Revisions to the California State Implementation Plan, San Joaquin Valley Unified Air Pollution Control District, 52623-52624 [2011-21368]
Download as PDF
Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 163 / Tuesday, August 23, 2011 / Proposed Rules
H. Executive Order 13211, Actions That
Significantly Affect Energy Supply,
Distribution, or Use
This rule is not subject to Executive
Order 13211, ‘‘Actions Concerning
Regulations That Significantly Affect
Energy Supply, Distribution, or Use’’ (66
FR 28355, May 22, 2001) because it is
not a significant regulatory action under
Executive Order 12866.
I. National Technology Transfer and
Advancement Act (NTTAA)
Section 12 of the NTTAA of 1995
requires Federal agencies to evaluate
existing technical standards when
developing a new regulation. To comply
with NTTAA, EPA must consider and
use ‘‘voluntary consensus standards’’
(VCS) if available and applicable when
developing programs and policies
unless doing so would be inconsistent
with applicable law or otherwise
impractical. EPA believes that VCS are
inapplicable to this action. Today’s
action does not require the public to
perform activities conducive to the use
of VCS.
List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52
Air pollution control, Environmental
protection, Intergovernmental relations,
Nitrogen oxides, Particulate matter,
Reporting and recordkeeping
requirements, Sulfur dioxide, Volatile
organic compounds.
Authority: 42 U.S.C. 7401 et seq.
Dated: August 15, 2011.
Karl Brooks,
Regional Administrator, Region 7.
[FR Doc. 2011–21567 Filed 8–22–11; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560–50–P
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION
AGENCY
40 CFR Part 52
[EPA–R09–OAR–2011–0601; FRL–9453–1]
Revisions to the California State
Implementation Plan, San Joaquin
Valley Unified Air Pollution Control
District
Environmental Protection
Agency (EPA).
ACTION: Proposed rule.
AGENCY:
EPA is proposing to approve
revisions to the San Joaquin Valley
Unified Air Pollution Control District
(SJVUAPCD) portion of the California
State Implementation Plan (SIP). These
revisions concern volatile organic
compound (VOC), oxides of nitrogen
(NOx), and particulate matter (PM)
emissions from flares. We are approving
a local rule that regulates these emission
sources under the Clean Air Act as
amended in 1990 (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
September 22, 2011.
ADDRESSES: Submit comments,
identified by docket number EPA–R09–
OAR–2011–0601, by one of the
following methods:
1. Federal eRulemaking Portal:
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 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
www.regulations.gov or e-mail.
www.regulations.gov is an ‘‘anonymous
SUMMARY:
52623
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: Generally, documents in the
docket for this action are available
electronically at 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 at
www.regulations.gov, some information
may be publicly available only at the
hard copy location (e.g., copyrighted
material, large maps), 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.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Nicole Law, EPA Region IX, (415) 947–
4126, Law.Nicole@epa.gov.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Throughout this document, ‘‘we,’’ ‘‘us’’
and ‘‘our’’ refer to EPA.
Table of Contents
I. The State’s Submittal
A. What rule did the State submit?
B. Are there other versions of this rule?
C. What is the purpose of the submitted
rule revisions?
II. EPA’s Evaluation and Action
A. How is EPA evaluating the rule?
B. Does the rule meet the evaluation
criteria?
C. EPA Recommendations To Further
Improve the Rule
D. Public Comment and Final Action
III. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews
I. The State’s Submittal
A. What rule did the State submit?
Table 1 lists the rule addressed by this
proposal with the date that it was
amended by the local air agency and
submitted by the California Air
Resources Board.
srobinson on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
TABLE 1—SUBMITTED RULES
Local agency
Rule No.
SJVUAPCD .............................
4311
On February 4, 2010, EPA determined
that the submittal for SJVUAPCD Rule
4311 met the completeness criteria in 40
VerDate Mar<15>2010
16:06 Aug 22, 2011
Jkt 223001
Rule title
Amended
Flares ......................................................................................
CFR Part 51 Appendix V, which must be
met before formal EPA review.
PO 00000
Frm 00043
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
06/18/09
Submitted
01/10/10
B. Are there other versions of this rule?
We approved an earlier version of
Rule 4311 into the SIP on February 26,
E:\FR\FM\23AUP1.SGM
23AUP1
52624
Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 163 / Tuesday, August 23, 2011 / Proposed Rules
2003 (68 FR 8835). The SJVUAPCD
amended revisions to the SIP-approved
version on June 15, 2006 and June 18,
2009 and CARB submitted them to us
on December 29, 2006 and January 10,
2010. While we can act on only the most
recently submitted version, we have
reviewed materials provided with
previous submittals.
C. What is the purpose of the submitted
rule revisions?
VOCs and NOX help produce groundlevel ozone and smog, which harm
human health and the environment. PM
contributes to effects that are harmful to
human health and the environment,
including premature mortality,
aggravation of respiratory and
cardiovascular disease, decreased lung
function, visibility impairment, and
damage to vegetation and ecosystems.
Section 110(a) of the CAA requires
States to submit regulations that control
VOC, NOX, and PM emissions.
SJVUAPCD Rule 4311 minimizes flaring
events by requiring flare minimization
plans (FMPs), monitoring of flare
activity and emissions, and related
recordkeeping. EPA’s technical support
document (TSD) has more information
about this rule.
II. EPA’s Evaluation and Action
srobinson on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
A. How is EPA evaluating the rule?
Generally, SIP rules must be
enforceable (see section 110(a) of the
Act), 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 sections
182(a)(2) and (b)(2)), must not interfere
with any applicable requirements
concerning attainment and reasonable
further progress (RFP), and must not
relax existing requirements (see sections
110(l) and 193). Section 172(c)(1) of the
Act also requires implementation of all
reasonably available control measures
(RACM) as expeditiously as practicable
in nonattainment areas. The SJVUAPCD
regulates an ozone nonattainment area
(see 40 CFR part 81), so Rule 4311 must
fulfill RACT. Additionally, the RACM
requirement in CAA section 172(c)(1)
applies to this area.
Guidance and policy documents that
we use to evaluate enforceability and
RACT and RACM requirements
consistently include the following:
1. ‘‘Issues Relating to VOC Regulation
Cutpoints, Deficiencies, and
Deviations,’’ EPA, May 25, 1988 (the
Bluebook).
2. ‘‘Guidance Document for Correcting
Common VOC & Other Rule
VerDate Mar<15>2010
16:06 Aug 22, 2011
Jkt 223001
Deficiencies,’’ EPA Region 9, August 21,
2001 (the Little Bluebook).
3. Portions of the proposed post-1987
ozone and carbon monoxide policy that
concern RACT, 52 FR 45044, November
24, 1987.
4. ‘‘State Implementation Plans,
General Preamble for the
Implementation of Title I of the Clean
Air Amendments of 1990’’ 57 FR 13498,
April 16, 1992.
5. ‘‘Preamble, Final Rule to
Implement the 8-Hour Ozone National
Ambient Air Quality Standard’’ 70 FR
71612; Nov. 29, 2005.
6. Letter from William T. Hartnett to
Regional Air Division Directors, ‘‘RACT
Qs & As—Reasonable Available Control
Technology (RACT) Questions and
Answers,’’ May 18, 2006.
B. Does the rule meet the evaluation
criteria?
We believe this rule is 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 Rule
The TSD describes additional rule
revisions that we recommend for the
next time the local agency modifies the
rule but are not currently the basis for
rule disapproval.
D. Public Comment and Final Action
Because EPA believes the submitted
rule fulfills all relevant requirements,
we are proposing to fully approve it as
described in section 110(k)(3) of the Act.
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 this rule
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
PO 00000
Frm 00044
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 9990
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
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, 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, Nitrogen dioxide, Ozone,
Particulate matter, Reporting and
recordkeeping requirements, Volatile
organic compounds.
Authority: 42 U.S.C. 7401 et seq.
Dated: August 8, 2011.
Jared Blumenfeld,
Regional Administrator, Region IX.
[FR Doc. 2011–21368 Filed 8–22–11; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560–50–P
E:\FR\FM\23AUP1.SGM
23AUP1
Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 76, Number 163 (Tuesday, August 23, 2011)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 52623-52624]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2011-21368]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
40 CFR Part 52
[EPA-R09-OAR-2011-0601; FRL-9453-1]
Revisions to the California State Implementation Plan, San
Joaquin Valley Unified Air Pollution Control District
AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).
ACTION: Proposed rule.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: EPA is proposing to approve revisions to the San Joaquin
Valley Unified Air Pollution Control District (SJVUAPCD) portion of the
California State Implementation Plan (SIP). These revisions concern
volatile organic compound (VOC), oxides of nitrogen (NOx),
and particulate matter (PM) emissions from flares. We are approving a
local rule that regulates these emission sources under the Clean Air
Act as amended in 1990 (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 September 22, 2011.
ADDRESSES: Submit comments, identified by docket number EPA-R09-OAR-
2011-0601, by one of the following methods:
1. Federal eRulemaking Portal: 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 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 www.regulations.gov or e-mail.
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: Generally, documents in the docket for this action are
available electronically at 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 at www.regulations.gov, some
information may be publicly available only at the hard copy location
(e.g., copyrighted material, large maps), 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.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Nicole Law, EPA Region IX, (415) 947-
4126, Law.Nicole@epa.gov.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Throughout this document, ``we,'' ``us'' and
``our'' refer to EPA.
Table of Contents
I. The State's Submittal
A. What rule did the State submit?
B. Are there other versions of this rule?
C. What is the purpose of the submitted rule revisions?
II. EPA's Evaluation and Action
A. How is EPA evaluating the rule?
B. Does the rule meet the evaluation criteria?
C. EPA Recommendations To Further Improve the Rule
D. Public Comment and Final Action
III. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews
I. The State's Submittal
A. What rule did the State submit?
Table 1 lists the rule addressed by this proposal with the date
that it was amended by the local air agency and submitted by the
California Air Resources Board.
Table 1--Submitted Rules
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Local agency Rule No. Rule title Amended Submitted
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
SJVUAPCD........................... 4311 Flares..................... 06/18/09 01/10/10
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
On February 4, 2010, EPA determined that the submittal for SJVUAPCD
Rule 4311 met the completeness criteria in 40 CFR Part 51 Appendix V,
which must be met before formal EPA review.
B. Are there other versions of this rule?
We approved an earlier version of Rule 4311 into the SIP on
February 26,
[[Page 52624]]
2003 (68 FR 8835). The SJVUAPCD amended revisions to the SIP-approved
version on June 15, 2006 and June 18, 2009 and CARB submitted them to
us on December 29, 2006 and January 10, 2010. While we can act on only
the most recently submitted version, we have reviewed materials
provided with previous submittals.
C. What is the purpose of the submitted rule revisions?
VOCs and NOX help produce ground-level ozone and smog,
which harm human health and the environment. PM contributes to effects
that are harmful to human health and the environment, including
premature mortality, aggravation of respiratory and cardiovascular
disease, decreased lung function, visibility impairment, and damage to
vegetation and ecosystems. Section 110(a) of the CAA requires States to
submit regulations that control VOC, NOX, and PM emissions.
SJVUAPCD Rule 4311 minimizes flaring events by requiring flare
minimization plans (FMPs), monitoring of flare activity and emissions,
and related recordkeeping. EPA's technical support document (TSD) has
more information about this rule.
II. EPA's Evaluation and Action
A. How is EPA evaluating the rule?
Generally, SIP rules must be enforceable (see section 110(a) of the
Act), 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
sections 182(a)(2) and (b)(2)), must not interfere with any applicable
requirements concerning attainment and reasonable further progress
(RFP), and must not relax existing requirements (see sections 110(l)
and 193). Section 172(c)(1) of the Act also requires implementation of
all reasonably available control measures (RACM) as expeditiously as
practicable in nonattainment areas. The SJVUAPCD regulates an ozone
nonattainment area (see 40 CFR part 81), so Rule 4311 must fulfill
RACT. Additionally, the RACM requirement in CAA section 172(c)(1)
applies to this area.
Guidance and policy documents that we use to evaluate
enforceability and RACT and RACM requirements consistently include the
following:
1. ``Issues Relating to VOC Regulation Cutpoints, Deficiencies, and
Deviations,'' EPA, May 25, 1988 (the Bluebook).
2. ``Guidance Document for Correcting Common VOC & Other Rule
Deficiencies,'' EPA Region 9, August 21, 2001 (the Little Bluebook).
3. Portions of the proposed post-1987 ozone and carbon monoxide
policy that concern RACT, 52 FR 45044, November 24, 1987.
4. ``State Implementation Plans, General Preamble for the
Implementation of Title I of the Clean Air Amendments of 1990'' 57 FR
13498, April 16, 1992.
5. ``Preamble, Final Rule to Implement the 8-Hour Ozone National
Ambient Air Quality Standard'' 70 FR 71612; Nov. 29, 2005.
6. Letter from William T. Hartnett to Regional Air Division
Directors, ``RACT Qs & As--Reasonable Available Control Technology
(RACT) Questions and Answers,'' May 18, 2006.
B. Does the rule meet the evaluation criteria?
We believe this rule is 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 Rule
The TSD describes additional rule revisions that we recommend for
the next time the local agency modifies the rule but are not currently
the basis for rule disapproval.
D. Public Comment and Final Action
Because EPA believes the submitted rule fulfills all relevant
requirements, we are proposing to fully approve it as described in
section 110(k)(3) of the Act. 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 this rule 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 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, 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, Nitrogen dioxide, Ozone, Particulate matter, Reporting and
recordkeeping requirements, Volatile organic compounds.
Authority: 42 U.S.C. 7401 et seq.
Dated: August 8, 2011.
Jared Blumenfeld,
Regional Administrator, Region IX.
[FR Doc. 2011-21368 Filed 8-22-11; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P