Proposed Approval of Revision of Five California Clean Air Act Title V Operating Permits Programs, 16509-16512 [2012-6676]
Download as PDF
srobinson on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 55 / Wednesday, March 21, 2012 / Proposed Rules
going through www.regulations.gov,
your email address will be
automatically captured and included as
part of the comment that is placed in the
public docket and made available on the
Internet. If you submit an electronic
comment, the EPA recommends that
you include your name and other
contact information in the body of your
comment and with any disk or CD–ROM
you submit. If the EPA cannot read your
comment due to technical difficulties
and cannot contact you for clarification,
the EPA may not be able to consider
your comment. Electronic files should
avoid the use of special characters, any
form of encryption and be free of any
defects or viruses. For additional
information about the EPA’s public
docket, visit the EPA Docket Center
homepage at https://www.epa.gov/
epahome/dockets.htm.
Docket. The EPA has established a
docket for this rulemaking under Docket
ID No. EPA–HQ–OAR–2011–0435. All
documents in the docket are listed in
the www.regulations.gov index.
Although listed in the index, some
information is not publicly available,
e.g., CBI or other information whose
disclosure is restricted by statute.
Certain other material, such as
copyrighted material, is not placed on
the Internet and will be publicly
available only in hard copy. Publicly
available docket materials are available
either electronically in
www.regulations.gov or in hard copy at
the EPA Docket Center, EPA West,
Room 3334, 1301 Constitution Ave.
NW., Washington, DC. The Public
Reading Room is open from 8:30 a.m. to
4:30 p.m., Monday through Friday,
excluding legal holidays. The telephone
number for the Public Reading Room is
(202) 566–1744, and the telephone
number for the EPA Docket Center is
(202) 566–1742.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: For
questions about this proposed action,
contact Mr. Nick Parsons, Sector
Policies and Programs Division (E143–
01), Office of Air Quality Planning and
Standards, U.S. Environmental
Protection Agency, Research Triangle
Park, NC 27711; telephone number:
(919) 541–5372; fax number: (919) 541–
0246; email address:
parsons.nick@epa.gov.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: For the
reasons noted above, the public
comment period will be reopened until
March 30, 2012.
How can I get copies of the proposed
rule and other related information?
The proposed rule titled, National
Emission Standards for Hazardous Air
VerDate Mar<15>2010
17:11 Mar 20, 2012
Jkt 226001
Pollutant Emissions: Group IV Polymers
and Resins; Pesticide Active Ingredient
Production; and Polyether Polyols
Production, was published on January 9,
2012 (77 FR 1268). EPA has established
the public docket for the proposed
rulemaking under docket ID No. EPA–
HQ–OAR–2011–0435, and a copy of the
proposed rule is available in the docket.
Information on how to access the docket
is presented above in the ADDRESSES
section.
Dated: March 9, 2012.
Gina McCarthy,
Assistant Administrator.
[FR Doc. 2012–6807 Filed 3–20–12; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560–50–P
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION
AGENCY
40 CFR Part 70
[EPA–R09–OAR–2011–0955; FRL–9649–4]
Proposed Approval of Revision of Five
California Clean Air Act Title V
Operating Permits Programs
Environmental Protection
Agency (EPA).
ACTION: Proposed rule.
AGENCY:
EPA is proposing to approve
revisions to the Operating Permits (Title
V) programs of the Monterey Bay
Unified Air Pollution Control District
(MBUAPCD), San Luis Obispo County
Air Pollution Control District
(SLOCAPCD), Santa Barbara County Air
Pollution Control District (SBCAPCD),
South Coast Air Quality Management
District (SCAQMD), and Ventura County
Air Pollution Control District
(VCAPCD). These program revisions
will require sources with the potential
to emit (PTE)of greenhouse gas (GHG)
above the thresholds in EPA’s Tailoring
Rule that have not been previously
subject to Title V for other reasons to
obtain a Title V permit. See ‘‘Prevention
of Significant Deterioration and Title V
Greenhouse Gas Tailoring Rule; Final
Rule,’’ (the Tailoring Rule), 75 FR 31514
(June 3, 2010). We are taking comments
on this proposal and plan to follow with
a final action.
DATES: Any comments must arrive by
April 20, 2012.
ADDRESSES: Submit comments,
identified by docket number EPA–R09–
OAR–2011–0955, by one of the
following methods:
1. Federal eRulemaking Portal:
www.regulations.gov. Follow the on-line
instructions.
2. Email: R9airpermits@epa.gov.
SUMMARY:
PO 00000
Frm 00027
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
16509
3. Mail or deliver: Gerardo Rios (Air3), 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 email.
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 email 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.
Electronic files should avoid the use of
special characters, any form of
encryption, and be free of any defects or
viruses.
Docket: EPA has established a docket
for this action under EPA–R09–OAR–
2011–0955. Generally, documents in the
docket for this action are available
electronically at www.regulations.gov or
in hard copy at EPA Region IX, 75
Hawthorne Street, San Francisco, CA
94105. While all documents are listed at
www.regulations.gov, some information
may be publicly available only at the
hard copy location (e.g., copyrighted
material, large maps, multi-volume
reports), 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:
Roger Kohn, EPA Region IX, (415) 972–
3973, kohn.roger@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?
II. The Part 70 Operating Permits Program
A. What is the Part 70 operating permits
program?
B. How did EPA revise Part 70 to address
Title V permitting of GHG sources?
E:\FR\FM\21MRP1.SGM
21MRP1
16510
Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 55 / Wednesday, March 21, 2012 / Proposed Rules
C. What is the federal approval process for
revisions to a Part 70 operating permits
program?
III. EPA’s Evaluation and Action
A. How is EPA evaluating the rules?
B. Do the rules meet the evaluation
criteria?
C. Public Comment and Proposed Action
IV. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews
I. The State’s Submittal
were adopted by the local air agencies
and submitted by the California Air
Resources Board.
A. What rules did the State submit?
Table 1 lists the rules addressed by
this proposal with the dates that they
TABLE 1—SUBMITTED RULES
Local agency
Rule No.
MBUAPCD .................................
SLOCAPCD ...............................
SBCAPCD .................................
SCAQMD ...................................
218
216
1301
3000
3001
3002
3003
3005
3006
33
33.1
VCAPCD ....................................
II. The Part 70 Operating Permits
Program
srobinson on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
A. What is the Part 70 operating permits
program?
Title V of the Clean Air Act (CAA)
Amendments of 1990 require all states
to develop an operating permits
program that meets federal criteria listed
in 40 Code of Federal Regulations (CFR)
Part 70. In implementing this program,
the states are to require certain sources
of air pollution to obtain permits that
contain all applicable requirements
under the CAA. One purpose of the Part
70 operating permits program (also
known as the Title V program) is to
improve enforcement and compliance
by issuing each source a single permit
that consolidates all of the applicable
CAA requirements into a federallyenforceable document. By consolidating
all of the applicable requirements for a
facility into one document, the source,
the public, and the permitting
authorities can more easily determine
what CAA requirements apply and how
compliance with those requirements is
determined.
B. How did EPA revise Part 70 to
address Title V permitting of GHG
sources?
In the Tailoring Rule (75 FR 31514,
June 3, 2010), we amended the
definition of ‘‘major source’’ in Part 70
by codifying EPA’s longstanding
interpretation that applicability for a
‘‘major stationary source’’ under CAA
sections 501(2)(B) and 302(j) and 40
CFR 70.2 is triggered by sources of
pollutants ‘‘subject to regulation.’’ We
also added a definition of ‘‘subject to
regulation’’ to clarify that this phrase
means a pollutant subject to either a
VerDate Mar<15>2010
17:11 Mar 20, 2012
Jkt 226001
Rule title
Adopted
Title V: Federal Operating Permits ................................................
Federal Part 70 Operating Permits ...............................................
Part 70 Operating Permits—General Information .........................
General ..........................................................................................
Applicability.
Requirements.
Applications.
Permit Revisions.
Public Participation.
Part 70 Permits—General .............................................................
Part 70 Permits—Definitions.
provision in the CAA or a regulation
adopted by EPA under the CAA that
requires actual control of emissions of
that pollutant and that has taken effect
under the CAA. Finally, to tailor the
Title V program for GHGs, we also
included a second component within
the definition of ‘‘subject to regulation,’’
specifying that GHGs are not subject to
regulation for purposes of defining a
major source, unless as of July 1, 2011,
the GHG emissions are from a source
emitting or having the potential to emit
100,000 tons per year (tpy) of GHGs on
a carbon dioxide equivalent (CO2e)
basis. We defined the term ‘‘greenhouse
gases’’ with a cross-reference to the
definition in 40 CFR 86.1818–12(a). The
combined effect of these Part 70
amendments is to revise the Title V
program to require stationary sources
that have the potential to emit 100,000
tpy or more of GHGs on a CO2e basis
to obtain Title V permits, regardless of
whether they are subject to any CAA
requirement to control their GHG
emissions. The five air districts whose
Title V programs we are proposing to
revise took differing approaches to
revising their Title V regulations to
address the Tailoring Rule’s Title V
requirements, depending on the
structure and content of their rules. In
section III.B., we explain how the
districts’ revised Title V regulations
satisfy the new Title V GHG criteria.
C. What is the federal approval process
for revisions to a Part 70 operating
permits program?
In order for state regulations to be
approved as part of the federallyenforceable Title V operating permits
program, states must formally adopt
regulations consistent with state and
PO 00000
Frm 00028
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
Submitted
11/17/10
3/23/11
1/20/11
11/5/10
11/7/11
8/19/11
4/21/11
11/5/10
4/12/11
8/19/11
Federal requirements. This process
generally includes a public notice,
public hearing, public comment period,
and a formal adoption by a stateauthorized rulemaking body.
Once a state rule, regulation, or
control strategy is adopted, the state
submits it to us for inclusion into its
approved operating permits program.
We must provide public notice and seek
additional public comment regarding
the proposed Federal action on the state
submission. If adverse comments are
received, they must be addressed prior
to any final Federal action by us.
All state regulations and supporting
information approved by EPA under
section 502 of the CAA, including
revisions to the state program, are
included in the Federally-approved
operating permits program. Records of
such actions are maintained in the CFR
at Title 40, part 70, appendix A, entitled
‘‘Approval Status of State and Local
Operating Permits Programs.’’
III. EPA’s Evaluation and Action
A. How is EPA evaluating the rules?
The relevant statutory provisions for
our review of the submitted rules
include 40 CFR Part 70, as amended by
the June 3, 2010 Tailoring Rule.
B. Do the rules meet the evaluation
criteria?
We have reviewed the five districts’
revised Title V rules in accordance with
the rule evaluation criteria described
above. A discussion for each District is
provided below. EPA is proposing to
find that each district’s submittal
correctly implements the changes in
Title V applicability required by the
Tailoring Rule.
E:\FR\FM\21MRP1.SGM
21MRP1
srobinson on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 55 / Wednesday, March 21, 2012 / Proposed Rules
MBUAPCD revised Rule 218 (Title V:
Federal Operating Permits) to satisfy the
Tailoring Rule requirements. The
District revised the definition of ‘‘Major
Source’’ in section 2.18.5 of the rule to
include sources that, as of July 1, 2010,
emit or have the potential to emit
‘‘100,000 tpy or more of carbon dioxide
equivalent (CO2e) greenhouse gas
emissions and directly emit, or have the
potential to emit, 100 tons per year (tpy)
or more of any greenhouse gas,’’ as
required by the Tailoring Rule. The
District also revised Section 1.3 of the
rule to exempt sources that limit their
PTE of GHG emissions to less than
100,000 tpy of CO2e greenhouse gas
emissions, and to exclude greenhouse
gases from the exemption for sources
that limit their PTE to less than 100 tpy
of any air pollutant. The District added
new definitions for ‘‘Greenhouse Gases’’
and ‘‘Carbon Dioxide Equivalent
Emissions’’. Instead of using a crossreference to 40 CFR 86.1818–12(a), as
EPA does in the Tailoring Rule,
MBUAPCD has provided a specific
definition of Greenhouse Gases in its
rule, which is consistent with the EPA
definition. The District’s definition of
‘‘Carbon Dioxide Equivalent Emissions’’
incorporates the Global Warming
Potential values that EPA lists in Table
A–1 to Subpart A of 40 CFR Part 98,
EPA’s Mandatory Greenhouse Gas
Reporting regulation. All of these
changes, which are the only changes
that the District made to Rule 218, are
consistent with the requirements of the
Tailoring Rule. We note that the
applicability date of July 1, 2010 is one
year earlier than required by the
Tailoring Rule. This had no practical
effect in the District because there are
no sources newly subject to Title V
based solely on being classified a major
source for GHG emissions.
SLOAPCD added a new provision to
the Applicability section of Rule 216
(Federal Part 70 Permits). The new
provision, in paragraph 216.B.2.,
requires sources that emit GHG in
amounts ‘‘equal to or exceeding the
thresholds specified in 40 CFR 70.2 in
effect August 2, 2010’’ to apply for a
title V permit. The District also added
a new provision to the definition of ‘‘Air
Pollutant.’’ The new provision, in
paragraph 216.C.4.f., adds ‘‘Greenhouse
gases that are ‘subject to regulation’ as
defined in 40 CFR 70.2 in effect August
2, 2010’’ to the list of the air pollutants
defined in the rule. These crossreferences to 40 CFR 70.2 means that the
District’s approach to tailoring the
applicability of its Title V program for
GHG sources is identical to EPA’s. We
are proposing to approve these revisions
VerDate Mar<15>2010
17:11 Mar 20, 2012
Jkt 226001
to SLOAPCD’s title V program because
they are consistent with EPA’s approach
to Title V applicability for GHG sources
in the Tailoring Rule.
SBCAPCD revised Rule 1301 (General
Information), which is one of five rules
that comprise the District’s Regulation
XIII (Part 70 Operating Permit Program),
by adding a cross-reference to 40 CFR
70.2. Specifically, the District amended
the definition of ‘‘Part 70 Source’’ in
section 1301.C. by adding a new
provision that makes sources with the
potential to emit ‘‘greenhouse gases that
are ‘subject to regulation’ as defined in
40 CFR 70.2 in effect August 2, 2010’’
subject to Title V. This cross-reference
to the 40 CFR 70.2 definition of ‘‘subject
to regulation’’ means that the District’s
approach to tailoring the applicability of
its Title V program to GHG sources is
identical to EPA’s, and therefore
approvable.
In addition to the GHG-related rule
changes adopted on January 20, 2011,
SBCAPCD had previously revised the
definition of ‘‘stationary source’’ in Rule
1301 to reduce the area in which marine
vessels associated with a stationary
source must account for their emissions.
Rule 1301 now limits the geographic
area of emissions liability to ‘‘California
Coastal Waters’’ (as defined in Rule
1301) adjacent to the District, and
excludes areas adjacent to the
neighboring counties of San Luis Obispo
and Ventura. We are proposing to
approve this change, which is consistent
with the District’s jurisdiction in Santa
Barbara County.
SCAQMD addressed the Tailoring
Rule requirements by revising six of the
seven rules that comprise Regulation
XXX (Title V Permits). Specifically,
SCAQMD revised Rule 3000 (General) to
add definitions of ‘‘Carbon Dioxide
Equivalent’’, ‘‘Global Warming
Potential’’, and ‘‘Greenhouse Gas.’’
SCAQMD also revised Rule 3001
(Applicability) to require that any
facility that, as of July 1, 2011, has the
potential to emit 100,000 tpy or more of
GHG on a CO2e basis and a potential to
emit more than 100 tpy of any GHG on
a mass basis apply for a Title V permit
within 180 days. SCAQMD provided a
specific definition of GHG in Rule 3000
which is consistent with the EPA
definition. The District’s definition of
‘‘CO2 equivalent’’ is based on the same
Global Warming Potential values that
EPA lists in Table A–1 to Subpart A of
40 CFR Part 98, EPA’s Mandatory
Greenhouse Gas Reporting regulation.
SCAQMD’s definition of ‘‘Global
Warming Potential’’ uses the same
language as EPA’s definition in 40 CFR
Section 98.6. Finally, SCAQMD revised
Rule 3003 (Applications), Rule 3005
PO 00000
Frm 00029
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
16511
(Permit Revisions), and Rule 3006
(Public Participation), to make the cross
references to Rule 3000 within those
rules consistent with the revised
numbering sequence in that rule. Since
the District’s Title V program changes
are consistent with EPA’s approach to
Title V in the Tailoring Rule, we are
proposing to approve them as a revision
to SCAQMD’s Title V program.
VCAPCD addressed the applicability
of title V permitting for major GHG
sources by revising the applicability
provisions of Rule 33 (Part 70 Permits—
General). Specifically, the District
revised subsection 33.B.1., which
requires stationary sources with a PTE
of 100 tpy or more of any regulated air
pollutant to obtain a title V permit.
VCAPCD added language to this
provision to make it applicable to
sources that emit greenhouse gases,
effective July 1, 2011, if a source also
has a PTE of 100,000 tons per year or
more on a CO2 equivalent basis.
In addition the District added a new
definition of ‘‘CO2 Equivalent (CO2e)’’ to
Rule 33.1 (Part 70 Permits—Definitions)
that is based on EPA’s definition of ‘‘tpy
CO2 equivalent emissions’’ in 40 CFR
70.2, and refers to the Global Warming
Potentials that appear in Table 1 of Rule
2 (Definitions). (Rule 2 has been
submitted to EPA for approval into the
Ventura County portion of the California
State Implementation Plan. We will take
action on that rule in a separate
rulemaking.) We are approving the
District’s definition because, while it is
not identical to the 70.2 definition, it is
sufficiently similar to, and fully
consistent with, our definition. The
District also revised two definitions in
Rule 33.1. The definition of ‘‘regulated
air pollutant’’ now includes greenhouse
gases if the source has a potential to
emit of 100,000 tons per year or more
CO2 equivalent emissions. The
definition of ‘‘Insignificant Activity’’
now excludes greenhouse gases from the
emission level of 2 tpy of any regulated
pollutant that otherwise qualifies an
activity as insignificant.
VCAPCD also made one revision that
is unrelated to GHG. The District
revised the definition of ‘‘FederallyEnforceable Requirement’’ in Rule 33.1.
The District added language to
Subparagraph 33.1.12.a, which lists
Title I requirements of the CAA that are
federally enforceable, to clarify that
federally enforceable Title I
requirements are ‘‘not limited to’’ the
requirements listed in the definition.
The additional language ensures that the
definition includes other Title I
requirements that may be promulgated
by the EPA Administrator in the future.
E:\FR\FM\21MRP1.SGM
21MRP1
16512
Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 55 / Wednesday, March 21, 2012 / Proposed Rules
We are proposing to approve the Title
V program revisions submitted by
VCAPCD because the GHG provisions of
the revised rules are consistent with
EPA’s approach to Title V in the
Tailoring Rule, and the revision to the
definition of ‘‘Federally-Enforceable
Requirement’’ clarifies the definition
and is consistent with EPA’s definition
of ‘‘applicable requirement’’ in 40 CFR
70.2.
srobinson on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
C. Public Comment and Proposed
Action
EPA believes the submitted rules
fulfill all of the Tailoring Rule’s Title V
requirements; therefore we are
proposing to approve these rule
changes, adopted in 2010 and 2011, as
revisions to the Title V programs of all
five districts. 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.
IV. Statutory and Executive Order
Reviews
Today’s 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 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
VerDate Mar<15>2010
17:11 Mar 20, 2012
Jkt 226001
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 proposed action does
not have tribal implications as specified
by Executive Order 13175 (65 FR 67249,
November 9, 2000), because the action
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 70
Environmental protection,
Administrative practice and procedure,
Air pollution control, Carbon dioxide,
Carbon dioxide equivalents, Greenhouse
gases, Hydrofluorocarbons,
Intergovernmental relations, Methane,
Nitrous oxide, Perfluorocarbons,
Reporting and recordkeeping
requirements, Sulfur hexafluoride,
Incorporation by Reference.
Authority: 42 U.S.C. 7401 et seq.
Dated: March 8, 2012.
Jared Blumenfeld,
Regional Administrator, Region IX.
[FR Doc. 2012–6676 Filed 3–20–12; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560–50–P
DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR
Fish and Wildlife Service
50 CFR Part 17
[Docket No. FWS–R1–ES–2011–0096;
4500030114]
RIN 1018–AX38
Endangered and Threatened Wildlife
and Plants; Designation of Critical
Habitat for the Southern Selkirk
Mountains Population of Woodland
Caribou (Rangifer tarandus caribou)
Fish and Wildlife Service,
Interior.
ACTION: Proposed rule; reopening of
comment period and announcement of
public hearing.
AGENCY:
We, the U.S. Fish and
Wildlife Service (Service), announce the
reopening of the comment period on our
November 30, 2011, proposed rule to
designate critical habitat for the
southern Selkirk Mountains population
of woodland caribou (Rangifer tarandus
SUMMARY:
PO 00000
Frm 00030
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
caribou) under the Endangered Species
Act of 1973, as amended (Act). We are
reopening the public comment period to
allow all interested parties another
opportunity to comment on the
proposed rule. Comments previously
submitted need not be resubmitted and
will be fully considered in preparation
of the final rule. We will also hold a
public informational session and
hearing (see DATES and ADDRESSES).
DATES: Written Comments: We will
consider comments received or
postmarked on or before May 21, 2012.
Comments must be received by
11:59 p.m. Eastern Standard Time on
the closing date.
Public informational session and
public hearing: We will hold a public
informational session from 9:30 a.m. to
11:30 a.m., followed by a public hearing
from 2 p.m. to 5 p.m., on April 28, 2012,
in Bonners Ferry, Idaho (see
ADDRESSES).
ADDRESSES: Written Comments: You
may submit comments by one of the
following methods:
(1) Federal eRulemaking Portal:
https://www.regulations.gov. In the
Search box, enter the Docket number for
this proposed rule, which is FWS–R1–
ES–2011–0096. Please ensure that you
have found the correct rulemaking
before submitting your comment.
(2) U.S. mail or hand delivery: Public
Comments Processing, Attn: Docket No.
FWS–R1–ES–2011–0096; Division of
Policy and Directives Management; U.S.
Fish and Wildlife Service; 4401 N.
Fairfax Drive, MS 2042–PDM;
Arlington, VA 22203.
We request that you send comments
only by the methods described above.
We will post all comments on https://
www.regulations.gov. This generally
means that we will post any personal
information you provide us (see the
Public Comments section below for
more information).
Public informational session and
public hearing: The public
informational session and hearing will
be held at the Bonners Ferry High
School, 6485 Tamarack Lane, Bonners
Ferry, ID 83805. People needing
reasonable accommodations in order to
attend and participate in the public
hearing should contact Brian Kelly,
State Supervisor, Idaho Fish and
Wildlife Office, at (208) 378–5243, as
soon as possible (see FOR FURTHER
INFORMATION CONTACT).
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Brian Kelly, State Supervisor, U.S. Fish
and Wildlife Service, Idaho Fish and
Wildlife Office, 1387 South Vinnell
Way, Room 368, Boise, ID 83709;
telephone 208–378–5243; facsimile
E:\FR\FM\21MRP1.SGM
21MRP1
Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 77, Number 55 (Wednesday, March 21, 2012)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 16509-16512]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2012-6676]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
40 CFR Part 70
[EPA-R09-OAR-2011-0955; FRL-9649-4]
Proposed Approval of Revision of Five California Clean Air Act
Title V Operating Permits Programs
AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).
ACTION: Proposed rule.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: EPA is proposing to approve revisions to the Operating Permits
(Title V) programs of the Monterey Bay Unified Air Pollution Control
District (MBUAPCD), San Luis Obispo County Air Pollution Control
District (SLOCAPCD), Santa Barbara County Air Pollution Control
District (SBCAPCD), South Coast Air Quality Management District
(SCAQMD), and Ventura County Air Pollution Control District (VCAPCD).
These program revisions will require sources with the potential to emit
(PTE)of greenhouse gas (GHG) above the thresholds in EPA's Tailoring
Rule that have not been previously subject to Title V for other reasons
to obtain a Title V permit. See ``Prevention of Significant
Deterioration and Title V Greenhouse Gas Tailoring Rule; Final Rule,''
(the Tailoring Rule), 75 FR 31514 (June 3, 2010). We are taking
comments on this proposal and plan to follow with a final action.
DATES: Any comments must arrive by April 20, 2012.
ADDRESSES: Submit comments, identified by docket number EPA-R09-OAR-
2011-0955, by one of the following methods:
1. Federal eRulemaking Portal: www.regulations.gov. Follow the on-
line instructions.
2. Email: R9airpermits@epa.gov.
3. Mail or deliver: Gerardo Rios (Air-3), 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 email.
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 email
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. Electronic files should avoid the use of
special characters, any form of encryption, and be free of any defects
or viruses.
Docket: EPA has established a docket for this action under EPA-R09-
OAR-2011-0955. Generally, documents in the docket for this action are
available electronically at www.regulations.gov or in hard copy at EPA
Region IX, 75 Hawthorne Street, San Francisco, CA 94105. While all
documents are listed at www.regulations.gov, some information may be
publicly available only at the hard copy location (e.g., copyrighted
material, large maps, multi-volume reports), 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: Roger Kohn, EPA Region IX, (415) 972-
3973, kohn.roger@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?
II. The Part 70 Operating Permits Program
A. What is the Part 70 operating permits program?
B. How did EPA revise Part 70 to address Title V permitting of
GHG sources?
[[Page 16510]]
C. What is the federal approval process for revisions to a Part
70 operating permits program?
III. EPA's Evaluation and Action
A. How is EPA evaluating the rules?
B. Do the rules meet the evaluation criteria?
C. Public Comment and Proposed Action
IV. 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 by the local air agencies and submitted by the
California Air Resources Board.
Table 1--Submitted Rules
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Local agency Rule No. Rule title Adopted Submitted
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
MBUAPCD................................ 218 Title V: Federal Operating 11/17/10 11/7/11
Permits.
SLOCAPCD............................... 216 Federal Part 70 Operating 3/23/11 8/19/11
Permits.
SBCAPCD................................ 1301 Part 70 Operating Permits-- 1/20/11 4/21/11
General Information.
SCAQMD................................. 3000 General........................ 11/5/10 11/5/10
3001 Applicability..................
3002 Requirements...................
3003 Applications...................
3005 Permit Revisions...............
3006 Public Participation...........
VCAPCD................................. 33 Part 70 Permits--General....... 4/12/11 8/19/11
33.1 Part 70 Permits--Definitions...
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
II. The Part 70 Operating Permits Program
A. What is the Part 70 operating permits program?
Title V of the Clean Air Act (CAA) Amendments of 1990 require all
states to develop an operating permits program that meets federal
criteria listed in 40 Code of Federal Regulations (CFR) Part 70. In
implementing this program, the states are to require certain sources of
air pollution to obtain permits that contain all applicable
requirements under the CAA. One purpose of the Part 70 operating
permits program (also known as the Title V program) is to improve
enforcement and compliance by issuing each source a single permit that
consolidates all of the applicable CAA requirements into a federally-
enforceable document. By consolidating all of the applicable
requirements for a facility into one document, the source, the public,
and the permitting authorities can more easily determine what CAA
requirements apply and how compliance with those requirements is
determined.
B. How did EPA revise Part 70 to address Title V permitting of GHG
sources?
In the Tailoring Rule (75 FR 31514, June 3, 2010), we amended the
definition of ``major source'' in Part 70 by codifying EPA's
longstanding interpretation that applicability for a ``major stationary
source'' under CAA sections 501(2)(B) and 302(j) and 40 CFR 70.2 is
triggered by sources of pollutants ``subject to regulation.'' We also
added a definition of ``subject to regulation'' to clarify that this
phrase means a pollutant subject to either a provision in the CAA or a
regulation adopted by EPA under the CAA that requires actual control of
emissions of that pollutant and that has taken effect under the CAA.
Finally, to tailor the Title V program for GHGs, we also included a
second component within the definition of ``subject to regulation,''
specifying that GHGs are not subject to regulation for purposes of
defining a major source, unless as of July 1, 2011, the GHG emissions
are from a source emitting or having the potential to emit 100,000 tons
per year (tpy) of GHGs on a carbon dioxide equivalent (CO2e) basis. We
defined the term ``greenhouse gases'' with a cross-reference to the
definition in 40 CFR 86.1818-12(a). The combined effect of these Part
70 amendments is to revise the Title V program to require stationary
sources that have the potential to emit 100,000 tpy or more of GHGs on
a CO2e basis to obtain Title V permits, regardless of whether they are
subject to any CAA requirement to control their GHG emissions. The five
air districts whose Title V programs we are proposing to revise took
differing approaches to revising their Title V regulations to address
the Tailoring Rule's Title V requirements, depending on the structure
and content of their rules. In section III.B., we explain how the
districts' revised Title V regulations satisfy the new Title V GHG
criteria.
C. What is the federal approval process for revisions to a Part 70
operating permits program?
In order for state regulations to be approved as part of the
federally-enforceable Title V operating permits program, states must
formally adopt regulations consistent with state and Federal
requirements. This process generally includes a public notice, public
hearing, public comment period, and a formal adoption by a state-
authorized rulemaking body.
Once a state rule, regulation, or control strategy is adopted, the
state submits it to us for inclusion into its approved operating
permits program. We must provide public notice and seek additional
public comment regarding the proposed Federal action on the state
submission. If adverse comments are received, they must be addressed
prior to any final Federal action by us.
All state regulations and supporting information approved by EPA
under section 502 of the CAA, including revisions to the state program,
are included in the Federally-approved operating permits program.
Records of such actions are maintained in the CFR at Title 40, part 70,
appendix A, entitled ``Approval Status of State and Local Operating
Permits Programs.''
III. EPA's Evaluation and Action
A. How is EPA evaluating the rules?
The relevant statutory provisions for our review of the submitted
rules include 40 CFR Part 70, as amended by the June 3, 2010 Tailoring
Rule.
B. Do the rules meet the evaluation criteria?
We have reviewed the five districts' revised Title V rules in
accordance with the rule evaluation criteria described above. A
discussion for each District is provided below. EPA is proposing to
find that each district's submittal correctly implements the changes in
Title V applicability required by the Tailoring Rule.
[[Page 16511]]
MBUAPCD revised Rule 218 (Title V: Federal Operating Permits) to
satisfy the Tailoring Rule requirements. The District revised the
definition of ``Major Source'' in section 2.18.5 of the rule to include
sources that, as of July 1, 2010, emit or have the potential to emit
``100,000 tpy or more of carbon dioxide equivalent (CO2e) greenhouse
gas emissions and directly emit, or have the potential to emit, 100
tons per year (tpy) or more of any greenhouse gas,'' as required by the
Tailoring Rule. The District also revised Section 1.3 of the rule to
exempt sources that limit their PTE of GHG emissions to less than
100,000 tpy of CO2e greenhouse gas emissions, and to exclude greenhouse
gases from the exemption for sources that limit their PTE to less than
100 tpy of any air pollutant. The District added new definitions for
``Greenhouse Gases'' and ``Carbon Dioxide Equivalent Emissions''.
Instead of using a cross-reference to 40 CFR 86.1818-12(a), as EPA does
in the Tailoring Rule, MBUAPCD has provided a specific definition of
Greenhouse Gases in its rule, which is consistent with the EPA
definition. The District's definition of ``Carbon Dioxide Equivalent
Emissions'' incorporates the Global Warming Potential values that EPA
lists in Table A-1 to Subpart A of 40 CFR Part 98, EPA's Mandatory
Greenhouse Gas Reporting regulation. All of these changes, which are
the only changes that the District made to Rule 218, are consistent
with the requirements of the Tailoring Rule. We note that the
applicability date of July 1, 2010 is one year earlier than required by
the Tailoring Rule. This had no practical effect in the District
because there are no sources newly subject to Title V based solely on
being classified a major source for GHG emissions.
SLOAPCD added a new provision to the Applicability section of Rule
216 (Federal Part 70 Permits). The new provision, in paragraph
216.B.2., requires sources that emit GHG in amounts ``equal to or
exceeding the thresholds specified in 40 CFR 70.2 in effect August 2,
2010'' to apply for a title V permit. The District also added a new
provision to the definition of ``Air Pollutant.'' The new provision, in
paragraph 216.C.4.f., adds ``Greenhouse gases that are `subject to
regulation' as defined in 40 CFR 70.2 in effect August 2, 2010'' to the
list of the air pollutants defined in the rule. These cross-references
to 40 CFR 70.2 means that the District's approach to tailoring the
applicability of its Title V program for GHG sources is identical to
EPA's. We are proposing to approve these revisions to SLOAPCD's title V
program because they are consistent with EPA's approach to Title V
applicability for GHG sources in the Tailoring Rule.
SBCAPCD revised Rule 1301 (General Information), which is one of
five rules that comprise the District's Regulation XIII (Part 70
Operating Permit Program), by adding a cross-reference to 40 CFR 70.2.
Specifically, the District amended the definition of ``Part 70 Source''
in section 1301.C. by adding a new provision that makes sources with
the potential to emit ``greenhouse gases that are `subject to
regulation' as defined in 40 CFR 70.2 in effect August 2, 2010''
subject to Title V. This cross-reference to the 40 CFR 70.2 definition
of ``subject to regulation'' means that the District's approach to
tailoring the applicability of its Title V program to GHG sources is
identical to EPA's, and therefore approvable.
In addition to the GHG-related rule changes adopted on January 20,
2011, SBCAPCD had previously revised the definition of ``stationary
source'' in Rule 1301 to reduce the area in which marine vessels
associated with a stationary source must account for their emissions.
Rule 1301 now limits the geographic area of emissions liability to
``California Coastal Waters'' (as defined in Rule 1301) adjacent to the
District, and excludes areas adjacent to the neighboring counties of
San Luis Obispo and Ventura. We are proposing to approve this change,
which is consistent with the District's jurisdiction in Santa Barbara
County.
SCAQMD addressed the Tailoring Rule requirements by revising six of
the seven rules that comprise Regulation XXX (Title V Permits).
Specifically, SCAQMD revised Rule 3000 (General) to add definitions of
``Carbon Dioxide Equivalent'', ``Global Warming Potential'', and
``Greenhouse Gas.'' SCAQMD also revised Rule 3001 (Applicability) to
require that any facility that, as of July 1, 2011, has the potential
to emit 100,000 tpy or more of GHG on a CO2e basis and a
potential to emit more than 100 tpy of any GHG on a mass basis apply
for a Title V permit within 180 days. SCAQMD provided a specific
definition of GHG in Rule 3000 which is consistent with the EPA
definition. The District's definition of ``CO2 equivalent''
is based on the same Global Warming Potential values that EPA lists in
Table A-1 to Subpart A of 40 CFR Part 98, EPA's Mandatory Greenhouse
Gas Reporting regulation. SCAQMD's definition of ``Global Warming
Potential'' uses the same language as EPA's definition in 40 CFR
Section 98.6. Finally, SCAQMD revised Rule 3003 (Applications), Rule
3005 (Permit Revisions), and Rule 3006 (Public Participation), to make
the cross references to Rule 3000 within those rules consistent with
the revised numbering sequence in that rule. Since the District's Title
V program changes are consistent with EPA's approach to Title V in the
Tailoring Rule, we are proposing to approve them as a revision to
SCAQMD's Title V program.
VCAPCD addressed the applicability of title V permitting for major
GHG sources by revising the applicability provisions of Rule 33 (Part
70 Permits--General). Specifically, the District revised subsection
33.B.1., which requires stationary sources with a PTE of 100 tpy or
more of any regulated air pollutant to obtain a title V permit. VCAPCD
added language to this provision to make it applicable to sources that
emit greenhouse gases, effective July 1, 2011, if a source also has a
PTE of 100,000 tons per year or more on a CO2 equivalent
basis.
In addition the District added a new definition of ``CO2
Equivalent (CO2e)'' to Rule 33.1 (Part 70 Permits--
Definitions) that is based on EPA's definition of ``tpy CO2
equivalent emissions'' in 40 CFR 70.2, and refers to the Global Warming
Potentials that appear in Table 1 of Rule 2 (Definitions). (Rule 2 has
been submitted to EPA for approval into the Ventura County portion of
the California State Implementation Plan. We will take action on that
rule in a separate rulemaking.) We are approving the District's
definition because, while it is not identical to the 70.2 definition,
it is sufficiently similar to, and fully consistent with, our
definition. The District also revised two definitions in Rule 33.1. The
definition of ``regulated air pollutant'' now includes greenhouse gases
if the source has a potential to emit of 100,000 tons per year or more
CO2 equivalent emissions. The definition of ``Insignificant
Activity'' now excludes greenhouse gases from the emission level of 2
tpy of any regulated pollutant that otherwise qualifies an activity as
insignificant.
VCAPCD also made one revision that is unrelated to GHG. The
District revised the definition of ``Federally-Enforceable
Requirement'' in Rule 33.1. The District added language to Subparagraph
33.1.12.a, which lists Title I requirements of the CAA that are
federally enforceable, to clarify that federally enforceable Title I
requirements are ``not limited to'' the requirements listed in the
definition. The additional language ensures that the definition
includes other Title I requirements that may be promulgated by the EPA
Administrator in the future.
[[Page 16512]]
We are proposing to approve the Title V program revisions submitted
by VCAPCD because the GHG provisions of the revised rules are
consistent with EPA's approach to Title V in the Tailoring Rule, and
the revision to the definition of ``Federally-Enforceable Requirement''
clarifies the definition and is consistent with EPA's definition of
``applicable requirement'' in 40 CFR 70.2.
C. Public Comment and Proposed Action
EPA believes the submitted rules fulfill all of the Tailoring
Rule's Title V requirements; therefore we are proposing to approve
these rule changes, adopted in 2010 and 2011, as revisions to the Title
V programs of all five districts. 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.
IV. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews
Today's 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 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 proposed action does not have tribal implications
as specified by Executive Order 13175 (65 FR 67249, November 9, 2000),
because the action 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 70
Environmental protection, Administrative practice and procedure,
Air pollution control, Carbon dioxide, Carbon dioxide equivalents,
Greenhouse gases, Hydrofluorocarbons, Intergovernmental relations,
Methane, Nitrous oxide, Perfluorocarbons, Reporting and recordkeeping
requirements, Sulfur hexafluoride, Incorporation by Reference.
Authority: 42 U.S.C. 7401 et seq.
Dated: March 8, 2012.
Jared Blumenfeld,
Regional Administrator, Region IX.
[FR Doc. 2012-6676 Filed 3-20-12; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P