Revisions to the California State Implementation Plan, South Coast Air Quality Management District, 56639-56640 [2013-22360]
Download as PDF
Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 178 / Friday, September 13, 2013 / Proposed Rules
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 CAA; and
Does not provide EPA with the
discretionary authority to address, as
appropriate, disproportionate human
health or environmental effects, using
practicable and legally permissible
methods, under Executive Order 12898
(59 FR 7629, February 16, 1994).
In addition, this rule does not have
Tribal implications, as specified by
Executive Order 13175 (65 FR 67249,
November 9, 2000), because the SIP is
not approved to apply in Indian country
located in the State, and EPA notes that
it will not impose substantial direct
costs on Tribal governments or preempt
Tribal law.
List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52
Environmental protection, Air
pollution control, Incorporation by
reference, Particulate matter, Reporting
and recordkeeping requirements.
Authority: 42 U.S.C. 7401 et. seq.
Dated: September 3, 2013.
Judith A. Enck,
Regional Administrator, Region 2.
[FR Doc. 2013–22356 Filed 9–12–13; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560–50–P
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION
AGENCY
40 CFR Part 52
[EPA–R09–OAR–2013–0596; FRL–9900–97–
Region 9]
Revisions to the California State
Implementation Plan, South Coast Air
Quality Management District
Environmental Protection
Agency (EPA).
AGENCY:
ACTION:
Proposed rule.
EPA is proposing to approve
a revision to the South Coast Air Quality
Management District (SCAQMD) portion
of the California State Implementation
Plan (SIP). This revision concerns
particulate matter (PM) and carbon
monoxide (CO) emissions from Cement
Kilns. We are approving a local rule that
regulates this emission source 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
October 15, 2013.
ADDRESSES: Submit comments,
identified by docket number EPA–R09–
OAR–2013–0596, 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.
Electronic files should avoid the use of
special characters, any form of
SUMMARY:
56639
encryption, and be free of any defects or
viruses.
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:
Christine Vineyard, EPA Region IX,
(415) 947–4125, vineyard.christine@
epa.gov.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Throughout this document, ‘‘we,’’ ‘‘us’’
and ‘‘our’’ refer to EPA.
Table of Contents
I. The State’s Submittal
A. What rule did the State submit?
B. Are there other versions of this rule?
C. What is the purpose of the submitted
rule revision?
II. EPA’s Evaluation and Action
A. How is EPA evaluating the rule?
B. Does the rule meet the evaluation
criteria?
C. EPA Recommendations To Further
Improve the Rule
D. Public Comment and Proposed Action
III. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews
I. The State’s Submittal
A. What rule did the State submit?
Table 1 lists the rule addressed by this
proposal with the date that it was
adopted by the local air agency and
submitted by the California Air
Resources Board.
TABLE 1—SUBMITTED RULE
emcdonald on DSK67QTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
Local agency
SCAQMD ................................
Rule No.
1112.1
On August 25, 2010, EPA determined
that the submittal for SCAQMD Rule
1112.1 met the completeness criteria in
VerDate Mar<15>2010
17:49 Sep 12, 2013
Jkt 229001
Rule title
Adopted
Emissions of Particulate Matter and Carbon Monoxide from
Cement Kilns.
40 CFR Part 51 Appendix V, which
must be met before formal EPA review.
PO 00000
Frm 00019
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
12/04/09
Submitted
07/20/10
B. Are there other versions of this rule?
We approved an earlier version of
Rule 1112.1 into the SIP on September
2, 1998 (63 FR 46659).
E:\FR\FM\13SEP1.SGM
13SEP1
56640
Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 178 / Friday, September 13, 2013 / Proposed Rules
C. What is the purpose of the submitted
rule revision?
PM contributes to effects that are
harmful to human health and the
environment, including premature
mortality, aggravation of respiratory and
cardiovascular disease, decreased lung
function, visibility impairment, and
damage to vegetation and ecosystems.
Section 110(a) of the CAA requires
States to submit regulations that control
PM emissions. Rule 1112.1 has been
amended to include carbon monoxide
(CO) limits in addition to the existing
particulate matter (PM) limits.
Additionally, the compliance
procedures and test methods have been
updated. EPA’s technical support
document (TSD) has more information
about this rule.
emcdonald on DSK67QTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
II. EPA’s Evaluation and Action
A. How is EPA evaluating the rule?
Generally, SIP rules must be
enforceable (see section 110(a) of the
Act) and must not relax existing
requirements (see sections 110(l) and
193). In addition, SIP rules must
implement Reasonably Available
Control Measures (RACM), including
Reasonably Available Control
Technology (RACT), in moderate PM–10
nonattainment areas, and Best Available
Control Measures (BACM), including
Best Available Control Technology
(BACT), in serious PM–10
nonattainment areas (see CAA sections
189(a)(1) and 189(b)(1)). The SCAQMD
regulates a PM–10 nonattainment area
classified as serious (see 40 CFR part
81), so Rule 1112.1 must implement
BACM with respect to PM–10. The PM
requirements in the submitted rule are
not changed and we are not reevaluating
them with respect to stringency as part
of this action. Carbon Monoxide
requirements are added, and have no
affect on SCAQMD’s attainment status
for CO as indicated by the modeling.
Guidance and policy documents that
we use to evaluate enforceability and
other requirements consistently include
the following:
1. ‘‘Issues Relating to VOC Regulation
Cutpoints, Deficiencies, and Deviations;
Clarification to Appendix D of
November 24, 1987 Federal Register
Notice,’’ (Blue Book), notice of
availability published in the May 25,
1988 Federal Register.
2. ‘‘Guidance Document for Correcting
Common VOC & Other Rule
Deficiencies,’’ EPA Region 9, August 21,
2001 (the Little Bluebook).
3. ‘‘State Implementation Plans;
General Preamble for the
Implementation of Title I of the Clean
Air Act Amendments of 1990,’’ 57 FR
VerDate Mar<15>2010
17:49 Sep 12, 2013
Jkt 229001
13498 (April 16, 1992); 57 FR 18070
(April 28, 1992).
4. ‘‘State Implementation Plans for
Serious PM–10 Nonattainment Areas,
and Attainment Date Waivers for PM–10
Nonattainment Areas Generally;
Addendum to the General Preamble for
the Implementation of Title I of the
Clean Air Act Amendments of 1990,’’ 59
FR 41998 (August 16, 1994).
5. ‘‘PM–10 Guideline Document,’’
EPA 452/R–93–008, April 1993.
6. ‘‘Fugitive Dust Background
Document and Technical Information
Document for Best Available Control
Measures,’’ EPA 450/2–92–004,
September 1992.
B. Does the rule meet the evaluation
criteria?
We believe this rule revision is
consistent with the relevant policy and
guidance regarding enforceability,
stringency, and SIP relaxations. The
submitted rule ultimately strengthens
the SIP by maintaining PM requirements
and allowing alternative limits for CO
which are expected to reduce NOX
emissions.
C. Public Comment and Proposed
Action
Because EPA believes the submitted
rule fulfills all relevant requirements,
we are proposing to fully approve it as
described in section 110(k)(3) of the Act.
We will accept comments from the
public on this proposal for the next 30
days. Unless we receive convincing new
information during the comment period,
we intend to publish a final approval
action that will incorporate this rule
into the federally enforceable SIP.
III. Statutory and Executive Order
Reviews
Under the Clean Air Act, the
Administrator is required to approve a
SIP submission that complies with the
provisions of the Act and applicable
Federal regulations. 42 U.S.C. 7410(k);
40 CFR 52.02(a). Thus, in reviewing SIP
submissions, EPA’s role is to approve
State choices, provided that they meet
the criteria of the Clean Air Act.
Accordingly, this 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
PO 00000
Frm 00020
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 9990
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, Carbon monoxide,
Incorporation by referenced,
Intergovernmental relations, Nitrogen
dioxide, Ozone, Particulate matter,
Reporting and recordkeeping
requirements.
Authority: 42 U.S.C. 7401 et seq.
Dated: September 4, 2014.
Jared Blumenfeld,
Regional Administrator, Region IX.
[FR Doc. 2013–22360 Filed 9–12–13; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560–50–P
E:\FR\FM\13SEP1.SGM
13SEP1
Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 78, Number 178 (Friday, September 13, 2013)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 56639-56640]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2013-22360]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
40 CFR Part 52
[EPA-R09-OAR-2013-0596; FRL-9900-97-Region 9]
Revisions to the California State Implementation Plan, South
Coast Air Quality Management District
AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).
ACTION: Proposed rule.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: EPA is proposing to approve a revision to the South Coast Air
Quality Management District (SCAQMD) portion of the California State
Implementation Plan (SIP). This revision concerns particulate matter
(PM) and carbon monoxide (CO) emissions from Cement Kilns. We are
approving a local rule that regulates this emission source 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 October 15, 2013.
ADDRESSES: Submit comments, identified by docket number EPA-R09-OAR-
2013-0596, 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. Electronic files should avoid the use of
special characters, any form of encryption, and be free of any defects
or viruses.
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: Christine Vineyard, EPA Region IX,
(415) 947-4125, vineyard.christine@epa.gov.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Throughout this document, ``we,'' ``us'' and
``our'' refer to EPA.
Table of Contents
I. The State's Submittal
A. What rule did the State submit?
B. Are there other versions of this rule?
C. What is the purpose of the submitted rule revision?
II. EPA's Evaluation and Action
A. How is EPA evaluating the rule?
B. Does the rule meet the evaluation criteria?
C. EPA Recommendations To Further Improve the Rule
D. Public Comment and Proposed Action
III. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews
I. The State's Submittal
A. What rule did the State submit?
Table 1 lists the rule addressed by this proposal with the date
that it was adopted by the local air agency and submitted by the
California Air Resources Board.
Table 1--Submitted Rule
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Local agency Rule No. Rule title Adopted Submitted
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
SCAQMD............................. 1112.1 Emissions of Particulate 12/04/09 07/20/10
Matter and Carbon Monoxide
from Cement Kilns.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
On August 25, 2010, EPA determined that the submittal for SCAQMD
Rule 1112.1 met the completeness criteria in 40 CFR Part 51 Appendix V,
which must be met before formal EPA review.
B. Are there other versions of this rule?
We approved an earlier version of Rule 1112.1 into the SIP on
September 2, 1998 (63 FR 46659).
[[Page 56640]]
C. What is the purpose of the submitted rule revision?
PM contributes to effects that are harmful to human health and the
environment, including premature mortality, aggravation of respiratory
and cardiovascular disease, decreased lung function, visibility
impairment, and damage to vegetation and ecosystems. Section 110(a) of
the CAA requires States to submit regulations that control PM
emissions. Rule 1112.1 has been amended to include carbon monoxide (CO)
limits in addition to the existing particulate matter (PM) limits.
Additionally, the compliance procedures and test methods have been
updated. EPA's technical support document (TSD) has more information
about this rule.
II. EPA's Evaluation and Action
A. How is EPA evaluating the rule?
Generally, SIP rules must be enforceable (see section 110(a) of the
Act) and must not relax existing requirements (see sections 110(l) and
193). In addition, SIP rules must implement Reasonably Available
Control Measures (RACM), including Reasonably Available Control
Technology (RACT), in moderate PM-10 nonattainment areas, and Best
Available Control Measures (BACM), including Best Available Control
Technology (BACT), in serious PM-10 nonattainment areas (see CAA
sections 189(a)(1) and 189(b)(1)). The SCAQMD regulates a PM-10
nonattainment area classified as serious (see 40 CFR part 81), so Rule
1112.1 must implement BACM with respect to PM-10. The PM requirements
in the submitted rule are not changed and we are not reevaluating them
with respect to stringency as part of this action. Carbon Monoxide
requirements are added, and have no affect on SCAQMD's attainment
status for CO as indicated by the modeling.
Guidance and policy documents that we use to evaluate
enforceability and other requirements consistently include the
following:
1. ``Issues Relating to VOC Regulation Cutpoints, Deficiencies, and
Deviations; Clarification to Appendix D of November 24, 1987 Federal
Register Notice,'' (Blue Book), notice of availability published in the
May 25, 1988 Federal Register.
2. ``Guidance Document for Correcting Common VOC & Other Rule
Deficiencies,'' EPA Region 9, August 21, 2001 (the Little Bluebook).
3. ``State Implementation Plans; General Preamble for the
Implementation of Title I of the Clean Air Act Amendments of 1990,'' 57
FR 13498 (April 16, 1992); 57 FR 18070 (April 28, 1992).
4. ``State Implementation Plans for Serious PM-10 Nonattainment
Areas, and Attainment Date Waivers for PM-10 Nonattainment Areas
Generally; Addendum to the General Preamble for the Implementation of
Title I of the Clean Air Act Amendments of 1990,'' 59 FR 41998 (August
16, 1994).
5. ``PM-10 Guideline Document,'' EPA 452/R-93-008, April 1993.
6. ``Fugitive Dust Background Document and Technical Information
Document for Best Available Control Measures,'' EPA 450/2-92-004,
September 1992.
B. Does the rule meet the evaluation criteria?
We believe this rule revision is consistent with the relevant
policy and guidance regarding enforceability, stringency, and SIP
relaxations. The submitted rule ultimately strengthens the SIP by
maintaining PM requirements and allowing alternative limits for CO
which are expected to reduce NOX emissions.
C. Public Comment and Proposed Action
Because EPA believes the submitted rule fulfills all relevant
requirements, we are proposing to fully approve it as described in
section 110(k)(3) of the Act. We will accept comments from the public
on this proposal for the next 30 days. Unless we receive convincing new
information during the comment period, we intend to publish a final
approval action that will incorporate this rule into the federally
enforceable SIP.
III. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews
Under the Clean Air Act, the Administrator is required to approve a
SIP submission that complies with the provisions of the Act and
applicable Federal regulations. 42 U.S.C. 7410(k); 40 CFR 52.02(a).
Thus, in reviewing SIP submissions, EPA's role is to approve State
choices, provided that they meet the criteria of the Clean Air Act.
Accordingly, this 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, Carbon monoxide,
Incorporation by referenced, Intergovernmental relations, Nitrogen
dioxide, Ozone, Particulate matter, Reporting and recordkeeping
requirements.
Authority: 42 U.S.C. 7401 et seq.
Dated: September 4, 2014.
Jared Blumenfeld,
Regional Administrator, Region IX.
[FR Doc. 2013-22360 Filed 9-12-13; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P