Revisions to the California State Implementation Plan, Antelope Valley Air Quality Management District, Feather River Air Quality Management District and Santa Barbara County Air Pollution Control District, 76222-76225 [2015-30809]
Download as PDF
<![CDATA[
76222
Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 235 / Tuesday, December 8, 2015 / Rules and Regulations
(C) South Coast Air Quality
Management District.
(1) Rule 1151, ‘‘Motor Vehicle and
Mobile Equipment Non-Assembly Line
Coating Operations,’’ amended on
September 5, 2014.
*
*
*
*
*
(463) * * *
(i) * * *
(B) Yolo-Solano Air Quality
Management District.
(1) Rule 2.26, ‘‘Motor Vehicle and
Mobile Equipment Coating Operations,’’
revised on December 10, 2008.
*
*
*
*
*
[FR Doc. 2015–30828 Filed 12–7–15; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560–50–P
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION
AGENCY
40 CFR Part 52
[EPA–R09–OAR–2015–0619; FRL–9936–67–
Region 9]
Revisions to the California State
Implementation Plan, Antelope Valley
Air Quality Management District,
Feather River Air Quality Management
District and Santa Barbara County Air
Pollution Control District
Environmental Protection
Agency (EPA).
ACTION: Direct final rule.
AGENCY:
The Environmental Protection
Agency (EPA) is taking direct final
action to approve revisions to the
Antelope Valley Air Quality
Management District (AVAQMD),
Feather River Air Quality Management
District (FRAQMD), and Santa Barbara
County Air Pollution Control District
(SBCAPCD) portions of the California
State Implementation Plan (SIP). These
revisions concern emissions of volatile
SUMMARY:
organic compounds (VOCs) from
architectural coatings. We are approving
local rules that regulate these emission
sources under the Clean Air Act (CAA
or the Act).
DATES: This rule is effective on February
8, 2016 without further notice, unless
the EPA receives adverse comments by
January 7, 2016. If we receive such
comments, we will publish a timely
withdrawal in the Federal Register to
notify the public that this direct final
rule will not take effect.
ADDRESSES: Submit comments,
identified by docket number [EPA–R09–
OAR–2015–0619, 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: Once submitted,
comments cannot be edited or
withdrawn. The EPA may publish any
comment received to its public docket.
Do not submit electronically any
information you consider to be
Confidential Business Information (CBI)
or other information whose disclosure is
restricted by statute. If you need to
include CBI as part of your comment,
please visit https://www.epa.gov/
dockets/comments.html for further
instructions. Multimedia submissions
(audio, video, etc.) must be
accompanied by a written comment.
The written comment is considered the
official comment and should include
discussion of all points you wish to
make. For the full EPA public comment
policy and general guidance on making
effective comments, please visit https://
www.epa.gov/dockets/comments.html.
Docket: 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,
California 94105–3901. 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:
Arnold Lazarus, EPA Region IX, (415)
972 3024, lazarus.arnold@epa.gov.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Throughout this document, ‘‘we,’’ ‘‘us,’’
and ‘‘our’’ refer to the 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. The EPA’s Evaluation and Action
A. How is the 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. Incorporation by Reference
IV. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews
I. The State’s Submittal
A. What rules did the State submit?
Table 1 lists the rules we are
approving with the dates that they were
adopted by the local air agencies and
submitted by the California Air
Resources Board (CARB).
TABLE 1—SUBMITTED RULES
Local agency
Rule No.
Lhorne on DSK9F6TC42PROD with RULES
AVAQMD .........................................................
FRAQMD .........................................................
SBCAPCD .......................................................
On May 13, 2014 the EPA determined
that the submittal for AVAQMD Rule
1113 met the completeness criteria in 40
CFR part 51 Appendix V, which must be
met before formal EPA review.
On December 18, 2014, the submittal
for FRAQMD Rule 3.15 and SBCAPCD
Rule 323.1 was deemed by operation of
law to meet the completeness criteria in
40 CFR part 51 Appendix V.
VerDate Sep<11>2014
14:14 Dec 07, 2015
Jkt 238001
1113
3.15
323.1
Architectural Coatings ....................................
Architectural Coatings ....................................
Architectural Coatings ....................................
B. Are there other versions of these
rules?
There is a previous version of
AVAQMD 1113 adopted by the district
on March 18, 2003. The EPA finalized
a simultaneous limited approval and
limited disapproval of this version on
August 26, 2004 (69 FR 52432).
We approved Sutter County Air
Pollution Control District (SCAPCD)
PO 00000
Frm 00022
Adopted/
amended
Rule title
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
3/18/2003
8/4/2014
6/19/2014
Submitted
5/13/2014
11/6/2014
11/6/2014
Rule 3.15, ‘‘Architectural Coatings,’’ and
Yuba County Air Pollution Control
District (YCAPCD) Rule 3.15,
‘‘Architectural Coatings,’’ into the
California SIP on May 3, 1982. SCAPCD
and YCAPCD joined together to form the
FRAQMD on September 3, 1991;
however, SCAPCD Rule 3.15 and
YCAPCD Rule 3.15 have remained in
the SIP. The EPA is approving removal
E:\FR\FM\08DER1.SGM
08DER1
Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 235 / Tuesday, December 8, 2015 / Rules and Regulations
of these rules because the SCAPCD and
the YCAPCD no longer exist and the
requirements are superseded by
76223
FRAQMD Rule 3.15. Table 2 lists the
two superseded rules.
TABLE 2—RULES TO BE SUPERSEDED
Local agency
Rule No.
Rule title
SCAPCD ..........................................
YCAPCD ..........................................
3.15
3.15
There are no previous versions of
SBCAPCD Rule 323.1 in the SIP.
sources covered by a Control
Techniques Guidelines (CTG) document
as well as each major source of VOCs in
ozone nonattainment areas classified as
moderate or above (see CAA sections
182(b)(2)). The EPA has designated a
portion of the FRAQMD (specifically,
southern Sutter County) as a severe
nonattainment area for the 1-hour ozone
national ambient air quality standards
(NAAQS or standards) and the 1997 and
2008 8-hour ozone standards. Similarly,
the EPA has designated the AVAQMD
as severe nonattainment for the 2008 8hour ozone NAAQS, and the SBCAPCD
as unclassifiable/attainment for the 2008
8-Hour Ozone NAAQS. See 40 CFR
81.305. Because there are no relevant
EPA CTG documents and because there
are no major architectural coating
sources, architectural coatings are
considered area sources of VOC and are
not subject to RACT requirements.
However, architectural coatings are
subject to other VOC content limits and
control measures described in the TSDs.
Guidance and policy documents that
we used to evaluate the enforceability,
revision/relaxation and stringency
requirements of this rule include the
following:
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. Architectural coatings are
coatings that are applied to stationary
structures and their accessories. They
include house paints, stains, industrial
maintenance coatings, traffic coatings,
and many other products. VOCs are
emitted from the coatings during
application and curing, and from the
associated solvents used for thinning
and clean-up.
AVAQMD Rule 1113 controls VOC
emissions from architectural coatings by
establishing VOC limits on any
architectural coating supplied, sold,
offered for sale or manufactured for use
within the AVAQMD. The major
revision to Rule 1113 is elimination of
the averaging provision which was the
primary basis for the EPA’s 2004 limited
disapproval of a prior version of this
rule.
Rule 3.15 and SBCAPCD Rule 323.1
similarly control VOC emissions by
establishing VOC limits on architectural
coatings supplied, sold, offered for sale
or manufactured for use within the
FRAQMD and SBCAPCD.
The EPA’s technical support
documents (TSDs) have more
information about these rules.
Lhorne on DSK9F6TC42PROD with RULES
II. The EPA’s Evaluation and Action
A. How is the EPA evaluating the rules?
SIP rules must be enforceable (see
CAA section 110(a)(2)), must not
interfere with applicable requirements
concerning attainment and reasonable
further progress or other CAA
requirements (see CAA section 110(l)),
and must not modify certain SIP control
requirements in nonattainment areas
without ensuring equivalent or greater
emissions reductions (see CAA section
193).
Generally, SIP rules must require
Reasonably Available Control
Technology (RACT) for each category of
VerDate Sep<11>2014
14:14 Dec 07, 2015
Jkt 238001
Architectural Coatings ...............................................................................
Architectural Coatings ...............................................................................
1. ‘‘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 and 57 FR 18070,
April 28, 1992).
2. ‘‘Issues Relating to VOC Regulation
Cutpoints, Deficiencies, and Deviations’’
(‘‘the Bluebook,’’ U.S. EPA, May 25, 1988;
revised January 11, 1990).
3. ‘‘Guidance Document for Correcting
Common VOC & Other Rule Deficiencies’’
(‘‘the Little Bluebook,’’ EPA Region 9, August
21, 2001).
4. National Volatile Organic Compound
Emission Standards for Architectural
Coatings, 40 CFR 59.400, Subpart D, Table 1,
VOC Content Limits for Architectural
Coatings.
5. California Air Resources Board (CARB)
‘‘Suggested Control Measure for Architectural
Coatings,’’ Approved 2007, February 1, 2008.
6. AVAQMD Rule 1113,’’Architectural
Coatings,’’ EPA Limited Approval and
Disapproval on August 26, 2004 (69 FR
52432).
7. South Coast Air Quality Management
District Rule 1113, ’’Architectural Coatings,’’
amended June 3, 2011, and approved into the
SIP on March 26, 2013 (78 FR 18244).
PO 00000
Submitted
Frm 00023
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
1/28/1981
3/30/1981
8. SCAPCD Rule 3.15, Architectural
Coatings, submitted January 28, 1981, and
approved by the EPA May 3, 1982 (47 FR
18856).
9. YCAPCD Rule 3.15, Architectural
Coatings, submitted March 30, 1981, and
approved by the EPA November 10, 1982 (47
FR 50865).
10. FRAQMD Rule 3.15, Architectural
Coatings, adopted June 19, 2014, and
submitted November 6, 2014.
11. SBCAPCD Rule 323.1 Architectural
Coatings, adopted June 19, 2014, and
submitted November 6, 2014.
12. Final Rule To Implement the 8-Hour
Ozone NAAQS—Phase 2, 70 FR 71612 (Nov.
25, 2005).
B. Do the rules meet the evaluation
criteria?
We believe these rules are consistent
with the relevant policy and guidance
regarding enforceability, SIP relaxations
and stringency. The TSDs have more
information on our evaluation.
C. EPA Recommendations to Further
Improve the Rules
The TSDs describe additional rule
revisions that we recommend for the
next time the local agencies modify the
rules, but are not currently the basis for
rule disapproval.
D. Public Comment and Final Action
As authorized in section 110(k)(3) of
the Act, the EPA is fully approving the
submitted rules because we believe they
fulfill all relevant requirements. We do
not think anyone will object to this
approval, so we are finalizing it without
proposing it in advance. However, in
the Proposed Rules section of this
Federal Register, we are simultaneously
proposing approval of the same
submitted rules. If we receive adverse
comments by January 7, 2016, we will
publish a timely withdrawal in the
Federal Register to notify the public
that the direct final approval will not
take effect and we will address the
comments in a subsequent final action
based on the proposal. If we do not
receive timely adverse comments, the
direct final approval will be effective
without further notice on February 8,
2016. This will incorporate these rules
into the federally enforceable SIP.
E:\FR\FM\08DER1.SGM
08DER1
76224
Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 235 / Tuesday, December 8, 2015 / Rules and Regulations
Please note that if the EPA receives
adverse comment on an amendment,
paragraph, or section of this rule and if
that provision may be severed from the
remainder of the rule, the EPA may
adopt as final those provisions of the
rule that are not the subject of an
adverse comment.
III. Incorporation by Reference
In this rule, the EPA is finalizing
regulatory text that includes
incorporation by reference. In
accordance with requirements of 1 CFR
51.5, the EPA is finalizing the
incorporation by reference of the
AVAQMD, FRAQMD, SBCAPCD,
SCAPCD and YCAPCD rules described
in the amendments to 40 CFR part 52 set
forth below. The EPA has made, and
will continue to make, these documents
available electronically through
www.regulations.gov and in hard copy
at the appropriate EPA office (see the
ADDRESSES section of this preamble for
more information).
Lhorne on DSK9F6TC42PROD with RULES
IV. 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, the EPA’s role is to
approve state choices, provided that
they meet the criteria of the Clean Air
Act. Accordingly, this action merely
approves state law as meeting Federal
requirements and does not impose
additional requirements beyond those
imposed by state law. For that reason,
this action:
• Is not a significant regulatory action
subject to review by the Office of
Management and Budget under
Executive Orders 12866 (58 FR 51735,
October 4, 1993) and 13563 (76 FR 3821,
January 21, 2011);
• 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);
VerDate Sep<11>2014
14:14 Dec 07, 2015
Jkt 238001
• 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 the 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, the SIP is not approved
to apply on any Indian reservation land
or in any other area where the EPA or
an Indian tribe has demonstrated that a
tribe has jurisdiction. In those areas of
Indian country, the rule does not have
tribal implications and will not impose
substantial direct costs on tribal
governments or preempt tribal law as
specified by Executive Order 13175 (65
FR 67249, November 9, 2000).
The Congressional Review Act, 5
U.S.C. 801 et seq., as added by the Small
Business Regulatory Enforcement
Fairness Act of 1996, generally provides
that before a rule may take effect, the
agency promulgating the rule must
submit a rule report, which includes a
copy of the rule, to each House of the
Congress and to the Comptroller General
of the United States. The EPA will
submit a report containing this action
and other required information to the
U.S. Senate, the U.S. House of
Representatives, and the Comptroller
General of the United States prior to
publication of the rule in the Federal
Register. A major rule cannot take effect
until 60 days after it is published in the
Federal Register. This action is not a
‘‘major rule’’ as defined by 5 U.S.C.
804(2).
Under section 307(b)(1) of the Clean
Air Act, petitions for judicial review of
this action must be filed in the United
States Court of Appeals for the
appropriate circuit by February 8, 2016.
Filing a petition for reconsideration by
the Administrator of this final rule does
not affect the finality of this action for
the purposes of judicial review nor does
it extend the time within which a
petition for judicial review may be filed,
and shall not postpone the effectiveness
of such rule or action. Parties with
objections to this direct final rule are
encouraged to file a comment in
response to the parallel notice of
PO 00000
Frm 00024
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
proposed rulemaking for this action
published in the Proposed Rules section
of today’s Federal Register, rather than
file an immediate petition for judicial
review of this direct final rule, so that
the EPA can withdraw this direct final
rule and address the comment in the
proposed rulemaking. This action may
not be challenged later in proceedings to
enforce its requirements (see section
307(b)(2)).
List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52
Environmental protection, Air
pollution control, Incorporation by
reference, Intergovernmental relations,
Ozone, Reporting and recordkeeping
requirements, Volatile organic
compounds.
Dated: October 19, 2015.
Jared Blumenfeld,
Regional Administrator, Region IX.
Part 52, Chapter I, Title 40 of the Code
of Federal Regulations is amended as
follows:
PART 52—APPROVAL AND
PROMULGATION OF
IMPLEMENTATION PLANS
1. The authority citation for Part 52
continues to read as follows:
■
Authority: 42 U.S.C. 7401 et seq.
Subpart F—California
2. Section 52.220 is amended by
adding paragraphs (c)(89)(iii)(E),
(c)(98)(i)(G), (c)(441)(i)(E)(3),
(c)(457)(i)(A)(5), and (c)(457)(i)(G) to
read as follows:
■
§ 52.220
Identification of plan.
*
*
*
*
*
(c) * * *
(89) * * *
(iii) * * *
(E) Previously approved on May 3,
1982, in paragraph (c)(89)(iii)(A) of this
section and now deleted with
replacement in paragraph
(c)(457)(i)(A)(5) by Feather River Air
Quality Management District Rule 3.15,
‘‘Architectural Coatings.’’
*
*
*
*
*
(98) * * *
(i) * * *
(G) Previously approved on May 3,
1982, in paragraph (c)(98)(i)(A) of this
section and now deleted with
replacement in paragraph
(c)(457)(i)(A)(5) by Feather River Air
Quality Management District Rule 3.15,
‘‘Architectural Coatings.’’
*
*
*
*
*
(441) * * *
(i) * * *
(E) * * *
E:\FR\FM\08DER1.SGM
08DER1
Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 235 / Tuesday, December 8, 2015 / Rules and Regulations
(3) Rule 1113, ‘‘Architectural
Coatings,’’ amended on March 18, 2003.
*
*
*
*
*
(457) * * *
(i) * * *
(A) * * *
(5) Rule 3.15, ‘‘Architectural
Coatings,’’ amended on August 4, 2014.
*
*
*
*
*
(G) Santa Barbara County Air
Pollution Control District.
(1) Rule 323.1, ‘‘Architectural
Coatings,’’ adopted on June 19, 2014.
*
*
*
*
*
[FR Doc. 2015–30809 Filed 12–7–15; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560–50–P
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION
AGENCY
40 CFR Part 52
[EPA–R01–OAR–2013–0786; A–1–FRL–
9936–08–Region 1]
Approval and Promulgation of Air
Quality Implementation Plans;
Massachusetts; Transit System
Improvements
Environmental Protection
Agency (EPA).
ACTION: Final rule.
AGENCY:
The Environmental Protection
Agency (EPA) is approving a State
Implementation Plan (SIP) revision
submitted by the Commonwealth of
Massachusetts. This revision removes
from the SIP the design aspect of the
Red Line/Blue Line Connector
transportation control measure as a
requirement in the Massachusetts SIP,
without substitution or replacement,
and in addition implements
administrative changes that lengthen the
existing public process requirement so
that a public meeting on the annual
update and status report be held within
seventy-five days of its July 1st
submittal date and replaces references
to the Executive Office of
Transportation (EOT) with references to
the Massachusetts Department of
Transportation (MassDOT). This action
is being taken in accordance with the
Clean Air Act.
DATES: This rule is effective on January
7, 2016.
ADDRESSES: EPA has established a
docket for this action under Docket
Identification No. EPA–R01–OAR–
2013–0786. All documents in the docket
are listed on the https://
www.regulations.gov Web site. Although
listed in the index, some information is
not publicly available, i.e., CBI or other
information whose disclosure is
Lhorne on DSK9F6TC42PROD with RULES
SUMMARY:
VerDate Sep<11>2014
14:14 Dec 07, 2015
Jkt 238001
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
form. Publicly available docket
materials are available either through
https://www.regulations.gov or at the
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency,
EPA New England Regional Office,
Office of Ecosystem Protection, Air
Quality Planning Unit, 5 Post Office
Square–Suite 100, Boston, MA. EPA
requests that if at all possible, you
contact the contact listed in the FOR
FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section to
schedule your inspection. The Regional
Office’s official hours of business are
Monday through Friday, 8:30 a.m. to
4:30 p.m., excluding legal holidays.
Copies of the documents relevant to
this action are also available for public
inspection during normal business
hours, by appointment at the Air and
Climate Division, Department of
Environmental Protection, One Winter
Street, 8th Floor, Boston, MA 02108.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Donald O. Cooke, Air Quality Planning
Unit, U.S. Environmental Protection
Agency, EPA New England Regional
Office, Office of Ecosystem Protection, 5
Post Office Square–Suite 100, (Mail
code OEP05–2), Boston, MA 02109–
3912, telephone number (617) 918–
1668, fax number (617) 918–0668, email
cooke.donald@epa.gov.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Throughout this document whenever
‘‘we,’’ ‘‘us,’’ or ‘‘our’’ is used, we mean
EPA.
Organization of this document. The
following outline is provided to aid in
locating information in this preamble.
I. Background and Purpose
II. Response to Comments
III. Final Action
IV. Incorporation by Reference
V. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews
I. Background and Purpose
On December 1, 2014 (79 FR 71061),
EPA published a Notice of Proposed
Rulemaking (NPR) for the
Commonwealth of Massachusetts. The
NPR proposed approval of a revised
version of 310 Code of Massachusetts
Regulations (CMR) 7.36, ‘‘Transit
System Improvements,’’ effective under
Massachusetts law on October 25, 2013.
An earlier version of this rule had
previously been approved by EPA into
the Massachusetts SIP. See 73 FR 44654.
The revised regulation: (1) Deletes the
SIP requirement to design the Red Line/
Blue Line Connector from the Blue Line
at Government Center to the Red Line at
Charles Station; (2) lengthens by fifteen
days (from sixty days to within seventy-
PO 00000
Frm 00025
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
76225
five days of the July 1 submittal date)
the time period within which MassDEP
must hold a public meeting to take
public comment on MassDOT’s annual
update and status report for each project
required by 310 CMR 7.36(2)(f) through
(j) and any project implemented
pursuant to 310 CMR 7.36(4) and (5);
and (3) replaces references to the
Commonwealth’s Executive Office of
Transportation and EOT with
Massachusetts Department of
Transportation and MassDOT,
respectively. The formal SIP revision
was submitted to EPA by Massachusetts
on November 6, 2013.
EPA’s role in reviewing SIP revisions
is to approve state choices, provided
they meet the criteria of the Clean Air
Act. An adequate SIP revision is one
that, among other things, meets the
Clean Air Act requirement under CAA
section 110(l) that a SIP revision must
not interfere with any applicable
requirement concerning attainment and
reasonable further progress (as defined
in CAA section 171) in relation to the
national air quality standards (NAAQS)
or any other applicable requirement of
the Act. The Commonwealth has
flexibility to revise SIP-approved
transportation control measures (TCMs),
provided the revisions are consistent
with attaining and maintaining
compliance with the NAAQS. EPA has
determined that the removal of the
design aspect of the Red Line/Blue Line
Connector from the SIP, as well as the
administrative revisions included in
Massachusetts’ November 6, 2013 SIP
submittal, do not interfere with
attainment or with reasonable further
progress or any other applicable Clean
Air Act requirement. Therefore, we are
approving Massachusetts’ revised 310
CMR 7.36, ‘‘Transit System
Improvements.’’
II. Response to Comments
EPA received forty-one comments on
our December 1, 2014 NPR. Comments
were received from: U.S. Senators
Elizabeth Warren and Edward J. Markey;
U.S. Representatives Michael Capuano
and Katherine Clark; Edward W.
Deveau, Candidate for State
Representative, 1st Suffolk District;
Boston Councilor Salvatore LaMattina;
Massachusetts Port Authority
(Massport); Conservation Law
Foundation (CLF); A Better City (ABC);
and Frederick Salvucci (former
Secretary of Massachusetts Department
of Transportation). In addition,
comments were received from East
Boston, Dorchester, and Medford,
Massachusetts residents. Although six
of the forty-one comments were
received after the public comment
E:\FR\FM\08DER1.SGM
08DER1
]]>Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 80, Number 235 (Tuesday, December 8, 2015)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 76222-76225]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2015-30809]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
40 CFR Part 52
[EPA-R09-OAR-2015-0619; FRL-9936-67-Region 9]
Revisions to the California State Implementation Plan, Antelope
Valley Air Quality Management District, Feather River Air Quality
Management District and Santa Barbara County Air Pollution Control
District
AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).
ACTION: Direct final rule.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is taking direct
final action to approve revisions to the Antelope Valley Air Quality
Management District (AVAQMD), Feather River Air Quality Management
District (FRAQMD), and Santa Barbara County Air Pollution Control
District (SBCAPCD) portions of the California State Implementation Plan
(SIP). These revisions concern emissions of volatile organic compounds
(VOCs) from architectural coatings. We are approving local rules that
regulate these emission sources under the Clean Air Act (CAA or the
Act).
DATES: This rule is effective on February 8, 2016 without further
notice, unless the EPA receives adverse comments by January 7, 2016. If
we receive such comments, we will publish a timely withdrawal in the
Federal Register to notify the public that this direct final rule will
not take effect.
ADDRESSES: Submit comments, identified by docket number [EPA-R09-OAR-
2015-0619, 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: Once submitted, comments cannot be edited or
withdrawn. The EPA may publish any comment received to its public
docket. Do not submit electronically any information you consider to be
Confidential Business Information (CBI) or other information whose
disclosure is restricted by statute. If you need to include CBI as part
of your comment, please visit https://www.epa.gov/dockets/comments.html
for further instructions. Multimedia submissions (audio, video, etc.)
must be accompanied by a written comment. The written comment is
considered the official comment and should include discussion of all
points you wish to make. For the full EPA public comment policy and
general guidance on making effective comments, please visit https://www.epa.gov/dockets/comments.html.
Docket: 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, California 94105-3901.
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: Arnold Lazarus, EPA Region IX, (415)
972 3024, lazarus.arnold@epa.gov.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Throughout this document, ``we,'' ``us,''
and ``our'' refer to the 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. The EPA's Evaluation and Action
A. How is the 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. Incorporation by Reference
IV. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews
I. The State's Submittal
A. What rules did the State submit?
Table 1 lists the rules we are approving with the dates that they
were adopted by the local air agencies and submitted by the California
Air Resources Board (CARB).
Table 1--Submitted Rules
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Adopted/
Local agency Rule No. Rule title amended Submitted
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
AVAQMD................................ 1113 Architectural Coatings.. 3/18/2003 5/13/2014
FRAQMD................................ 3.15 Architectural Coatings.. 8/4/2014 11/6/2014
SBCAPCD............................... 323.1 Architectural Coatings.. 6/19/2014 11/6/2014
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
On May 13, 2014 the EPA determined that the submittal for AVAQMD
Rule 1113 met the completeness criteria in 40 CFR part 51 Appendix V,
which must be met before formal EPA review.
On December 18, 2014, the submittal for FRAQMD Rule 3.15 and
SBCAPCD Rule 323.1 was deemed by operation of law to meet the
completeness criteria in 40 CFR part 51 Appendix V.
B. Are there other versions of these rules?
There is a previous version of AVAQMD 1113 adopted by the district
on March 18, 2003. The EPA finalized a simultaneous limited approval
and limited disapproval of this version on August 26, 2004 (69 FR
52432).
We approved Sutter County Air Pollution Control District (SCAPCD)
Rule 3.15, ``Architectural Coatings,'' and Yuba County Air Pollution
Control District (YCAPCD) Rule 3.15, ``Architectural Coatings,'' into
the California SIP on May 3, 1982. SCAPCD and YCAPCD joined together to
form the FRAQMD on September 3, 1991; however, SCAPCD Rule 3.15 and
YCAPCD Rule 3.15 have remained in the SIP. The EPA is approving removal
[[Page 76223]]
of these rules because the SCAPCD and the YCAPCD no longer exist and
the requirements are superseded by FRAQMD Rule 3.15. Table 2 lists the
two superseded rules.
Table 2--Rules To Be Superseded
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Local agency Rule No. Rule title Submitted
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
SCAPCD..................................... 3.15 Architectural Coatings............. 1/28/1981
YCAPCD..................................... 3.15 Architectural Coatings............. 3/30/1981
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
There are no previous versions of SBCAPCD Rule 323.1 in the SIP.
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. Architectural
coatings are coatings that are applied to stationary structures and
their accessories. They include house paints, stains, industrial
maintenance coatings, traffic coatings, and many other products. VOCs
are emitted from the coatings during application and curing, and from
the associated solvents used for thinning and clean-up.
AVAQMD Rule 1113 controls VOC emissions from architectural coatings
by establishing VOC limits on any architectural coating supplied, sold,
offered for sale or manufactured for use within the AVAQMD. The major
revision to Rule 1113 is elimination of the averaging provision which
was the primary basis for the EPA's 2004 limited disapproval of a prior
version of this rule.
Rule 3.15 and SBCAPCD Rule 323.1 similarly control VOC emissions by
establishing VOC limits on architectural coatings supplied, sold,
offered for sale or manufactured for use within the FRAQMD and SBCAPCD.
The EPA's technical support documents (TSDs) have more information
about these rules.
II. The EPA's Evaluation and Action
A. How is the EPA evaluating the rules?
SIP rules must be enforceable (see CAA section 110(a)(2)), must not
interfere with applicable requirements concerning attainment and
reasonable further progress or other CAA requirements (see CAA section
110(l)), and must not modify certain SIP control requirements in
nonattainment areas without ensuring equivalent or greater emissions
reductions (see CAA section 193).
Generally, SIP rules 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 of
VOCs in ozone nonattainment areas classified as moderate or above (see
CAA sections 182(b)(2)). The EPA has designated a portion of the FRAQMD
(specifically, southern Sutter County) as a severe nonattainment area
for the 1-hour ozone national ambient air quality standards (NAAQS or
standards) and the 1997 and 2008 8-hour ozone standards. Similarly, the
EPA has designated the AVAQMD as severe nonattainment for the 2008 8-
hour ozone NAAQS, and the SBCAPCD as unclassifiable/attainment for the
2008 8-Hour Ozone NAAQS. See 40 CFR 81.305. Because there are no
relevant EPA CTG documents and because there are no major architectural
coating sources, architectural coatings are considered area sources of
VOC and are not subject to RACT requirements. However, architectural
coatings are subject to other VOC content limits and control measures
described in the TSDs.
Guidance and policy documents that we used to evaluate the
enforceability, revision/relaxation and stringency requirements of this
rule include the following:
1. ``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 and 57 FR 18070, April 28, 1992).
2. ``Issues Relating to VOC Regulation Cutpoints, Deficiencies,
and Deviations'' (``the Bluebook,'' U.S. EPA, May 25, 1988; revised
January 11, 1990).
3. ``Guidance Document for Correcting Common VOC & Other Rule
Deficiencies'' (``the Little Bluebook,'' EPA Region 9, August 21,
2001).
4. National Volatile Organic Compound Emission Standards for
Architectural Coatings, 40 CFR 59.400, Subpart D, Table 1, VOC
Content Limits for Architectural Coatings.
5. California Air Resources Board (CARB) ``Suggested Control
Measure for Architectural Coatings,'' Approved 2007, February 1,
2008.
6. AVAQMD Rule 1113,''Architectural Coatings,'' EPA Limited
Approval and Disapproval on August 26, 2004 (69 FR 52432).
7. South Coast Air Quality Management District Rule 1113,
''Architectural Coatings,'' amended June 3, 2011, and approved into
the SIP on March 26, 2013 (78 FR 18244).
8. SCAPCD Rule 3.15, Architectural Coatings, submitted January
28, 1981, and approved by the EPA May 3, 1982 (47 FR 18856).
9. YCAPCD Rule 3.15, Architectural Coatings, submitted March 30,
1981, and approved by the EPA November 10, 1982 (47 FR 50865).
10. FRAQMD Rule 3.15, Architectural Coatings, adopted June 19,
2014, and submitted November 6, 2014.
11. SBCAPCD Rule 323.1 Architectural Coatings, adopted June 19,
2014, and submitted November 6, 2014.
12. Final Rule To Implement the 8-Hour Ozone NAAQS--Phase 2, 70
FR 71612 (Nov. 25, 2005).
B. Do the rules meet the evaluation criteria?
We believe these rules are consistent with the relevant policy and
guidance regarding enforceability, SIP relaxations and stringency. The
TSDs have more information on our evaluation.
C. EPA Recommendations to Further Improve the Rules
The TSDs describe additional rule revisions that we recommend for
the next time the local agencies modify the rules, but are not
currently the basis for rule disapproval.
D. Public Comment and Final Action
As authorized in section 110(k)(3) of the Act, the EPA is fully
approving the submitted rules because we believe they fulfill all
relevant requirements. We do not think anyone will object to this
approval, so we are finalizing it without proposing it in advance.
However, in the Proposed Rules section of this Federal Register, we are
simultaneously proposing approval of the same submitted rules. If we
receive adverse comments by January 7, 2016, we will publish a timely
withdrawal in the Federal Register to notify the public that the direct
final approval will not take effect and we will address the comments in
a subsequent final action based on the proposal. If we do not receive
timely adverse comments, the direct final approval will be effective
without further notice on February 8, 2016. This will incorporate these
rules into the federally enforceable SIP.
[[Page 76224]]
Please note that if the EPA receives adverse comment on an
amendment, paragraph, or section of this rule and if that provision may
be severed from the remainder of the rule, the EPA may adopt as final
those provisions of the rule that are not the subject of an adverse
comment.
III. Incorporation by Reference
In this rule, the EPA is finalizing regulatory text that includes
incorporation by reference. In accordance with requirements of 1 CFR
51.5, the EPA is finalizing the incorporation by reference of the
AVAQMD, FRAQMD, SBCAPCD, SCAPCD and YCAPCD rules described in the
amendments to 40 CFR part 52 set forth below. The EPA has made, and
will continue to make, these documents available electronically through
www.regulations.gov and in hard copy at the appropriate EPA office (see
the ADDRESSES section of this preamble for more information).
IV. 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, the EPA's role is to approve state
choices, provided that they meet the criteria of the Clean Air Act.
Accordingly, this action merely approves state law as meeting Federal
requirements and does not impose additional requirements beyond those
imposed by state law. For that reason, this action:
Is not a significant regulatory action subject to review
by the Office of Management and Budget under Executive Orders 12866 (58
FR 51735, October 4, 1993) and 13563 (76 FR 3821, January 21, 2011);
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 the 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, the SIP is not approved to apply on any Indian
reservation land or in any other area where the EPA or an Indian tribe
has demonstrated that a tribe has jurisdiction. In those areas of
Indian country, the rule does not have tribal implications and will not
impose substantial direct costs on tribal governments or preempt tribal
law as specified by Executive Order 13175 (65 FR 67249, November 9,
2000).
The Congressional Review Act, 5 U.S.C. 801 et seq., as added by the
Small Business Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act of 1996, generally
provides that before a rule may take effect, the agency promulgating
the rule must submit a rule report, which includes a copy of the rule,
to each House of the Congress and to the Comptroller General of the
United States. The EPA will submit a report containing this action and
other required information to the U.S. Senate, the U.S. House of
Representatives, and the Comptroller General of the United States prior
to publication of the rule in the Federal Register. A major rule cannot
take effect until 60 days after it is published in the Federal
Register. This action is not a ``major rule'' as defined by 5 U.S.C.
804(2).
Under section 307(b)(1) of the Clean Air Act, petitions for
judicial review of this action must be filed in the United States Court
of Appeals for the appropriate circuit by February 8, 2016. Filing a
petition for reconsideration by the Administrator of this final rule
does not affect the finality of this action for the purposes of
judicial review nor does it extend the time within which a petition for
judicial review may be filed, and shall not postpone the effectiveness
of such rule or action. Parties with objections to this direct final
rule are encouraged to file a comment in response to the parallel
notice of proposed rulemaking for this action published in the Proposed
Rules section of today's Federal Register, rather than file an
immediate petition for judicial review of this direct final rule, so
that the EPA can withdraw this direct final rule and address the
comment in the proposed rulemaking. This action may not be challenged
later in proceedings to enforce its requirements (see section
307(b)(2)).
List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52
Environmental protection, Air pollution control, Incorporation by
reference, Intergovernmental relations, Ozone, Reporting and
recordkeeping requirements, Volatile organic compounds.
Dated: October 19, 2015.
Jared Blumenfeld,
Regional Administrator, Region IX.
Part 52, Chapter I, Title 40 of the Code of Federal Regulations is
amended as follows:
PART 52--APPROVAL AND PROMULGATION OF IMPLEMENTATION PLANS
0
1. The authority citation for Part 52 continues to read as follows:
Authority: 42 U.S.C. 7401 et seq.
Subpart F--California
0
2. Section 52.220 is amended by adding paragraphs (c)(89)(iii)(E),
(c)(98)(i)(G), (c)(441)(i)(E)(3), (c)(457)(i)(A)(5), and (c)(457)(i)(G)
to read as follows:
Sec. 52.220 Identification of plan.
* * * * *
(c) * * *
(89) * * *
(iii) * * *
(E) Previously approved on May 3, 1982, in paragraph
(c)(89)(iii)(A) of this section and now deleted with replacement in
paragraph (c)(457)(i)(A)(5) by Feather River Air Quality Management
District Rule 3.15, ``Architectural Coatings.''
* * * * *
(98) * * *
(i) * * *
(G) Previously approved on May 3, 1982, in paragraph (c)(98)(i)(A)
of this section and now deleted with replacement in paragraph
(c)(457)(i)(A)(5) by Feather River Air Quality Management District Rule
3.15, ``Architectural Coatings.''
* * * * *
(441) * * *
(i) * * *
(E) * * *
[[Page 76225]]
(3) Rule 1113, ``Architectural Coatings,'' amended on March 18,
2003.
* * * * *
(457) * * *
(i) * * *
(A) * * *
(5) Rule 3.15, ``Architectural Coatings,'' amended on August 4,
2014.
* * * * *
(G) Santa Barbara County Air Pollution Control District.
(1) Rule 323.1, ``Architectural Coatings,'' adopted on June 19,
2014.
* * * * *
[FR Doc. 2015-30809 Filed 12-7-15; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P
