Revisions to the California State Implementation Plan, San Joaquin Valley Air Pollution Control District, 67154-67156 [E9-30169]
Download as PDF
<![CDATA[
67154
Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 242 / Friday, December 18, 2009 / Proposed Rules
except for claims over which the Board
has original jurisdiction.
(c) Remand for a Statement of the
Case. In cases before the Board in which
a claimant has timely filed a Notice of
Disagreement with a determination of
the agency of original jurisdiction on a
claim, but the record does not reflect
that the agency of original jurisdiction
subsequently granted the claim in full or
furnished the claimant with a Statement
of the Case, the Board shall remand the
claim to the agency of original
jurisdiction with instructions to prepare
and issue a Statement of the Case in
accordance with the provisions of
subpart B of this part. A remand for a
Statement of the Case is not required if
the claimant, consistent with the
withdrawal requirements of § 20.204 of
this chapter, withdraws the Notice of
Disagreement.
(d) Exceptions. A remand or referral
to the agency of original jurisdiction is
not necessary for any of the following
purposes:
(1) Clarifying a procedural matter
before the Board, including the
appellant’s choice of representative
before the Board, the issues on appeal,
or requests for a hearing before the
Board;
(2) Considering law not already
considered by the agency of original
jurisdiction, including, but not limited
to, statutes, regulations, and court
decisions;
(3) Reviewing additional evidence
received by the Board, if, pursuant to
§ 20.1304(c) of this chapter, the
appellant or the appellant’s
representative waives the right to initial
consideration by the agency of original
jurisdiction, or if the Board determines
that the benefit or benefits to which the
evidence relates may be fully allowed
on appeal;
(4) Requesting an opinion under
§ 20.901 of this chapter;
(5) Supplementing the record with a
recognized medical treatise; or
(6) Considering a matter over which
the Board has original jurisdiction.
(Authority: 38 U.S.C. 7102, 7103(c), 7104(a),
7105).
erowe on DSK5CLS3C1PROD with PROPOSALS-1
PART 20—BOARD OF VETERANS’
APPEALS: RULES OF PRACTICE
3. The authority citation for part 20
continues to read as follows:
Authority: 38 U.S.C. 501(a) and as noted
in specific sections.
Subpart J—Action by the Board
4. Amend § 20.903 by:
a. Revising the section heading.
b. Revising paragraph (b).
VerDate Nov<24>2008
15:10 Dec 17, 2009
Jkt 220001
The revisions read as follows:
§ 20.903 Rule 903. Notification of evidence
to be considered by the Board and
opportunity for response.
*
*
*
*
*
(b) If the Board supplements the
record with a recognized medical
treatise. (1) General. If, pursuant to
§ 19.9(d)(5) of this chapter, the Board
supplements the record with a
recognized medical treatise, the Board
will notify the appellant and his or her
representative, if any, that the Board
will consider such recognized medical
treatise in the adjudication of the
appeal. The notice from the Board will
contain a copy of the relevant portions
of the recognized medical treatise. The
appellant will be given 60 days after the
date of the notice described in this
section to file a response, which may
include the submission of relevant
evidence or argument. The date the
Board gives the notice will be presumed
to be the same as the date of the notice
letter for purposes of determining
whether a response was timely filed.
(2) Exception. The notice described in
paragraph (b)(1) of this section is not
required if the Board uses a recognized
medical treatise or medical dictionary
for the limited purpose of defining a
medical term and that definition is not
material to the Board’s disposition of
the appeal.
5. Revise paragraph (b)(2) of § 20.1304
to read as follows:
§ 20.1304 Rule 1304. Request for change
in representation, request for personal
hearing, or submission of additional
evidence following certification of an appeal
to the Board of Veterans’ Appeals.
*
*
*
*
*
(b) * * *
(2) Exception. The motion described
in paragraph (b)(1) of this section is not
required to submit evidence in response
to a notice described in § 20.903 of this
chapter.
*
*
*
*
*
[FR Doc. E9–30094 Filed 12–17–09; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE P
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION
AGENCY
40 CFR Part 52
[EPA–R09–OAR–2009–0859, FRL–9093–7]
Revisions to the California State
Implementation Plan, San Joaquin
Valley Air Pollution Control District
AGENCY: Environmental Protection
Agency (EPA).
ACTION: Proposed rule.
PO 00000
Frm 00015
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
SUMMARY: EPA is proposing to approve
revisions to the San Joaquin Valley Air
Pollution Control District (SJVAPCD)
portion of the California State
Implementation Plan (SIP). Under
authority of the Clean Air Act as
amended in 1990 (CAA or the Act), we
are proposing to approve local rules that
address reduction of animal matter and
volatile organic compound (VOC)
emissions from crude oil production,
cutback asphalt, and petroleum solvent
dry cleaning.
DATES: Any comments must arrive by
January 19, 2010.
ADDRESSES: Submit comments,
identified by docket number EPA–R09–
OAR–2009–0859, by one of the
following methods:
1. Federal eRulemaking Portal:
https://www.regulations.gov. Follow the
on-line instructions.
2. E-mail: steckel.andrew@epa.gov.
3. Mail or deliver: Andrew Steckel
(Air–4), U.S. Environmental Protection
Agency Region IX, 75 Hawthorne Street,
San Francisco, CA 94105–3901.
Instructions: All comments will be
included in the public docket without
change and may be made available
online at https://www.regulations.gov,
including any personal information
provided, unless the comment includes
Confidential Business Information (CBI)
or other information whose disclosure is
restricted by statute. Information that
you consider CBI or otherwise protected
should be clearly identified as such and
should not be submitted through
https://www.regulations.gov or e-mail.
https://www.regulations.gov is an
‘‘anonymous access’’ system, and EPA
will not know your identity or contact
information unless you provide it in the
body of your comment. If you send email directly to EPA, your e-mail
address will be automatically captured
and included as part of the public
comment. If EPA cannot read your
comment due to technical difficulties
and cannot contact you for clarification,
EPA may not be able to consider your
comment.
Docket: The index to the docket for
this action is available electronically at
https://www.regulations.gov and in hard
copy at EPA Region IX, 75 Hawthorne
Street, San Francisco, California. While
all documents in the docket are listed in
the index, some information may be
publicly available only at the hard copy
location (e.g., copyrighted material), and
some may not be publicly available in
either location (e.g., CBI). To inspect the
hard copy materials, please schedule an
appointment during normal business
hours with the contact listed in the FOR
FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section.
E:\FR\FM\18DEP1.SGM
18DEP1
67155
Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 242 / Friday, December 18, 2009 / Proposed Rules
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Joanne Wells, EPA Region IX, (415)
947–4118, wells.joanne@epa.gov.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Throughout this document, ‘‘we,’’ ‘‘us’’
and ‘‘our’’ refer to EPA.
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
Rules and Rule Revisions?
II. EPA’s Evaluation and Action
A. How Is EPA Evaluating the Rules?
B. Do the Rules Meet the Evaluation
Criteria?
C. EPA Recommendations To Further
Improve the Rules
D. Public Comment and Final Action
III. 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, amended, or revised by
the local air agencies and submitted by
the California Air Resources Board
(CARB).
TABLE 1—SUBMITTED RULES PROPOSED FOR FULL APPROVAL
District
Rule No.
SJVUAPCD .............................
SJVUAPCD .............................
SJVUAPCD .............................
4104
4404
4641
SJVUAPCD .............................
4672
On September 17, 2007, the submittal
of August 24, 2007 was found to meet
the completeness criteria in 40 CFR part
51, appendix V, which must be met
before formal EPA review.
erowe on DSK5CLS3C1PROD with PROPOSALS-1
B. Are There Other Versions of These
Rules?
Some SIP versions of submitted
SJVAPCD rules are old rules from the
eight counties that now comprise
SJVAPCD; other SIP versions are
SJVAPCD rules that have been
renumbered. These SIP-approved rules
are described below.
Precursor SIP rules for submitted
SJVAPCD Rule 4104:
• Fresno County Rule 414, Reduction
of Animal Matter (approved on
September 22, 1972, 37 FR 19812).
• Kern County Rule 415, Reduction of
Animal Matter (approved on September
22, 1972, 37 FR 19812).
• Kings County Rule 415, Reduction
of Animal Matter (approved on
September 22, 1972, 37 FR 19812).
• Madera County Rule 421, Reduction
of Animal Matter (approved on
November 18, 1983, 48 FR 52450).
• Merced County Rule 414, Reduction
of Animal Matter (approved on
September 22, 1972, 37 FR 19812).
• San Joaquin County Rule 414,
Reduction of Animal Matter (approved
on August 22, 1977, 42 FR 42219).
• Stanislaus County Rule 414,
Reduction of Animal Matter (approved
on September 22, 1972, 37 FR 19812).
• Tulare County Rule 415, Reduction
of Animal Matter (approved on
September 22, 1972, 37 FR 19812).
Precursor SIP rule for submitted
SJVAPCD Rule 4641:
• SJVAPCD Rule 463.1, Cutback,
Slow Cure, and Emulsified Asphalt,
Paving and Maintenance Operations
(amended on September 19, 1991,
VerDate Nov<24>2008
15:10 Dec 17, 2009
Jkt 220001
Rule title
Amended
Reduction of Animal Matter ....................................................
Heavy Oil Test Station—Kern County ...................................
Cutback, Slow Cure, and Emulsified Asphalt, Paving and
Maintenance Operations.
Petroleum Solvent Dry Cleaning Operations .........................
approved on June 24, 1992, 57 FR
28089).
Precursor SIP rule for submitted
SJVAPCD Rule 4672:
• SJVAPCD Rule 467.2, Petroleum
Solvent Dry Cleaning Operations
(adopted on April 11, 1991, approved
on April 24, 1992, 57 FR 15026).
There is no SIP rule for submitted
SJVAPCD Rule 4404.
C. What Is the Purpose of the Submitted
Rules and Rule Revisions?
Section 110(a) of the CAA requires
states to submit regulations that control
volatile organic compounds, oxides of
nitrogen, particulate matter, and other
air pollutants which harm human health
and the environment. These rules were
developed as part of the local agency’s
program to control these pollutants.
The purpose of new SJVAPCD Rule
4404 is as follows:
• 4404: The new rule requires
reducing uncontrolled VOC emissions
from a heavy oil test station by 99%.
The purposes of amendments to Rules
4104, 4641, and 4672 are as follows:
• 4104: The requirement for reducing
air contaminants during the reduction of
animal matter by setting a minimum
exposure time of 0.3 seconds at 1200
degrees Fahrenheit is unchanged. The
format is improved, the rule is
renumbered, and the rule applicability
is added.
• 4641: The rule requires reducing
VOC emissions by prohibiting the
application and manufacturing of
certain types of asphalt used for paving
and maintenance operations. The format
is improved, the rule is renumbered,
and the definition of VOC is deleted.
• 4672: The rule requires reducing
VOC emissions from petroleum solvent
dry cleaning operations through
implementation of various good
PO 00000
Frm 00016
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
Submitted
12/17/92
12/17/92
12/17/92
08/24/07
08/24/07
08/24/07
12/17/92
08/24/07
operating practices and with the use of
emission control equipment. The format
is improved, the rule is renumbered,
and the rule purpose is added.
The TSD has more information about
these rules.
II. EPA’s Evaluation and Action
A. How Is EPA Evaluating the Rules?
Generally, SIP rules must be
enforceable (see section 110(a) of the
CAA), must require Reasonably
Available Control Technology (RACT)
for each category of sources covered by
a Control Techniques Guidelines (CTG)
document as well as each major source
in nonattainment areas (see section
182(a)(2)), and must not relax existing
requirements (see sections 110(l) and
193). The SJVAPCD regulates an ozone
nonattainment area (see 40 CFR part 81)
and must fulfill the requirements of
RACT.
Guidance and policy documents that
we used to help evaluate rules and
RACT requirements consistently
include the following:
1. Portions of the proposed post-1987
ozone and carbon monoxide policy that
concern RACT, 52 FR 45044 (November
24, 1987).
2. Requirements for Preparation,
Adoption, and Submittal of
Implementation Plans, U.S. EPA, 40
CFR part 51.
3. Issues Relating to VOC Regulation
Cutpoints, Deficiencies, and Deviations,
EPA (May 25, 1988). [The Bluebook]
4. Addendum to the General Preamble
for the Implementation of Title I of the
Clean Air Act Amendments of 1990, 59
FR 41998 (August 16, 1994).
5. Guidance Document for Correcting
Common VOC & Other Rule
Deficiencies, EPA Region 9 (August 21,
2001). [The Little Bluebook]
E:\FR\FM\18DEP1.SGM
18DEP1
67156
Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 242 / Friday, December 18, 2009 / Proposed Rules
6. Control of Volatile Organic
Compound Emissions from Large
Petroleum Dry Cleaners, U.S. EPA–450/
3–82–009 (September 1982).
7. Control of Volatile Organic
Emissions from Use of Cutback Asphalt,
U.S. EPA–450/2–77–037 (December
1977).
8. 2007 Ozone Plan, San Joaquin
Valley Air Pollution Control District
(April 30, 2007). https://www.arb.ca.gov/
planning/sip/2007sip/sjv8hr/
sjvozone.htm.
9. RACT Demonstration for Ozone
SIP, San Joaquin Valley Air Pollution
Control District (April 16, 2009). https://
www.valleyair.org/Workshops/public_
workshops_idx.htm#8hrOzone
RactSIP%2004-16-10.
10. RACT Analysis for Rules 4104,
4402, 4404, 4453, 4454, 4625, 4641, and
4672, San Joaquin Valley Air Pollution
Control District (June 12, 2008).
B. Do the Rules Meet the Evaluation
Criteria?
We believe that SJVAPCD Rules 4104,
4404, 4641, and 4672 are consistent
with the relevant policy and guidance
regarding enforceability, RACT and SIP
relaxations.
The TSD has more information on our
evaluation.
C. EPA Recommendations To Further
Improve the Rules
The TSD describes additional rule
revisions that we recommend for the
next time the local agency modifies the
rules.
D. Public Comment and Final Action
Because EPA believes the submitted
rules fulfill all relevant requirements,
we are proposing to fully approve them
as described in section 110(k)(3) of the
CAA. 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 rules into the federally enforceable
SIP.
erowe on DSK5CLS3C1PROD with PROPOSALS-1
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, EPA’s role is to approve
state choices, provided that they meet
the criteria of the Clean Air Act.
Accordingly, this action merely
approves state law as meeting Federal
requirements and does not impose
VerDate Nov<24>2008
15:10 Dec 17, 2009
Jkt 220001
additional requirements beyond those
imposed by state law. For that reason,
this action:
• Is not a ‘‘significant regulatory
action’’ subject to review by the Office
of Management and Budget under
Executive Order 12866 (58 FR 51735,
October 4, 1993);
• 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 EPA with the
discretionary authority to address, as
appropriate, disproportionate human
health or environmental effects, using
practicable and legally permissible
methods, under Executive Order 12898
(59 FR 7629, February 16, 1994).
In addition, this rule does not have
tribal implications as specified by
Executive Order 13175 (65 FR 67249,
November 9, 2000), because the SIP is
not approved to apply in Indian country
located in the state, and EPA notes that
it will not impose substantial direct
costs on tribal governments or preempt
tribal law.
List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52
Environmental protection, Air
pollution control, Intergovernmental
relations, Ozone, Reporting and
recordkeeping requirements, Volatile
organic compounds.
Authority: 42 U.S.C. 7401 et seq.
PO 00000
Frm 00017
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
Dated: December 2, 2009.
Laura Yoshii,
Acting Regional Administrator, Region IX.
[FR Doc. E9–30169 Filed 12–17–09; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560–50–P
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
National Highway Traffic Safety
Administration
49 CFR Part 595
[Docket No. NHTSA–2009–0065]
RIN 2127–AK22
Make Inoperative Exemptions; Head
Restraints
AGENCY: National Highway Traffic
Safety Administration (NHTSA),
Department of Transportation (DOT).
ACTION: Response to petition; Notice of
proposed rulemaking (NPRM).
SUMMARY: This notice of proposed
rulemaking is being issued in response
to a petition from Bruno Independent
Living Aids to expand and update
existing exemptions to the ‘‘make
inoperative’’ prohibition with respect to
the Federal motor vehicle safety
standard on head restraints. These
exemptions are included in a regulation
that provides exemptions for the ‘‘make
inoperative’’ provision for, among other
things, vehicle modifications to
accommodate people with disabilities.
NHTSA is proposing two substantive
changes to the regulation. The first is to
expand the exemption from the
minimum height requirements listed in
the head restraint standard to include
the right front passenger position in
addition to the driver position. The
second is to update the exemption to
include relevant provisions of a new
version of the head restraint standard.
Additionally, this document proposes to
update an existing reference in the
exemption to reflect the current
numbering in the Code of Federal
Regulations. Finally, we are denying
other requests to expand the exemption
to certain other requirements of the
head restraint standard.
DATES: You should submit our
comments early enough to ensure that
Docket Management receives them not
later than February 16, 2010.
ADDRESSES: You may submit comments
to the docket number identified in the
heading of this document by any of the
following methods:
• Federal eRulemaking Portal: Go to
https://www.regulations.gov. Follow the
online instructions for submitting
comments.
E:\FR\FM\18DEP1.SGM
18DEP1
]]>Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 74, Number 242 (Friday, December 18, 2009)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 67154-67156]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: E9-30169]
=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
40 CFR Part 52
[EPA-R09-OAR-2009-0859, FRL-9093-7]
Revisions to the California State Implementation Plan, San
Joaquin Valley Air Pollution Control District
AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).
ACTION: Proposed rule.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: EPA is proposing to approve revisions to the San Joaquin
Valley Air Pollution Control District (SJVAPCD) portion of the
California State Implementation Plan (SIP). Under authority of the
Clean Air Act as amended in 1990 (CAA or the Act), we are proposing to
approve local rules that address reduction of animal matter and
volatile organic compound (VOC) emissions from crude oil production,
cutback asphalt, and petroleum solvent dry cleaning.
DATES: Any comments must arrive by January 19, 2010.
ADDRESSES: Submit comments, identified by docket number EPA-R09-OAR-
2009-0859, by one of the following methods:
1. Federal eRulemaking Portal: https://www.regulations.gov. Follow
the on-line instructions.
2. E-mail: steckel.andrew@epa.gov.
3. Mail or deliver: Andrew Steckel (Air-4), U.S. Environmental
Protection Agency Region IX, 75 Hawthorne Street, San Francisco, CA
94105-3901.
Instructions: All comments will be included in the public docket
without change and may be made available online at https://www.regulations.gov, including any personal information provided,
unless the comment includes Confidential Business Information (CBI) or
other information whose disclosure is restricted by statute.
Information that you consider CBI or otherwise protected should be
clearly identified as such and should not be submitted through https://www.regulations.gov or e-mail. https://www.regulations.gov is an
``anonymous access'' system, and EPA will not know your identity or
contact information unless you provide it in the body of your comment.
If you send e-mail directly to EPA, your e-mail address will be
automatically captured and included as part of the public comment. If
EPA cannot read your comment due to technical difficulties and cannot
contact you for clarification, EPA may not be able to consider your
comment.
Docket: The index to the docket for this action is available
electronically at https://www.regulations.gov and in hard copy at EPA
Region IX, 75 Hawthorne Street, San Francisco, California. While all
documents in the docket are listed in the index, some information may
be publicly available only at the hard copy location (e.g., copyrighted
material), and some may not be publicly available in either location
(e.g., CBI). To inspect the hard copy materials, please schedule an
appointment during normal business hours with the contact listed in the
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section.
[[Page 67155]]
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Joanne Wells, EPA Region IX, (415)
947-4118, wells.joanne@epa.gov.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Throughout this document, ``we,'' ``us'' and
``our'' refer to EPA.
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 Rules and Rule
Revisions?
II. EPA's Evaluation and Action
A. How Is EPA Evaluating the Rules?
B. Do the Rules Meet the Evaluation Criteria?
C. EPA Recommendations To Further Improve the Rules
D. Public Comment and Final Action
III. 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, amended, or revised by the local air agencies
and submitted by the California Air Resources Board (CARB).
Table 1--Submitted Rules Proposed for Full Approval
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
District Rule No. Rule title Amended Submitted
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
SJVUAPCD........................... 4104 Reduction of Animal Matter. 12/17/92 08/24/07
SJVUAPCD........................... 4404 Heavy Oil Test Station-- 12/17/92 08/24/07
Kern County.
SJVUAPCD........................... 4641 Cutback, Slow Cure, and 12/17/92 08/24/07
Emulsified Asphalt, Paving
and Maintenance Operations.
SJVUAPCD........................... 4672 Petroleum Solvent Dry 12/17/92 08/24/07
Cleaning Operations.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
On September 17, 2007, the submittal of August 24, 2007 was found
to meet the completeness criteria in 40 CFR part 51, appendix V, which
must be met before formal EPA review.
B. Are There Other Versions of These Rules?
Some SIP versions of submitted SJVAPCD rules are old rules from the
eight counties that now comprise SJVAPCD; other SIP versions are
SJVAPCD rules that have been renumbered. These SIP-approved rules are
described below.
Precursor SIP rules for submitted SJVAPCD Rule 4104:
Fresno County Rule 414, Reduction of Animal Matter
(approved on September 22, 1972, 37 FR 19812).
Kern County Rule 415, Reduction of Animal Matter (approved
on September 22, 1972, 37 FR 19812).
Kings County Rule 415, Reduction of Animal Matter
(approved on September 22, 1972, 37 FR 19812).
Madera County Rule 421, Reduction of Animal Matter
(approved on November 18, 1983, 48 FR 52450).
Merced County Rule 414, Reduction of Animal Matter
(approved on September 22, 1972, 37 FR 19812).
San Joaquin County Rule 414, Reduction of Animal Matter
(approved on August 22, 1977, 42 FR 42219).
Stanislaus County Rule 414, Reduction of Animal Matter
(approved on September 22, 1972, 37 FR 19812).
Tulare County Rule 415, Reduction of Animal Matter
(approved on September 22, 1972, 37 FR 19812).
Precursor SIP rule for submitted SJVAPCD Rule 4641:
SJVAPCD Rule 463.1, Cutback, Slow Cure, and Emulsified
Asphalt, Paving and Maintenance Operations (amended on September 19,
1991, approved on June 24, 1992, 57 FR 28089).
Precursor SIP rule for submitted SJVAPCD Rule 4672:
SJVAPCD Rule 467.2, Petroleum Solvent Dry Cleaning
Operations (adopted on April 11, 1991, approved on April 24, 1992, 57
FR 15026).
There is no SIP rule for submitted SJVAPCD Rule 4404.
C. What Is the Purpose of the Submitted Rules and Rule Revisions?
Section 110(a) of the CAA requires states to submit regulations
that control volatile organic compounds, oxides of nitrogen,
particulate matter, and other air pollutants which harm human health
and the environment. These rules were developed as part of the local
agency's program to control these pollutants.
The purpose of new SJVAPCD Rule 4404 is as follows:
4404: The new rule requires reducing uncontrolled VOC
emissions from a heavy oil test station by 99%.
The purposes of amendments to Rules 4104, 4641, and 4672 are as
follows:
4104: The requirement for reducing air contaminants during
the reduction of animal matter by setting a minimum exposure time of
0.3 seconds at 1200 degrees Fahrenheit is unchanged. The format is
improved, the rule is renumbered, and the rule applicability is added.
4641: The rule requires reducing VOC emissions by
prohibiting the application and manufacturing of certain types of
asphalt used for paving and maintenance operations. The format is
improved, the rule is renumbered, and the definition of VOC is deleted.
4672: The rule requires reducing VOC emissions from
petroleum solvent dry cleaning operations through implementation of
various good operating practices and with the use of emission control
equipment. The format is improved, the rule is renumbered, and the rule
purpose is added.
The TSD has more information about these rules.
II. EPA's Evaluation and Action
A. How Is EPA Evaluating the Rules?
Generally, SIP rules must be enforceable (see section 110(a) of the
CAA), must require Reasonably Available Control Technology (RACT) for
each category of sources covered by a Control Techniques Guidelines
(CTG) document as well as each major source in nonattainment areas (see
section 182(a)(2)), and must not relax existing requirements (see
sections 110(l) and 193). The SJVAPCD regulates an ozone nonattainment
area (see 40 CFR part 81) and must fulfill the requirements of RACT.
Guidance and policy documents that we used to help evaluate rules
and RACT requirements consistently include the following:
1. Portions of the proposed post-1987 ozone and carbon monoxide
policy that concern RACT, 52 FR 45044 (November 24, 1987).
2. Requirements for Preparation, Adoption, and Submittal of
Implementation Plans, U.S. EPA, 40 CFR part 51.
3. Issues Relating to VOC Regulation Cutpoints, Deficiencies, and
Deviations, EPA (May 25, 1988). [The Bluebook]
4. Addendum to the General Preamble for the Implementation of Title
I of the Clean Air Act Amendments of 1990, 59 FR 41998 (August 16,
1994).
5. Guidance Document for Correcting Common VOC & Other Rule
Deficiencies, EPA Region 9 (August 21, 2001). [The Little Bluebook]
[[Page 67156]]
6. Control of Volatile Organic Compound Emissions from Large
Petroleum Dry Cleaners, U.S. EPA-450/3-82-009 (September 1982).
7. Control of Volatile Organic Emissions from Use of Cutback
Asphalt, U.S. EPA-450/2-77-037 (December 1977).
8. 2007 Ozone Plan, San Joaquin Valley Air Pollution Control
District (April 30, 2007). https://www.arb.ca.gov/planning/sip/2007sip/sjv8hr/sjvozone.htm.
9. RACT Demonstration for Ozone SIP, San Joaquin Valley Air
Pollution Control District (April 16, 2009). https://www.valleyair.org/Workshops/public_workshops_idx.htm#8hrOzoneRactSIP%2004-16-10.
10. RACT Analysis for Rules 4104, 4402, 4404, 4453, 4454, 4625,
4641, and 4672, San Joaquin Valley Air Pollution Control District (June
12, 2008).
B. Do the Rules Meet the Evaluation Criteria?
We believe that SJVAPCD Rules 4104, 4404, 4641, and 4672 are
consistent with the relevant policy and guidance regarding
enforceability, RACT and SIP relaxations.
The TSD has more information on our evaluation.
C. EPA Recommendations To Further Improve the Rules
The TSD describes additional rule revisions that we recommend for
the next time the local agency modifies the rules.
D. Public Comment and Final Action
Because EPA believes the submitted rules fulfill all relevant
requirements, we are proposing to fully approve them as described in
section 110(k)(3) of the CAA. 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 rules 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, EPA's role is to approve state
choices, provided that they meet the criteria of the Clean Air Act.
Accordingly, this action merely approves state law as meeting Federal
requirements and does not impose additional requirements beyond those
imposed by state law. For that reason, this action:
Is not a ``significant regulatory action'' subject to
review by the Office of Management and Budget under Executive Order
12866 (58 FR 51735, October 4, 1993);
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 EPA with the discretionary authority to
address, as appropriate, disproportionate human health or environmental
effects, using practicable and legally permissible methods, under
Executive Order 12898 (59 FR 7629, February 16, 1994).
In addition, this rule does not have tribal implications as specified
by Executive Order 13175 (65 FR 67249, November 9, 2000), because the
SIP is not approved to apply in Indian country located in the state,
and EPA notes that it will not impose substantial direct costs on
tribal governments or preempt tribal law.
List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52
Environmental protection, Air pollution control, Intergovernmental
relations, Ozone, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements, Volatile
organic compounds.
Authority: 42 U.S.C. 7401 et seq.
Dated: December 2, 2009.
Laura Yoshii,
Acting Regional Administrator, Region IX.
[FR Doc. E9-30169 Filed 12-17-09; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P
