Revisions to the California State Implementation Plan, San Joaquin Valley Unified Air Pollution Control District, 35329-35331 [2012-14410]
Download as PDF
Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 114 / Wednesday, June 13, 2012 / Proposed Rules
erowe on DSK2VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS-1
Accordingly, this proposed action
merely proposes to approve State law as
meeting Federal requirements and does
not impose additional requirements
beyond those imposed by State law. For
that reason, this proposed action:
• Is not a ‘‘significant regulatory
action’’ subject to review by the Office
of Management and Budget under
Executive 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 SIP is
not approved to apply in Indian country
located in the State, and EPA notes that
it will not impose substantial direct
costs on tribal governments or preempt
tribal law.
List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52
Environmental protection, Air
pollution control, Intergovernmental
VerDate Mar<15>2010
13:47 Jun 12, 2012
Jkt 226001
relations, Ozone, Reporting and
recordkeeping requirements, Volatile
organic compounds.
Authority: 42 U.S.C. 7401 et seq.
Dated: May 25, 2012.
Jared Blumenfeld,
Regional Administrator, Region IX.
[FR Doc. 2012–14421 Filed 6–12–12; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560–50–P
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION
AGENCY
40 CFR Part 52
[EPA–R09–OAR–2012–0359; FRL–9685–9]
Revisions to the California State
Implementation Plan, San Joaquin
Valley Unified Air Pollution Control
District
Environmental Protection
Agency (EPA).
ACTION: Proposed rule.
AGENCY:
EPA is proposing to approve
revisions to the San Joaquin Valley
Unified Air Pollution Control District
(SJVUAPCD) portion of the California
State Implementation Plan (SIP). These
revisions concern volatile organic
compound (VOC) emissions from crude
oil production sumps and refinery
wastewater separators. We are
approving local rules that regulate these
emission sources under the Clean Air
Act as amended in 1990 (CAA or the
Act). We are taking comments on this
proposal and plan to follow with a final
action.
DATES: Any comments must arrive by
July 13, 2012.
ADDRESSES: Submit comments,
identified by docket number EPA–R09–
OAR–2012–0359, by one of the
following methods:
1. Federal eRulemaking Portal:
www.regulations.gov. Follow the on-line
instructions.
2. Email: steckel.andrew@epa.gov.
3. Mail or deliver: Andrew Steckel
(Air-4), U.S. Environmental Protection
Agency Region IX, 75 Hawthorne Street,
San Francisco, CA 94105–3901.
Instructions: All comments will be
included in the public docket without
change and may be made available
online at www.regulations.gov,
including any personal information
provided, unless the comment includes
Confidential Business Information (CBI)
or other information whose disclosure is
SUMMARY:
PO 00000
Frm 00031
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
35329
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.
Docket: Generally, documents in the
docket for this action are available
electronically at www.regulations.gov
and in hard copy at EPA Region IX, 75
Hawthorne Street, San Francisco,
California. While all documents in the
docket are listed at
www.regulations.gov, some information
may be publicly available only at the
hard copy location (e.g., copyrighted
material, large maps), and some may not
be publicly available in either location
(e.g., CBI). To inspect the hard copy
materials, please schedule an
appointment during normal business
hours with the contact listed in the FOR
FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Nicole Law, EPA Region IX, (415) 947–
4126, law.nicole@epa.gov.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Throughout this document, ‘‘we,’’ ‘‘us’’
and ‘‘our’’ refer to EPA.
Table of Contents
I. The State’s Submittal
A. What rules did the State submit?
B. Are there other versions of these rules?
C. What is the purpose of the submitted
rules and rule revisions?
II. EPA’s Evaluation and Action.
A. How is EPA evaluating the rules?
B. Do the rules meet the evaluation
criteria?
C. EPA recommendations to further
improve the rules.
D. Public comment and final action.
III. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews
I. The State’s Submittal
A. What rules did the state submit?
Table 1 lists the rules addressed by
this proposal with the dates that they
were amended by the local air agency
and submitted by the California Air
Resources Board (CARB).
E:\FR\FM\13JNP1.SGM
13JNP1
35330
Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 114 / Wednesday, June 13, 2012 / Proposed Rules
TABLE 1—SUBMITTED RULES
Local agency
Rule No.
SJVUAPCD ......
SJVUAPCD ......
Rule title
4402
4625
Crude Oil Production Sumps ............................................................
Wastewater Separators ....................................................................
On March 13, 2012, EPA determined
that the submittal for SJVUAPCD Rule
4402 and SJVUPACD Rule 4625 met the
completeness criteria in 40 CFR Part 51
Appendix V, which must be met before
formal EPA review.
B. Are there other versions of these
rules?
On July 7, 2011 (76 FR 39777), we
finalized a limited approval into the SIP
of earlier versions of Rule 4402 and
4625 because these rules largely
fulfilled relevant CAA requirements. We
simultaneously finalized a limited
disapproval of these rules, identifying
several rule deficiencies. The
SJVUAPCD adopted revisions to the
SIP-approved versions on December 15,
2011 and CARB submitted them to us
on February 23, 2012.
C. What is the purpose of the submitted
rules and rule revisions?
VOCs help produce ground-level
ozone and smog, which harm human
health and the environment. Section
110(a) of the CAA requires States to
submit regulations that control VOC
emissions. The submitted Rule 4402,
Crude Oil Production Sumps, controls
VOC emissions from sumps by
prohibiting first stage sumps, requiring
covers, requiring recordkeeping, and
limiting emergency pit use. The
submitted Rule 4625, Wastewater
Separators, controls VOC emissions
from wastewater separators at refineries
by requiring inspections, removing
exemptions, and requiring
recordkeeping. The rules were revised
largely to address the deficiencies
identified in EPA’s July 7, 2011 limited
disapproval. EPA’s technical support
documents (TSDs) have more
information about these rules.
II. EPA’s Evaluation and Action
erowe on DSK2VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS-1
A. How is EPA evaluating the rules?
Generally, SIP rules must be
enforceable (see section 110(a) of the
Act), must require Reasonably Available
Control Technology (RACT) for each
category of sources covered by a Control
Techniques Guidelines (CTG) document
as well as each major source in
nonattainment areas (see sections
182(b)(2) and 182(f)), and must not relax
existing requirements (see sections
110(l) and 193). The SJVUAPCD
VerDate Mar<15>2010
13:47 Jun 12, 2012
Amended
Jkt 226001
regulates an ozone nonattainment area
(see 40 CFR part 81), so Rules 4402 and
4625 must fulfill RACT.
Guidance and policy documents that
we use to evaluate enforceability and
RACT requirements consistently
include the following:
1. ‘‘Issues Relating to VOC Regulation
Cutpoints, Deficiencies, and
Deviations,’’ EPA, May 25, 1988 (the
Bluebook).
2. ‘‘Guidance Document for Correcting
Common VOC & Other Rule
Deficiencies,’’ EPA Region 9, August 21,
2001 (the Little Bluebook).
3. ‘‘Technical Support Document for
Suggested Control Measure for the
Control of Organic Compound
Emissions from Sumps Used in Oil
Production Operations,’’ California Air
Resources Board, August 11, 1988.
B. Do the rules meet the evaluation
criteria?
We believe these rules are consistent
with the relevant policy and guidance
regarding enforceability, RACT, and SIP
relaxations. The TSDs have more
information on our evaluation and
explain how the revised submittal
adequately addresses all deficiencies
identified in our previous limited
disapproval by revisions to the rule and/
or the District’s supporting
documentation.
C. EPA recommendations to further
improve the rules
We recommend SJVUAPCD develop a
more current inventory of all oil
production sumps, ponds, and pits in
the District for its next ozone plan. This
inventory could identify the number of
sumps and ponds by size, type (lined,
unlined, excavation, above ground, etc.),
VOC content and operator production
rate. The TSDs describe additional rule
revisions that we recommend for the
next time the local agency modifies the
rules but are not currently the basis for
rule disapproval.
D. Public Comment and Final Action
Because EPA believes the submitted
rules fulfill all relevant requirements,
we are proposing to fully approve them
as described in section 110(k)(3) of the
Act. We will accept comments from the
public on this proposal for the next 30
days. Unless we receive convincing new
information during the comment period,
PO 00000
Frm 00032
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
12/15/11
12/15/11
Submitted
02/23/12
02/23/12
we intend to publish a final approval
action that will incorporate these rules
into the federally enforceable SIP. If we
finalize this action as proposed, this
action would terminate all sanction and
FIP clocks associated with our July 2011
limited disapproval.
On January 10, 2012, EPA partially
approved and partially disapproved the
RACT SIP submitted by California on
June 18, 2009 for the SJV extreme ozone
nonattainment area (2009 RACT SIP),
based in part on our conclusion that the
State had not fully satisfied CAA
Section 182 RACT requirements for
crude oil production sumps and refinery
wastewater separators. See 77 FR 1417,
1425 (January 10, 2012). Final approval
of Rule 4402 and 4625 would satisfy
California’s obligation to implement
RACT under CAA section 182 for this
source category for the 1-hour ozone
and 1997 8-hour ozone NAAQS and
thereby terminate both the sanctions
clocks and the Federal Implementation
Plan (FIP) clock associated with these
rules.
III. Statutory and Executive Order
Reviews
Under the Clean Air Act, the
Administrator is required to approve a
SIP submission that complies with the
provisions of the Act and applicable
Federal regulations. 42 U.S.C. 7410(k);
40 CFR 52.02(a). Thus, in reviewing SIP
submissions, EPA’s role is to approve
State choices, provided that they meet
the criteria of the Clean Air Act.
Accordingly, this 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
E:\FR\FM\13JNP1.SGM
13JNP1
Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 114 / Wednesday, June 13, 2012 / Proposed Rules
affect small governments, as described
in the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act
of 1995 (Public Law 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 SIP is
not approved to apply in Indian country
located in the State, and EPA notes that
it will not impose substantial direct
costs on tribal governments or preempt
tribal law.
List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52
Environmental protection, Air
pollution control, Intergovernmental
relations, Ozone, Reporting and
recordkeeping requirements, Volatile
organic compounds.
Authority: 42 U.S.C. 7401 et seq.
Dated: May 25, 2012.
Jared Blumenfeld,
Regional Administrator, Region IX.
[FR Doc. 2012–14410 Filed 6–12–12; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560–50–P
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION
AGENCY
40 CFR Part 725
[EPA–HQ–OPPT–2010–0994; FRL–9350–6]
erowe on DSK2VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS-1
RIN 2070–AD43
Trichoderma reesei; Proposed
Significant New Use Rule
Environmental Protection
Agency (EPA).
ACTION: Proposed rule.
AGENCY:
EPA is proposing a significant
new use rule (SNUR) under the Toxic
SUMMARY:
VerDate Mar<15>2010
13:47 Jun 12, 2012
Jkt 226001
Substances Control Act (TSCA) for the
genetically modified microorganism
identified generically as Trichoderma
reesei (T. reesei). This microorganism
was the subject of a Microbial
Commercial Activity Notice (MCAN).
EPA believes this action is necessary
because the use of this genetically
modified T. reesei under certain
conditions may be hazardous to human
health and the environment. This
proposed rule would also establish a
mechanism to allow EPA to evaluate an
intended use and its conditions, and to
prohibit or limit that activity before it
occurs, if EPA determines it may be
hazardous.
DATES: Comments must be received on
or before July 13, 2012.
ADDRESSES: Submit your comments,
identified by docket identification (ID)
number EPA–HQ–OPPT–2010–0994, by
one of the following methods:
• Federal eRulemaking Portal: https://
www.regulations.gov. Follow the online
instructions for submitting comments.
• Mail: Document Control Office
(7407M), Office of Pollution Prevention
and Toxics (OPPT), Environmental
Protection Agency, 1200 Pennsylvania
Ave. NW., Washington, DC 20460–0001.
• Hand Delivery: OPPT Document
Control Office (DCO), EPA East Bldg.,
Rm. 6428, 1201 Constitution Ave. NW.,
Washington, DC. Attention: Docket ID
Number EPA–HQ–OPPT–2010–0994.
The DCO is open from 8 a.m. to 4 p.m.,
Monday through Friday, excluding legal
holidays. The telephone number for the
DCO is (202) 564–8930. Such deliveries
are only accepted during the DCO’s
normal hours of operation, and special
arrangements should be made for
deliveries of boxed information.
Instructions: Direct your comments to
docket ID number EPA–HQ–OPPT–
2010–0994. EPA’s policy is that all
comments received will be included in
the docket without change and may be
made available online at https://
www.regulations.gov, including any
personal information provided, unless
the comment includes information
claimed to be Confidential Business
Information (CBI) or other information
whose disclosure is restricted by statute.
Do not submit information that you
consider to be CBI or otherwise
protected through regulations.gov or
email. The regulations.gov Web site is
an ‘‘anonymous access’’ system, which
means EPA will not know your identity
or contact information unless you
provide it in the body of your comment.
If you send an email comment directly
to EPA without going through
regulations.gov, your email address will
be automatically captured and included
PO 00000
Frm 00033
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
35331
as part of the comment that is placed in
the docket and made available on the
Internet. If you submit an electronic
comment, 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 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: All documents in the docket
are listed in the docket index available
at https://www.regulations.gov. 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,
will be publicly available only in hard
copy. Publicly available docket
materials are available electronically at
https://www.regulations.gov, or, if only
available in hard copy, at the OPPT
Docket. The OPPT Docket is located in
the EPA Docket Center (EPA/DC) at Rm.
3334, EPA West Bldg., 1301
Constitution Ave. NW., Washington,
DC. The EPA/DC Public Reading Room
hours of operation are 8:30 a.m. to 4:30
p.m., Monday through Friday, excluding
legal holidays. The telephone number of
the EPA/DC Public Reading Room is
(202) 566–1744, and the telephone
number for the OPPT Docket is (202)
566–0280. Docket visitors are required
to show photographic identification,
pass through a metal detector, and sign
the EPA visitor log. All visitor bags are
processed through an X-ray machine
and subject to search. Visitors will be
provided an EPA/DC badge that must be
visible at all times in the building and
returned upon departure.
For
technical information contact: Kenneth
Moss, Chemical Control Division
(7405M), Office of Pollution Prevention
and Toxics, Environmental Protection
Agency, 1200 Pennsylvania Ave. NW.,
Washington, DC 20460–0001; telephone
number: (202) 564–9232; email address:
moss.kenneth@epa.gov.
For general information contact: The
TSCA-Hotline, ABVI-Goodwill, 422
South Clinton Ave., Rochester, NY
14620; telephone number: (202) 554–
1404; email address: TSCAHotline@epa.gov.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
E:\FR\FM\13JNP1.SGM
13JNP1
Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 77, Number 114 (Wednesday, June 13, 2012)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 35329-35331]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2012-14410]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
40 CFR Part 52
[EPA-R09-OAR-2012-0359; FRL-9685-9]
Revisions to the California State Implementation Plan, San
Joaquin Valley Unified Air Pollution Control District
AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).
ACTION: Proposed rule.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: EPA is proposing to approve revisions to the San Joaquin
Valley Unified Air Pollution Control District (SJVUAPCD) portion of the
California State Implementation Plan (SIP). These revisions concern
volatile organic compound (VOC) emissions from crude oil production
sumps and refinery wastewater separators. We are approving local rules
that regulate these emission sources under the Clean Air Act as amended
in 1990 (CAA or the Act). We are taking comments on this proposal and
plan to follow with a final action.
DATES: Any comments must arrive by July 13, 2012.
ADDRESSES: Submit comments, identified by docket number EPA-R09-OAR-
2012-0359, by one of the following methods:
1. Federal eRulemaking Portal: www.regulations.gov. Follow the on-
line instructions.
2. Email: steckel.andrew@epa.gov.
3. Mail or deliver: Andrew Steckel (Air-4), U.S. Environmental
Protection Agency Region IX, 75 Hawthorne Street, San Francisco, CA
94105-3901.
Instructions: All comments will be included in the public docket
without change and may be made available online at www.regulations.gov,
including any personal information provided, unless the comment
includes Confidential Business Information (CBI) or other information
whose disclosure is restricted by statute. Information that you
consider CBI or otherwise protected should be clearly identified as
such and should not be submitted through www.regulations.gov or 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.
Docket: Generally, documents in the docket for this action are
available electronically at www.regulations.gov and in hard copy at EPA
Region IX, 75 Hawthorne Street, San Francisco, California. While all
documents in the docket are listed at www.regulations.gov, some
information may be publicly available only at the hard copy location
(e.g., copyrighted material, large maps), and some may not be publicly
available in either location (e.g., CBI). To inspect the hard copy
materials, please schedule an appointment during normal business hours
with the contact listed in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Nicole Law, EPA Region IX, (415) 947-
4126, law.nicole@epa.gov.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Throughout this document, ``we,'' ``us'' and
``our'' refer to EPA.
Table of Contents
I. The State's Submittal
A. What rules did the State submit?
B. Are there other versions of these rules?
C. What is the purpose of the submitted rules and rule
revisions?
II. EPA's Evaluation and Action.
A. How is EPA evaluating the rules?
B. Do the rules meet the evaluation criteria?
C. EPA recommendations to further improve the rules.
D. Public comment and final action.
III. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews
I. The State's Submittal
A. What rules did the state submit?
Table 1 lists the rules addressed by this proposal with the dates
that they were amended by the local air agency and submitted by the
California Air Resources Board (CARB).
[[Page 35330]]
Table 1--Submitted Rules
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Local agency Rule No. Rule title Amended Submitted
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
SJVUAPCD....................... 4402 Crude Oil Production 12/15/11 02/23/12
Sumps.
SJVUAPCD....................... 4625 Wastewater Separators.... 12/15/11 02/23/12
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
On March 13, 2012, EPA determined that the submittal for SJVUAPCD
Rule 4402 and SJVUPACD Rule 4625 met the completeness criteria in 40
CFR Part 51 Appendix V, which must be met before formal EPA review.
B. Are there other versions of these rules?
On July 7, 2011 (76 FR 39777), we finalized a limited approval into
the SIP of earlier versions of Rule 4402 and 4625 because these rules
largely fulfilled relevant CAA requirements. We simultaneously
finalized a limited disapproval of these rules, identifying several
rule deficiencies. The SJVUAPCD adopted revisions to the SIP-approved
versions on December 15, 2011 and CARB submitted them to us on February
23, 2012.
C. What is the purpose of the submitted rules and rule revisions?
VOCs help produce ground-level ozone and smog, which harm human
health and the environment. Section 110(a) of the CAA requires States
to submit regulations that control VOC emissions. The submitted Rule
4402, Crude Oil Production Sumps, controls VOC emissions from sumps by
prohibiting first stage sumps, requiring covers, requiring
recordkeeping, and limiting emergency pit use. The submitted Rule 4625,
Wastewater Separators, controls VOC emissions from wastewater
separators at refineries by requiring inspections, removing exemptions,
and requiring recordkeeping. The rules were revised largely to address
the deficiencies identified in EPA's July 7, 2011 limited disapproval.
EPA's technical support documents (TSDs) have more information about
these rules.
II. EPA's Evaluation and Action
A. How is EPA evaluating the rules?
Generally, SIP rules must be enforceable (see section 110(a) of the
Act), must require Reasonably Available Control Technology (RACT) for
each category of sources covered by a Control Techniques Guidelines
(CTG) document as well as each major source in nonattainment areas (see
sections 182(b)(2) and 182(f)), and must not relax existing
requirements (see sections 110(l) and 193). The SJVUAPCD regulates an
ozone nonattainment area (see 40 CFR part 81), so Rules 4402 and 4625
must fulfill RACT.
Guidance and policy documents that we use to evaluate
enforceability and RACT requirements consistently include the
following:
1. ``Issues Relating to VOC Regulation Cutpoints, Deficiencies, and
Deviations,'' EPA, May 25, 1988 (the Bluebook).
2. ``Guidance Document for Correcting Common VOC & Other Rule
Deficiencies,'' EPA Region 9, August 21, 2001 (the Little Bluebook).
3. ``Technical Support Document for Suggested Control Measure for
the Control of Organic Compound Emissions from Sumps Used in Oil
Production Operations,'' California Air Resources Board, August 11,
1988.
B. Do the rules meet the evaluation criteria?
We believe these rules are consistent with the relevant policy and
guidance regarding enforceability, RACT, and SIP relaxations. The TSDs
have more information on our evaluation and explain how the revised
submittal adequately addresses all deficiencies identified in our
previous limited disapproval by revisions to the rule and/or the
District's supporting documentation.
C. EPA recommendations to further improve the rules
We recommend SJVUAPCD develop a more current inventory of all oil
production sumps, ponds, and pits in the District for its next ozone
plan. This inventory could identify the number of sumps and ponds by
size, type (lined, unlined, excavation, above ground, etc.), VOC
content and operator production rate. The TSDs describe additional rule
revisions that we recommend for the next time the local agency modifies
the rules but are not currently the basis for rule disapproval.
D. Public Comment and Final Action
Because EPA believes the submitted rules fulfill all relevant
requirements, we are proposing to fully approve them as described in
section 110(k)(3) of the Act. We will accept comments from the public
on this proposal for the next 30 days. Unless we receive convincing new
information during the comment period, we intend to publish a final
approval action that will incorporate these rules into the federally
enforceable SIP. If we finalize this action as proposed, this action
would terminate all sanction and FIP clocks associated with our July
2011 limited disapproval.
On January 10, 2012, EPA partially approved and partially
disapproved the RACT SIP submitted by California on June 18, 2009 for
the SJV extreme ozone nonattainment area (2009 RACT SIP), based in part
on our conclusion that the State had not fully satisfied CAA Section
182 RACT requirements for crude oil production sumps and refinery
wastewater separators. See 77 FR 1417, 1425 (January 10, 2012). Final
approval of Rule 4402 and 4625 would satisfy California's obligation to
implement RACT under CAA section 182 for this source category for the
1-hour ozone and 1997 8-hour ozone NAAQS and thereby terminate both the
sanctions clocks and the Federal Implementation Plan (FIP) clock
associated with these rules.
III. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews
Under the Clean Air Act, the Administrator is required to approve a
SIP submission that complies with the provisions of the Act and
applicable Federal regulations. 42 U.S.C. 7410(k); 40 CFR 52.02(a).
Thus, in reviewing SIP submissions, EPA's role is to approve State
choices, provided that they meet the criteria of the Clean Air Act.
Accordingly, this 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
[[Page 35331]]
affect small governments, as described in the Unfunded Mandates Reform
Act of 1995 (Public Law 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 SIP is not approved to apply in Indian country located in
the State, and EPA notes that it will not impose substantial direct
costs on tribal governments or preempt tribal law.
List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52
Environmental protection, Air pollution control, Intergovernmental
relations, Ozone, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements, Volatile
organic compounds.
Authority: 42 U.S.C. 7401 et seq.
Dated: May 25, 2012.
Jared Blumenfeld,
Regional Administrator, Region IX.
[FR Doc. 2012-14410 Filed 6-12-12; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P