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

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

[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

This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.