR 55620,
November 25, 1992.
6. Memorandum from William T. Harnett to Regional Air Division
Directors, (May 18, 2006), ``RACT Qs & As--Reasonably Available Control
Technology (RACT) Questions and Answers''.
7. RACT SIPs, Letter dated March 9, 2006 from EPA Region IX (Andrew
Steckel) to CARB (Kurt Karperos) describing Region IX's understanding
of what constitutes a minimally acceptable RACT SIP.
8. RACT SIPs, Letter dated April 4, 2006 from EPA Region IX (Andrew
Steckel) to CARB (Kurt Karperos) listing EPA's current CTGs,
Alternative Control Techniques (ACTs), and other
[[Page 27458]]
documents which may help to establish RACT.
9. ``Implementation of the 2008 National Ambient Air Quality
Standards for Ozone: State Implementation Plan Requirements'' (80 FR
12264; March 6, 2015).
With respect to major stationary sources, even though the PCAPCD
nonattainment area was classified as ``serious'' nonattainment for the
1997 8-hour ozone NAAQS at the time the District adopted its 2006 RACT
SIP, the District performed its 2006 RACT SIP demonstration as though
it were classified as a ``severe'' nonattainment area by analyzing for
major VOC/NOX sources that emit or have the potential to
emit at least 25 tons per year (tpy) as opposed to the 50 tpy threshold
associated with major sources in ``serious'' ozone nonattainment
areas.\2\ CAA section 182(c), (d), and (f).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\2\ Major stationary sources of VOC or NOX in serious
ozone nonattainment are those sources that emit or have the
potential to emit at least 50 tons per year.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
On May 5, 2010 (75 FR 24409), EPA granted the State of California's
request to reclassify the Sacramento Metropolitan ozone nonattainment
area, which includes parts of the PCAPCD, from ``serious'' to ``severe-
15'' for the 1997 8-hour ozone NAAQS. The Sacramento Metropolitan ozone
nonattainment area is also classified as severe-15 for the 2008 8-hour
ozone standard. 40 CFR 81.305. We evaluated both PCAPCD's 2006 RACT SIP
and its 2014 RACT SIP based on a ``severe-15'' classification.
B. Do the RACT SIP submissions meet the evaluation criteria?
PCAPCD's 2006 and 2014 RACT SIPs provide the District's
demonstration and certification that the applicable SIP for the Placer
County APCD satisfies CAA section 182 RACT requirements for the 1997
and 2008 8-hour ozone NAAQS. This conclusion is based on the District's
analysis of SIP-approved requirements that apply to: (1) CTG source
categories; and (2) major non-CTG stationary sources of NOX
or VOC emissions. See PCAPCD's 2006 RACT SIP Tables A and B and 2014
RACT SIP Table 1.
With respect to the 2006 RACT SIP, Table A in the appendix to the
2006 RACT SIP identifies the CTG and non-CTG categories with the
applicable district rules. The District did identify in Table D-1 of
the 2006 RACT SIP several rules that required re-submittal since newer
versions of the rules had been adopted. We reviewed the submittal
status of the rules in Table D-1 and conclude that the rules have been
submitted and approved into the SIP as meeting RACT.
Table B in the appendix to the 2006 RACT SIP lists major sources of
VOC and NOX in the District and includes a statement that
all the major stationary sources have adopted District rules that
satisfy RACT requirements. We reviewed CARB's emissions inventory
database for other potential CTG and/or major non-CTG sources not
included in PCAPCD's analysis and identified one major point source in
the District that is subject to section 182 RACT but was not identified
by the District. Capital Drum Inc., in Roseville, CA is a drum
manufacturer/refurbisher and emitted 34 tpy of VOCs in 2007. We
determined the source is covered by District Rule 223 ``Metal Container
Coating,'' which meets current RACT.
With respect to the 2014 RACT SIP, Table 1 of the 2014 RACT SIP
lists existing District rules that have been determined to meet RACT
and also lists the applicable CTGs. PCAPCD compared its rules to the
CTGs and rules of other air districts to determine if they satisfied
RACT. We conclude the PCAPCD rules meet RACT.
The 2014 RACT SIP identified three major stationary point sources
of NOX or VOC: Two biomass boilers and a natural gas
turbine. PCAPCD's 2014 RACT SIP states the biomass boilers and natural
gas turbine are subject to District RACT rules.
We reviewed CARB's emissions inventory database for other potential
CTG and/or major non-CTG sources not included in PCAPCD's analysis and
did not identify any other major sources in the District. However,
CARB's emissions inventory identified one potential CTG source under
standard industrial classification (SIC) code 2821 for the manufacture
of high-density polyethylene, polypropylene, and polystyrene CTG--for
which PCAPCD's 2014 RACT SIP indicated it had no subject sources.
Further investigation revealed that the SIC listed in CARB's emissions
inventory database for Sak Construction LLC was incorrect and that Sak
Construction LLC does not manufacture high-density polyethylene,
polypropylene, and polystyrene and therefore is not subject to the CTG.
The TSD contains further details.
Where there are no existing sources covered by a particular CTG
document, states may, in lieu of adopting RACT requirements for those
sources, adopt negative declarations certifying that there are no such
sources in the relevant nonattainment area. Table C of PCAPCD's 2006
RACT SIP and Table 2 of PCAPCD's 2014 RACT SIP lists the District's
negative declarations where it had no sources subject to the applicable
CTGs for the 1997 and 2008 8-hour ozone standards respectively. The
District based its conclusions on a review of its permit database,
internet search, business listings, SIC codes, industrial trade
association records, and yellow pages. We summarized the District's
negative declarations in Table 2 below.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\3\ Based on PCAPCD's 2014 RACT SIP, Table 2, a negative
declaration was required for the Polyester Resin CTG. PCAPCD adopted
the required negative declaration and submitted it with its 2014
RACT SIP.
Table 2--PCAPCD Negative Declarations
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
2006 RACT 2014 RACT
CTG Source category CTG Reference document SIP SIP
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Aerospace Coatings................................ EPA-453/R-97-004, Control of X X
Volatile Organic Compound
Emissions from Coating
Operations at Aerospace
Manufacturing and Rework
Operations.
Automobile and Light-duty Truck Assembly Coatings. EPA-450/2-77-008, Control of X X
Volatile Organic Emissions from
Existing Stationary Sources--
Volume II: Surface Coating of
Cans, Coils, Paper, Fabrics,
Automobiles, and Light-Duty
Trucks.
EPA 453/R-08-006, Control N/A* X
Techniques Guidelines for
Automobile and Light-Duty Truck
Assembly Coatings.
Dry Cleaning (Petroleum).......................... EPA-450/3-82-009, Control of X X
Volatile Organic Compound
Emissions from Large Petroleum
Dry Cleaners.
Fiberglass Boat Manufacturing..................... EPA 453/R-08-004, Control N/A* X
Techniques Guidelines for
Fiberglass Boat Manufacturing
Materials.
Flexible Packaging Printing....................... EPA-453/R-06-003, Control N/A* X
Techniques Guidelines for
Flexible Package Printing.
Large Appliances Surface Coatings................. EPA-450/2-77-034, Control of X X
Volatile Organic Emissions from
Existing Stationary Sources--
Volume V: Surface Coating of
Large Appliances.
EPA 453/R-07-004, Control N/A* X
Techniques Guidelines for Large
Appliance Coatings.
[[Page 27459]]
Magnet Wire....................................... EPA-450/2-77-033, Control of X X
Volatile Organic Emissions from
Existing Stationary Sources--
Volume IV: Surface Coating of
Insulation of Magnet Wire.
Metal Furniture Coatings.......................... EPA-450/2-77-032, Control of X X
Volatile Organic Emissions from
Existing Stationary Sources--
Volume III: Surface Coating of
Metal Furniture.
EPA 453/R-07-005, Control N/A* X
Techniques Guidelines for Metal
Furniture Coatings.
Natural Gas/Gasoline.............................. EPA-450/3-83-007 Control of X X
Volatile Organic Compound
Equipment Leaks from Natural
Gas/Gasoline Processing Plants.
Paper and Fabric.................................. EPA-450/2-77-008, Control of ............ X
Volatile Organic Emissions from
Existing Stationary Sources--
Volume II: Surface Coating of
Cans, Coils, Paper, Fabrics,
Automobiles, and Light-Duty
Trucks.
Paper, Film and Foil Coatings..................... EPA 453/R-07-003, Control N/A* X
Techniques Guidelines for
Paper, Film, and Foil Coatings.
Pharmaceutical Products........................... EPA-450/2-78-029, Control of X X
Volatile Organic Emissions from
Manufacture of Synthesized
Pharmaceutical Products.
Polyester Resin \3\............................... EPA-450/3-83-008, Control of X X
Volatile Organic Compound
Emissions from Manufacture of
High-Density Polyethylene,
Polypropylene, and Polystyrene
Resins.
EPA-450/3-83-006, Control of X X
Volatile Organic Compound Leaks
from Synthetic Organic Chemical
Polymer and Resin Manufacturing
Equipment.
Refineries........................................ EPA-450/2-77-025, Control of X X
Refinery Vacuum Producing
Systems, Wastewater Separators,
and Process Unit Turnarounds.
EPA-450/2-78-036, Control of X X
Volatile Organic Compound Leaks
from Petroleum Refinery
Equipment.
Rubber Tire....................................... EPA-450/2-78-030, Control of X X
Volatile Organic Emissions from
Manufacture of Pneumatic Rubber
Tires.
Ships/Marine Coating.............................. 61 FR 44050, 08/27/96, Control X X
Techniques Guidelines for
Shipbuilding and Ship Repair
Operations (Surface Coating).
Synthetic Organic Chemicals....................... EPA-450/3-84-015, Control of X X
Volatile Organic Compound
Emissions from Air Oxidation
Processes in Synthetic Organic
Chemical Manufacturing Industry.
EPA-450/4-91-031, Control of X X
Volatile Organic Compound
Emissions from Reactor
Processes and Distillation
Operations in Synthetic Organic
Chemical Manufacturing Industry.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
* These CTGs were issued between 2006-2008 and are not a requirement for the 1997 8-hour ozone standard.
PCAPCD provided its 2006 and 2014 RACT SIPs for public comment
prior to the public hearing for adoption. No written comments were
received by the District.
We are proposing to find that PCAPCD's 2006 and 2014 RACT SIP
submissions, including the above negative declarations, adequately
demonstrate that its rules satisfy RACT for the 1997 and 2008 8-hour
ozone NAAQS. Our TSDs have more information on our evaluation.
C. EPA Recommendations To Strengthen the RACT SIP
The TSD for the 2014 RACT SIP describes recommendations for
potential future emission reductions the next time the District opens
the rules for amendment.
D. Proposed Action and Public Comment
Based on the evaluations discussed above and more fully in our
TSDs, we are proposing to conclude that PCAPCD's 2006 and 2014 RACT
SIPs satisfy CAA section 182 RACT requirements for the 1997 and 2008 8-
hour ozone NAAQS and to fully approve these submissions into the
California SIP pursuant to section 110(k)(3) of the Act.
We are also proposing to approve the submitted negative
declarations for the polyester resins CTGs for the 2008 8-hr Ozone
NAAQS. We will accept comments from the public on this proposal for the
next 30 days. Unless we receive convincing new information during the
comment period, we intend to publish a final approval action that will
incorporate these RACT submissions into the federally enforceable SIP.
III. 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);
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 (2 U.S.C. 1531-1538);
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
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
[[Page 27460]]
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,
Reporting and recordkeeping requirements, Volatile organic compounds.
Authority: 42 U.S.C. 7401 et seq.
Dated: May 16, 2017.
Alexis Strauss,
Acting Regional Administrator, Region IX.
[FR Doc. 2017-12344 Filed 6-14-17; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P