Approval and Limited Approval and Limited Disapproval of Air Quality Implementation Plans; California; Northern Sonoma County Air Pollution Control District; Stationary Source Permits, 31567-31570 [2016-11621]
Download as PDF
<![CDATA[
Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 97 / Thursday, May 19, 2016 / Proposed Rules
program deficiencies unless California
submits and we approve SIP revisions
that correct the deficiencies within two
years of the final action.
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION
AGENCY
40 CFR Part 52
[EPA–R09–OAR–2016–0240; FRL–9946–45–
Region 9]
DATES:
Approval and Limited Approval and
Limited Disapproval of Air Quality
Implementation Plans; California;
Northern Sonoma County Air Pollution
Control District; Stationary Source
Permits
ADDRESSES:
Environmental Protection
Agency (EPA).
ACTION: Proposed rule.
AGENCY:
The Environmental Protection
Agency (EPA) is proposing action on
five permitting rules submitted as a
revision to the Northern Sonoma County
Air Pollution Control District
(NSCAPCD or District) portion of the
applicable state implementation plan
(SIP) for the State of California pursuant
to requirements under the Clean Air Act
(CAA or Act). We are proposing a
limited approval and limited
disapproval of two rules; we are
proposing to approve the remaining
three permitting rules; and we are
proposing to repeal three rules. The
submitted revisions include amended
rules governing the issuance of permits
for stationary sources, including review
and permitting of minor sources, and
major sources and major modifications
under part C of title I of the Act. The
intended effect of these proposed
actions is to update the applicable SIP
with current NSCAPCD permitting rules
and to set the stage for remedying
certain deficiencies in these rules; this
proposal also seeks to remedy specific
deficiencies identified in our recent
action on the California Infrastructure
SIP. If finalized as proposed, the limited
disapproval actions would trigger an
obligation for EPA to promulgate a
Federal Implementation Plan for the
specific New Source Review (NSR)
SUMMARY:
Any comments must arrive by
June 20, 2016.
Submit your comments,
identified by Docket ID Number EPA–
R09–OAR–2016–0240 at https://
www.regulations.gov, or via email to
r9airpermits@epa.gov. For comments
submitted at Regulations.gov, follow the
online instructions for submitting
comments. Once submitted, comments
cannot be edited or removed from
Regulations.gov. For either manner of
submission, 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. 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. The EPA will generally not
consider comments or comment
contents located outside of the primary
submission (i.e. on the web, cloud, or
other file sharing system). For
additional submission methods, please
contact the person identified in the FOR
FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section.
For the full EPA public comment policy,
information about CBI or multimedia
submissions, and general guidance on
making effective comments, please visit
https://www2.epa.gov/dockets/
commenting-epa-dockets.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Laura Yannayon, by phone: (415) 972–
3534 or by email at yannayon.laura@
epa.gov.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Throughout this document, the terms
‘‘we,’’ ‘‘us,’’ and ‘‘our’’ refer to EPA.
31567
Table of Contents
I. The State’s Submittals
A. Which rules did the State submit?
B. What are the existing NSCAPCD rules
governing stationary source permits in
the California SIP?
C. What is the purpose of this proposed
rule?
II. EPA’s Evaluation
A. How is EPA evaluating the rules?
B. Do the rules meet the evaluation
criteria?
1. Minor Source Permits
2. Prevention of Significant Deterioration
3. Nonattainment New Source Review
4. Section 110(l) of the Act
5. Conclusion
III. Proposed Action and Public Comment
IV. Incorporation by Reference
V. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews
I. The State’s Submittals
A. Which rules did the State submit?
On October 16, 1985 and December
11, 2014, California submitted amended
regulations to EPA for approval as
revisions to the NSCAPCD portion of
the California SIP under the Clean Air
Act. Collectively, the submitted
regulations comprise the District’s
current program for preconstruction
review and permitting of new or
modified stationary sources. These SIP
revision submittals, referred to herein as
the ‘‘SIP submittal’’ or ‘‘submitted
rules,’’ represent a significant update to
the District’s preconstruction review
and permitting program and are
intended to satisfy the requirements
under part C (prevention of significant
deterioration) (PSD) of title I of the Act
as well as the general preconstruction
review requirements for minor sources
under section 110(a)(2)(C) of the Act
(minor NSR).
Table 1 lists the rules addressed by
this proposal with the dates that they
were adopted by the District and
submitted to EPA by the California Air
Resources Board, which is the
governor’s designee for California SIP
submittals.
TABLE 1—SUBMITTED NSR RULES
asabaliauskas on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
Rule No.
130
200
220
230
240
Rule title
...................................................
...................................................
...................................................
...................................................
...................................................
Definitions ..................................................................................................
Permit Requirements .................................................................................
New Source Review ..................................................................................
Action on Applications ...............................................................................
Permit to Operate ......................................................................................
The submittal of Rule 240 was
deemed complete by operation of law
six months after the date of submittal.
40 CFR part 51, appendix V. The
remaining rule submittals were
VerDate Sep<11>2014
17:52 May 18, 2016
Amended
Jkt 238001
determined to meet the completeness
criteria 40 CFR part 51, appendix V on
February 20, 2015. A completeness
finding must be made before formal EPA
review. Each of these submittals
PO 00000
Frm 00036
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
11/14/14
11/14/14
11/14/14
11/14/14
2/22/84
Submitted
12/11/14
12/11/14
12/11/14
12/11/14
10/16/85
includes evidence of public notice and
adoption of the regulation. Our
technical support document (TSD)
provides additional background
E:\FR\FM\19MYP1.SGM
19MYP1
31568
Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 97 / Thursday, May 19, 2016 / Proposed Rules
information on each of the submitted
rules.
B. What are the existing NSCAPCD rules
governing stationary source permits in
the California SIP?
Table 2 lists the rules that make up
the existing SIP-approved rules for new
or modified stationary sources in
NSCAPCD. All of these rules would be
replaced or deleted from the SIP if EPA
takes final action on the proposed
approval of the submitted set of rules
listed in Table 1.
TABLE 2—EXISTING SIP RULES
SIP Approval
date
Rule No.
Rule title
10 .............................
12 .............................
18 .............................
130 ...........................
200 ...........................
220a .........................
220b .........................
220c ..........................
230 ...........................
240 ...........................
240e .........................
Permits Required ...........................................................................................................
Transfer ..........................................................................................................................
Conditional Approval ......................................................................................................
Definitions ......................................................................................................................
Permitting Requirements ...............................................................................................
New Source Review ......................................................................................................
New Source Review ......................................................................................................
New Source Review ......................................................................................................
Action on Applications ...................................................................................................
Permit to Operate ..........................................................................................................
Mandatory Monitoring Requirements .............................................................................
C. What is the purpose of this proposed
rule?
B. Do the rules meet the evaluation
criteria?
The purpose of this proposed rule is
to present our evaluation under the
CAA and EPA’s regulations of the
submitted rules adopted by the District
as identified in Table 1. We provide our
reasoning in general terms below but
provide more detailed analysis in our
TSD, which is available in the docket
for this proposed rulemaking.
With respect to procedures, CAA
sections 110(a) and 110(l) require that
revisions to a SIP be adopted by the
State after reasonable notice and public
hearing. Based on our review of the
public process documentation included
in the various submittals, we find that
NSCAPCD has provided sufficient
evidence of public notice and
opportunity for comment and public
hearings prior to adoption and submittal
of these rules to EPA.
With respect to substantive
requirements, we have evaluated each
submitted rule in accordance with the
CAA and regulatory requirements that
apply to: (1) General preconstruction
review programs for minor sources
under section 110(a)(2)(C) of the Act
and 40 CFR 51.160–164, and (2) PSD
permit programs under part C of title I
of the Act and 40 CFR 51.166. For the
most part, the submitted rules satisfy
the applicable requirements for these
permit programs and would strengthen
the applicable SIP by updating the
regulations and adding requirements to
address new or revised PSD permitting
requirements promulgated by EPA in
the last several years; however the
submitted rules also contain specific
deficiencies which prevent full approval
of Rules 130 and 220. Below, we discuss
generally our evaluation of NSCAPCD’s
submitted rules and the deficiencies
that are the basis for our proposed
action on these rules. Our TSD contains
a more detailed evaluation and
recommendations for program
improvements.
II. EPA’s Evaluation
asabaliauskas on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
A. How is EPA evaluating the rules?
EPA has reviewed the rules submitted
by NSCAPCD governing PSD and minor
NSR for stationary sources for
compliance with the CAA’s general
requirements for SIPs in CAA section
110(a)(2), EPA’s regulations for
stationary source permitting programs
in 40 CFR part 51, § 51.160 through
§ 51.164 and § 51.166, and the CAA
requirements for SIP revisions in CAA
section 110(l).1 As described below,
EPA is proposing a combination of
actions consisting of limited approval
and limited disapproval of Rules 130
(Definitions) and 220 (New Source
Review); full approval of Rules 200
(Permit Requirements), 230 (Action on
Applications), and 240 (Permit to
Operate); and replacement of Rules 10
(Permits Required), 12 (Transfer) and 18
(Conditional Approval).
1 CAA section 110(l) requires SIP revisions to be
subject to reasonable notice and public hearing
prior to adoption and submittal by States to EPA
and prohibits EPA from approving any SIP revision
that would interfere with any applicable
requirement concerning attainment and reasonable
further progress, or any other applicable
requirement of the CAA.
VerDate Sep<11>2014
17:52 May 18, 2016
Jkt 238001
PO 00000
Frm 00037
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
9/22/72
9/22/72
9/22/72
5/6/11
7/31/85
7/31/85
7/31/85
7/31/85
7/31/85
10/31/80
12/21/78
Federal Register
citation
37
37
37
76
50
50
50
50
50
45
43
FR
FR
FR
FR
FR
FR
FR
FR
FR
FR
FR
19812.
19812.
19812.
26192.
30943.
30943.
30943.
30943.
30943.
72148.
59489.
1. Minor Source Permits
Section 110(a)(2)(C) of the Act
requires that each SIP include a program
to provide for ‘‘regulation of the
modification and construction of any
stationary source within the areas
covered by the plan as necessary to
assure that national ambient air quality
standards are achieved, including a
permit program as required in parts C
and D’’ of title I of the Act. Thus, in
addition to the permit programs
required in parts C and D of title I of the
Act, which apply to new or modified
‘‘major’’ stationary sources of pollutants,
each SIP must include a program to
provide for the regulation of the
construction and modification of any
stationary source within the areas
covered by the plan as necessary to
assure that the national ambient air
quality standards (NAAQS) are
achieved. These general preconstruction requirements are
commonly referred to as ‘‘minor NSR’’
and are subject to EPA’s implementing
regulations in 40 CFR 51.160–51.164.
Rules 130—Definitions, 200—Permit
Requirements, 220—New Source
Review, 230—Action on Applications,
and 240—Permit to Operate, contain the
requirements for review and permitting
of individual minor stationary sources
in NSCAPCD. These rules satisfy the
statutory and regulatory requirements
for minor NSR programs. The changes
the District made to the rules listed
above as they pertain to the minor
source program were largely
administrative in nature and provide
additional clarity to the rules.
E:\FR\FM\19MYP1.SGM
19MYP1
Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 97 / Thursday, May 19, 2016 / Proposed Rules
asabaliauskas on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
2. Prevention of Significant
Deterioration
Part C of title I of the Act contains the
provisions for the prevention of
significant deterioration (PSD) of air
quality in areas designated ‘‘attainment’’
or ‘‘unclassifiable’’ for the NAAQS,
including preconstruction permit
requirements for new major sources or
major modifications proposing to
construct in such areas. EPA’s
regulations for PSD permit programs are
found in 40 CFR 51.166. NSCAPCD is
currently designated as ‘‘attainment’’ or
‘‘unclassifiable/attainment’’ for all
NAAQS pollutants.
The submitted rules contain the
requirements for review and permitting
of minor and PSD sources in NSCAPCD.
The rules satisfy most of the statutory
and regulatory requirements for PSD
permit programs, but Rules 130 and 220
also contain some deficiencies that form
the basis for our proposed limited
disapproval, as discussed below.
First, 40 CFR 51.161(d) specifies that
a public notice must be provided for all
lead point sources, as defined in 40 CFR
51.100(k). The provisions of Rule 220
(b) cross-reference the definition of the
term Significant in Rule 130 to provide
specific public notice emission rate
thresholds used to determine when
public notice is required. Rule 130
provides thresholds for all NAAQS
pollutants except lead. To correct this
deficiency, the District should add an
emission threshold for lead by revising
the definition of the term ‘‘Significant’’
in Rule 130.
Second, Rule 220 does not contain
any provisions specifying that required
air quality modeling shall be based on
the applicable models, databases, and
other requirements specified in Part 51
Appendix W, as required by 40 CFR
51.160(f) and 51.166(f). Provisions
pertaining to modeling requirements
must also specify the requirements for
using any alternative models. To correct
the deficiency, the District should add
the required modeling provisions to
Rule 220.
Third, text in Rule 220, Subsection
(b)(3) contains a significant typo
concerning the requirements pertaining
to stack height. This deficiency may be
corrected by adding the missing word
‘‘not’’.
Finally, Rule 230 does not contain
any provisions to satisfy the
requirements of 40 CFR 51.166(r)(1) and
(2) which require permit programs to
include specific language providing that
(1) ‘‘. . . approval to construct shall not
relieve any owner or operator of the
responsibility to comply fully with
applicable provisions of the plan and
VerDate Sep<11>2014
17:52 May 18, 2016
Jkt 238001
any other requirements under local,
State or Federal law’’ and (2) that if
‘‘. . . a particular source or
modification becomes a major stationary
source or major modification solely by
virtue of a relaxation in any enforceable
limitation which was established after
August 7, 1980, on the capacity of the
source or modification otherwise to emit
a pollutant, such as a restriction on
hours of operation, then the
requirements . . .’’ of the PSD program
shall apply to the source or modification
as though construction had not yet
commenced on the source or
modification. This deficiency can be
corrected by adding the language found
in 40 CFR 51.166(r)(1) and (2).
Compared to the existing SIP
approved PSD program in Rule 220
(approved July 31, 1985), however,
submitted Rules 130 and 220 represent
an overall strengthening of the District’s
PSD program, in large part because the
rule includes updated PSD provisions to
regulate new or modified major
stationary sources of PM2.5 emissions,
which are unregulated under the
existing SIP PSD program. Because
submitted Rules 130 and 220 strengthen
the SIP, we are proposing a limited
approval and limited disapproval based
on the deficiencies listed above.
31569
revision represents a strengthening of
NSCAPCD’s minor NSR and PSD
programs compared to the existing SIP
rules that we previously approved, and
that our approval of the SIP submittal
would not interfere with any applicable
requirement concerning attainment or
any other applicable requirement of the
Act.
Given all these considerations and in
light of the air quality improvements in
NSCAPCD, we propose that our
approval of these updated NSR
regulations into the California SIP
would not interfere with any applicable
requirement concerning attainment or
any other applicable requirement of the
Act.
3. Nonattainment New Source Review
The CAA defines ‘‘nonattainment
areas’’ as air quality planning areas that
exceed the primary or secondary
NAAQS for the given criteria pollutant.
The NSCAPCD is not designated
nonattainment for any NAAQS. Because
the NSCAPCD is not currently classified
nonattainment for any NAAQS, we are
not evaluating the submitted rules for
approval under 40 CFR 51.165, which
contains the requirements for
nonattainment NSR programs.
5. Conclusion
For the reasons stated above and
explained further in our TSD, we find
that the submitted rules satisfy most of
the applicable CAA and regulatory
requirements for the District’s minor
NSR and PSD permit programs under
CAA section 110(a)(2)(C) and part C of
title I of the Act. However, Rules 130
and 220 contain certain deficiencies that
prevent us from proposing a full
approval and we are proposing a limited
approval and limited disapproval of
these two rules. We do so based on our
finding that, while these rules do not
meet all of the applicable requirements,
the rules represent an overall
strengthening of the SIP by clarifying
and enhancing the permitting
requirements for major and minor
stationary sources in NSCAPCD.
Finally, we are proposing a full
approval of Rules 200, 230, and 240,
which will replace existing SIP Rules
10, 12 and 18. Our TSD, which is
available in the docket for today’s
action, contains additional information
on this rulemaking.
4. Section 110(l) of the Act
Section 110(l) prohibits EPA from
approving a revision of a plan if the
revision would ‘‘interfere with any
applicable requirement concerning
attainment and reasonable further
progress . . . or any other applicable
requirement of [the Act].’’
NSCAPCD is currently designated
attainment or unclassifiable/attainment
for all NAAQS pollutants. We are
unaware of any reliance by the District
on the continuation of any aspect of the
permit-related rules in the NSCAPCD
portion of the California SIP for the
purpose of continued attainment or
maintenance of the NAAQS. Our
approval of the NSCAPCD SIP submittal
(and supersession of the existing SIP
rules) would strengthen the applicable
SIP. Therefore we find that this SIP
III. Proposed Action and Public
Comment
Pursuant to section 110(k) of the CAA
and for the reasons provided above, EPA
is proposing a limited approval and
limited disapproval of Rules 130 and
220, and approval of the remaining
revisions to the NSCAPCD portion of
the California SIP that governs the
issuance of permits for stationary
sources under the jurisdiction of
NSCAPCD, including review and
permitting of major sources and major
modifications under part C of title I of
the CAA. Specifically, EPA is proposing
an action on NSCAPCD rules listed in
Table 1, above, as a revision to the
NSCAPCD portion of the California SIP.
EPA is proposing this action because,
although we find that the new and
amended rules meet most of the
PO 00000
Frm 00038
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
E:\FR\FM\19MYP1.SGM
19MYP1
31570
Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 97 / Thursday, May 19, 2016 / Proposed Rules
applicable requirements for such permit
programs and that the SIP revisions
improve the existing SIP, we have found
certain deficiencies that prevent full
approval of Rules 130 and 220, as
explained further in this preamble and
in the TSD for this rulemaking. The
intended effect of the proposed approval
and limited approval and limited
disapproval portions of this action is to
update the applicable SIP with current
NSCAPCD permitting regulations 2 and
to set the stage for remedying
deficiencies in these regulations.
In addition, on April 1, 2016 (81 FR
18766), EPA partially disapproved
California’s Infrastructure SIP Submittal
for the 1997 and 2006 PM2.5 NAAQS
with respect to Northern Sonoma
County APCD because it did not include
requirements for a baseline date for PSD
increments for PM2.5. If we finalize our
proposed action, this Infrastructure SIP
deficiency pertaining to the PSD-related
requirements of section 110(a)(2)(C),
(D)(i)(II) and (J) will be remedied, and
we will update the approved SIP for
California accordingly.
If finalized as proposed, the limited
disapproval of Rules 130 and 220 would
trigger an obligation for EPA to
promulgate a Federal Implementation
Plan unless the State of California
corrects the deficiencies, and EPA
approves the related plan revisions,
within two years of the final action.
We will accept comments from the
public on the proposed limited approval
and limited disapproval for the next 30
days.
IV. Incorporation by Reference
asabaliauskas on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
In this rule, the EPA is proposing to
include in a final EPA rule regulatory
text that includes incorporation by
reference. In accordance with
requirements of 1 CFR 51.5, the EPA is
proposing to incorporate by reference
the NSCAPCD rules as described in
Table 1 of this notice. The EPA has
made, and will continue to make, this
document generally electronically
through www.regulations.gov and in
hard copy at U.S. Environmental
Protection Agency Region IX (Air-3), 75
Hawthorne Street, San Francisco, CA,
94105–3901.
V. Statutory and Executive Order
Reviews
Additional information about these
statutes and Executive Orders can be
2 Final approval of the rules in Table 1 would
supersede all of the rules in the existing California
SIP as listed in Table 2.
VerDate Sep<11>2014
17:52 May 18, 2016
Jkt 238001
found at https://www2.epa.gov/lawsregulations/laws-and-executive-orders.
Thus, Executive Order 13175 does not
apply to this action.
A. Executive Order 12866: Regulatory
Planning and Review and Executive
Order 13563: Improving Regulation and
Regulatory Review
G. Executive Order 13045: Protection of
Children From Environmental Health
Risks and Safety Risks
This action is not a significant
regulatory action and was therefore not
submitted to the Office of Management
and Budget (OMB) for review.
B. Paperwork Reduction Act (PRA)
This action does not impose an
information collection burden under the
PRA because this action does not
impose additional requirements beyond
those imposed by state law.
C. Regulatory Flexibility Act (RFA)
I certify that this action will not have
a significant economic impact on a
substantial number of small entities
under the RFA. This action will not
impose any requirements on small
entities beyond those imposed by state
law.
The EPA interprets Executive Order
13045 as applying only to those
regulatory actions that concern
environmental health or safety risks that
the EPA has reason to believe may
disproportionately affect children, per
the definition of ‘‘covered regulatory
action’’ in section 2–202 of the
Executive Order. This action is not
subject to Executive Order 13045
because it does not impose additional
requirements beyond those imposed by
state law.
H. Executive Order 13211: Actions That
Significantly Affect Energy Supply,
Distribution, or Use
This action is not subject to Executive
Order 13211, because it is not a
significant regulatory action under
Executive Order 12866.
D. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act
(UMRA)
I. National Technology Transfer and
Advancement Act (NTTAA)
This action does not contain any
unfunded mandate as described in
UMRA, 2 U.S.C. 1531–1538, and does
not significantly or uniquely affect small
governments. This action does not
impose additional requirements beyond
those imposed by state law.
Accordingly, no additional costs to
State, local, or tribal governments, or to
the private sector, will result from this
action.
Section 12(d) of the NTTAA directs
the EPA to use voluntary consensus
standards in its regulatory activities
unless to do so would be inconsistent
with applicable law or otherwise
impractical. The EPA believes that this
action is not subject to the requirements
of section 12(d) of the NTTAA because
application of those requirements would
be inconsistent with the CAA.
E. Executive Order 13132: Federalism
This action does not have federalism
implications. It will not have substantial
direct effects on the states, on the
relationship between the national
government and the states, or on the
distribution of power and
responsibilities among the various
levels of government.
F. Executive Order 13175: Coordination
With Indian Tribal Governments
This action does not have tribal
implications, as specified in Executive
Order 13175, because 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, and will not impose
substantial direct costs on tribal
governments or preempt tribal law.
PO 00000
Frm 00039
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
J. Executive Order 12898: Federal
Actions To Address Environmental
Justice in Minority Populations and
Low-Income Population
The EPA lacks the discretionary
authority to address environmental
justice in this rulemaking.
List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52
Environmental protection, Air
pollution control, Incorporation by
reference, Intergovernmental relations,
Nitrogen dioxide, Ozone, Particulate
matter, Reporting and recordkeeping
requirements.
Authority: 42 U.S.C. 7401 et seq.
Dated: May 3, 2016.
Jared Blumenfeld,
Regional Administrator, Region IX.
[FR Doc. 2016–11621 Filed 5–18–16; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560–50–P
E:\FR\FM\19MYP1.SGM
19MYP1
]]>Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 81, Number 97 (Thursday, May 19, 2016)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 31567-31570]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2016-11621]
[[Page 31567]]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
40 CFR Part 52
[EPA-R09-OAR-2016-0240; FRL-9946-45-Region 9]
Approval and Limited Approval and Limited Disapproval of Air
Quality Implementation Plans; California; Northern Sonoma County Air
Pollution Control District; Stationary Source Permits
AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).
ACTION: Proposed rule.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is proposing action
on five permitting rules submitted as a revision to the Northern Sonoma
County Air Pollution Control District (NSCAPCD or District) portion of
the applicable state implementation plan (SIP) for the State of
California pursuant to requirements under the Clean Air Act (CAA or
Act). We are proposing a limited approval and limited disapproval of
two rules; we are proposing to approve the remaining three permitting
rules; and we are proposing to repeal three rules. The submitted
revisions include amended rules governing the issuance of permits for
stationary sources, including review and permitting of minor sources,
and major sources and major modifications under part C of title I of
the Act. The intended effect of these proposed actions is to update the
applicable SIP with current NSCAPCD permitting rules and to set the
stage for remedying certain deficiencies in these rules; this proposal
also seeks to remedy specific deficiencies identified in our recent
action on the California Infrastructure SIP. If finalized as proposed,
the limited disapproval actions would trigger an obligation for EPA to
promulgate a Federal Implementation Plan for the specific New Source
Review (NSR) program deficiencies unless California submits and we
approve SIP revisions that correct the deficiencies within two years of
the final action.
DATES: Any comments must arrive by June 20, 2016.
ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, identified by Docket ID Number EPA-
R09-OAR-2016-0240 at https://www.regulations.gov, or via email to
r9airpermits@epa.gov. For comments submitted at Regulations.gov, follow
the online instructions for submitting comments. Once submitted,
comments cannot be edited or removed from Regulations.gov. For either
manner of submission, 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. 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. The EPA will
generally not consider comments or comment contents located outside of
the primary submission (i.e. on the web, cloud, or other file sharing
system). For additional submission methods, please contact the person
identified in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section. For the full
EPA public comment policy, information about CBI or multimedia
submissions, and general guidance on making effective comments, please
visit https://www2.epa.gov/dockets/commenting-epa-dockets.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Laura Yannayon, by phone: (415) 972-
3534 or by email at yannayon.laura@epa.gov.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Throughout this document, the terms ``we,''
``us,'' and ``our'' refer to EPA.
Table of Contents
I. The State's Submittals
A. Which rules did the State submit?
B. What are the existing NSCAPCD rules governing stationary
source permits in the California SIP?
C. What is the purpose of this proposed rule?
II. EPA's Evaluation
A. How is EPA evaluating the rules?
B. Do the rules meet the evaluation criteria?
1. Minor Source Permits
2. Prevention of Significant Deterioration
3. Nonattainment New Source Review
4. Section 110(l) of the Act
5. Conclusion
III. Proposed Action and Public Comment
IV. Incorporation by Reference
V. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews
I. The State's Submittals
A. Which rules did the State submit?
On October 16, 1985 and December 11, 2014, California submitted
amended regulations to EPA for approval as revisions to the NSCAPCD
portion of the California SIP under the Clean Air Act. Collectively,
the submitted regulations comprise the District's current program for
preconstruction review and permitting of new or modified stationary
sources. These SIP revision submittals, referred to herein as the ``SIP
submittal'' or ``submitted rules,'' represent a significant update to
the District's preconstruction review and permitting program and are
intended to satisfy the requirements under part C (prevention of
significant deterioration) (PSD) of title I of the Act as well as the
general preconstruction review requirements for minor sources under
section 110(a)(2)(C) of the Act (minor NSR).
Table 1 lists the rules addressed by this proposal with the dates
that they were adopted by the District and submitted to EPA by the
California Air Resources Board, which is the governor's designee for
California SIP submittals.
Table 1--Submitted NSR Rules
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Rule No. Rule title Amended Submitted
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
130........................................... Definitions..................... 11/14/14 12/11/14
200........................................... Permit Requirements............. 11/14/14 12/11/14
220........................................... New Source Review............... 11/14/14 12/11/14
230........................................... Action on Applications.......... 11/14/14 12/11/14
240........................................... Permit to Operate............... 2/22/84 10/16/85
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
The submittal of Rule 240 was deemed complete by operation of law
six months after the date of submittal. 40 CFR part 51, appendix V. The
remaining rule submittals were determined to meet the completeness
criteria 40 CFR part 51, appendix V on February 20, 2015. A
completeness finding must be made before formal EPA review. Each of
these submittals includes evidence of public notice and adoption of the
regulation. Our technical support document (TSD) provides additional
background
[[Page 31568]]
information on each of the submitted rules.
B. What are the existing NSCAPCD rules governing stationary source
permits in the California SIP?
Table 2 lists the rules that make up the existing SIP-approved
rules for new or modified stationary sources in NSCAPCD. All of these
rules would be replaced or deleted from the SIP if EPA takes final
action on the proposed approval of the submitted set of rules listed in
Table 1.
Table 2--Existing SIP Rules
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
SIP Approval
Rule No. Rule title date Federal Register citation
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
10.................................. Permits Required............ 9/22/72 37 FR 19812.
12.................................. Transfer.................... 9/22/72 37 FR 19812.
18.................................. Conditional Approval........ 9/22/72 37 FR 19812.
130................................. Definitions................. 5/6/11 76 FR 26192.
200................................. Permitting Requirements..... 7/31/85 50 FR 30943.
220a................................ New Source Review........... 7/31/85 50 FR 30943.
220b................................ New Source Review........... 7/31/85 50 FR 30943.
220c................................ New Source Review........... 7/31/85 50 FR 30943.
230................................. Action on Applications...... 7/31/85 50 FR 30943.
240................................. Permit to Operate........... 10/31/80 45 FR 72148.
240e................................ Mandatory Monitoring 12/21/78 43 FR 59489.
Requirements.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
C. What is the purpose of this proposed rule?
The purpose of this proposed rule is to present our evaluation
under the CAA and EPA's regulations of the submitted rules adopted by
the District as identified in Table 1. We provide our reasoning in
general terms below but provide more detailed analysis in our TSD,
which is available in the docket for this proposed rulemaking.
II. EPA's Evaluation
A. How is EPA evaluating the rules?
EPA has reviewed the rules submitted by NSCAPCD governing PSD and
minor NSR for stationary sources for compliance with the CAA's general
requirements for SIPs in CAA section 110(a)(2), EPA's regulations for
stationary source permitting programs in 40 CFR part 51, Sec. 51.160
through Sec. 51.164 and Sec. 51.166, and the CAA requirements for SIP
revisions in CAA section 110(l).\1\ As described below, EPA is
proposing a combination of actions consisting of limited approval and
limited disapproval of Rules 130 (Definitions) and 220 (New Source
Review); full approval of Rules 200 (Permit Requirements), 230 (Action
on Applications), and 240 (Permit to Operate); and replacement of Rules
10 (Permits Required), 12 (Transfer) and 18 (Conditional Approval).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ CAA section 110(l) requires SIP revisions to be subject to
reasonable notice and public hearing prior to adoption and submittal
by States to EPA and prohibits EPA from approving any SIP revision
that would interfere with any applicable requirement concerning
attainment and reasonable further progress, or any other applicable
requirement of the CAA.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
B. Do the rules meet the evaluation criteria?
With respect to procedures, CAA sections 110(a) and 110(l) require
that revisions to a SIP be adopted by the State after reasonable notice
and public hearing. Based on our review of the public process
documentation included in the various submittals, we find that NSCAPCD
has provided sufficient evidence of public notice and opportunity for
comment and public hearings prior to adoption and submittal of these
rules to EPA.
With respect to substantive requirements, we have evaluated each
submitted rule in accordance with the CAA and regulatory requirements
that apply to: (1) General preconstruction review programs for minor
sources under section 110(a)(2)(C) of the Act and 40 CFR 51.160-164,
and (2) PSD permit programs under part C of title I of the Act and 40
CFR 51.166. For the most part, the submitted rules satisfy the
applicable requirements for these permit programs and would strengthen
the applicable SIP by updating the regulations and adding requirements
to address new or revised PSD permitting requirements promulgated by
EPA in the last several years; however the submitted rules also contain
specific deficiencies which prevent full approval of Rules 130 and 220.
Below, we discuss generally our evaluation of NSCAPCD's submitted rules
and the deficiencies that are the basis for our proposed action on
these rules. Our TSD contains a more detailed evaluation and
recommendations for program improvements.
1. Minor Source Permits
Section 110(a)(2)(C) of the Act requires that each SIP include a
program to provide for ``regulation of the modification and
construction of any stationary source within the areas covered by the
plan as necessary to assure that national ambient air quality standards
are achieved, including a permit program as required in parts C and D''
of title I of the Act. Thus, in addition to the permit programs
required in parts C and D of title I of the Act, which apply to new or
modified ``major'' stationary sources of pollutants, each SIP must
include a program to provide for the regulation of the construction and
modification of any stationary source within the areas covered by the
plan as necessary to assure that the national ambient air quality
standards (NAAQS) are achieved. These general pre-construction
requirements are commonly referred to as ``minor NSR'' and are subject
to EPA's implementing regulations in 40 CFR 51.160-51.164.
Rules 130--Definitions, 200--Permit Requirements, 220--New Source
Review, 230--Action on Applications, and 240--Permit to Operate,
contain the requirements for review and permitting of individual minor
stationary sources in NSCAPCD. These rules satisfy the statutory and
regulatory requirements for minor NSR programs. The changes the
District made to the rules listed above as they pertain to the minor
source program were largely administrative in nature and provide
additional clarity to the rules.
[[Page 31569]]
2. Prevention of Significant Deterioration
Part C of title I of the Act contains the provisions for the
prevention of significant deterioration (PSD) of air quality in areas
designated ``attainment'' or ``unclassifiable'' for the NAAQS,
including preconstruction permit requirements for new major sources or
major modifications proposing to construct in such areas. EPA's
regulations for PSD permit programs are found in 40 CFR 51.166. NSCAPCD
is currently designated as ``attainment'' or ``unclassifiable/
attainment'' for all NAAQS pollutants.
The submitted rules contain the requirements for review and
permitting of minor and PSD sources in NSCAPCD. The rules satisfy most
of the statutory and regulatory requirements for PSD permit programs,
but Rules 130 and 220 also contain some deficiencies that form the
basis for our proposed limited disapproval, as discussed below.
First, 40 CFR 51.161(d) specifies that a public notice must be
provided for all lead point sources, as defined in 40 CFR 51.100(k).
The provisions of Rule 220 (b) cross-reference the definition of the
term Significant in Rule 130 to provide specific public notice emission
rate thresholds used to determine when public notice is required. Rule
130 provides thresholds for all NAAQS pollutants except lead. To
correct this deficiency, the District should add an emission threshold
for lead by revising the definition of the term ``Significant'' in Rule
130.
Second, Rule 220 does not contain any provisions specifying that
required air quality modeling shall be based on the applicable models,
databases, and other requirements specified in Part 51 Appendix W, as
required by 40 CFR 51.160(f) and 51.166(f). Provisions pertaining to
modeling requirements must also specify the requirements for using any
alternative models. To correct the deficiency, the District should add
the required modeling provisions to Rule 220.
Third, text in Rule 220, Subsection (b)(3) contains a significant
typo concerning the requirements pertaining to stack height. This
deficiency may be corrected by adding the missing word ``not''.
Finally, Rule 230 does not contain any provisions to satisfy the
requirements of 40 CFR 51.166(r)(1) and (2) which require permit
programs to include specific language providing that (1) ``. . .
approval to construct shall not relieve any owner or operator of the
responsibility to comply fully with applicable provisions of the plan
and any other requirements under local, State or Federal law'' and (2)
that if ``. . . a particular source or modification becomes a major
stationary source or major modification solely by virtue of a
relaxation in any enforceable limitation which was established after
August 7, 1980, on the capacity of the source or modification otherwise
to emit a pollutant, such as a restriction on hours of operation, then
the requirements . . .'' of the PSD program shall apply to the source
or modification as though construction had not yet commenced on the
source or modification. This deficiency can be corrected by adding the
language found in 40 CFR 51.166(r)(1) and (2).
Compared to the existing SIP approved PSD program in Rule 220
(approved July 31, 1985), however, submitted Rules 130 and 220
represent an overall strengthening of the District's PSD program, in
large part because the rule includes updated PSD provisions to regulate
new or modified major stationary sources of PM2.5 emissions,
which are unregulated under the existing SIP PSD program. Because
submitted Rules 130 and 220 strengthen the SIP, we are proposing a
limited approval and limited disapproval based on the deficiencies
listed above.
3. Nonattainment New Source Review
The CAA defines ``nonattainment areas'' as air quality planning
areas that exceed the primary or secondary NAAQS for the given criteria
pollutant. The NSCAPCD is not designated nonattainment for any NAAQS.
Because the NSCAPCD is not currently classified nonattainment for any
NAAQS, we are not evaluating the submitted rules for approval under 40
CFR 51.165, which contains the requirements for nonattainment NSR
programs.
4. Section 110(l) of the Act
Section 110(l) prohibits EPA from approving a revision of a plan if
the revision would ``interfere with any applicable requirement
concerning attainment and reasonable further progress . . . or any
other applicable requirement of [the Act].''
NSCAPCD is currently designated attainment or unclassifiable/
attainment for all NAAQS pollutants. We are unaware of any reliance by
the District on the continuation of any aspect of the permit-related
rules in the NSCAPCD portion of the California SIP for the purpose of
continued attainment or maintenance of the NAAQS. Our approval of the
NSCAPCD SIP submittal (and supersession of the existing SIP rules)
would strengthen the applicable SIP. Therefore we find that this SIP
revision represents a strengthening of NSCAPCD's minor NSR and PSD
programs compared to the existing SIP rules that we previously
approved, and that our approval of the SIP submittal would not
interfere with any applicable requirement concerning attainment or any
other applicable requirement of the Act.
Given all these considerations and in light of the air quality
improvements in NSCAPCD, we propose that our approval of these updated
NSR regulations into the California SIP would not interfere with any
applicable requirement concerning attainment or any other applicable
requirement of the Act.
5. Conclusion
For the reasons stated above and explained further in our TSD, we
find that the submitted rules satisfy most of the applicable CAA and
regulatory requirements for the District's minor NSR and PSD permit
programs under CAA section 110(a)(2)(C) and part C of title I of the
Act. However, Rules 130 and 220 contain certain deficiencies that
prevent us from proposing a full approval and we are proposing a
limited approval and limited disapproval of these two rules. We do so
based on our finding that, while these rules do not meet all of the
applicable requirements, the rules represent an overall strengthening
of the SIP by clarifying and enhancing the permitting requirements for
major and minor stationary sources in NSCAPCD. Finally, we are
proposing a full approval of Rules 200, 230, and 240, which will
replace existing SIP Rules 10, 12 and 18. Our TSD, which is available
in the docket for today's action, contains additional information on
this rulemaking.
III. Proposed Action and Public Comment
Pursuant to section 110(k) of the CAA and for the reasons provided
above, EPA is proposing a limited approval and limited disapproval of
Rules 130 and 220, and approval of the remaining revisions to the
NSCAPCD portion of the California SIP that governs the issuance of
permits for stationary sources under the jurisdiction of NSCAPCD,
including review and permitting of major sources and major
modifications under part C of title I of the CAA. Specifically, EPA is
proposing an action on NSCAPCD rules listed in Table 1, above, as a
revision to the NSCAPCD portion of the California SIP.
EPA is proposing this action because, although we find that the new
and amended rules meet most of the
[[Page 31570]]
applicable requirements for such permit programs and that the SIP
revisions improve the existing SIP, we have found certain deficiencies
that prevent full approval of Rules 130 and 220, as explained further
in this preamble and in the TSD for this rulemaking. The intended
effect of the proposed approval and limited approval and limited
disapproval portions of this action is to update the applicable SIP
with current NSCAPCD permitting regulations \2\ and to set the stage
for remedying deficiencies in these regulations.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\2\ Final approval of the rules in Table 1 would supersede all
of the rules in the existing California SIP as listed in Table 2.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
In addition, on April 1, 2016 (81 FR 18766), EPA partially
disapproved California's Infrastructure SIP Submittal for the 1997 and
2006 PM2.5 NAAQS with respect to Northern Sonoma County APCD
because it did not include requirements for a baseline date for PSD
increments for PM2.5. If we finalize our proposed action,
this Infrastructure SIP deficiency pertaining to the PSD-related
requirements of section 110(a)(2)(C), (D)(i)(II) and (J) will be
remedied, and we will update the approved SIP for California
accordingly.
If finalized as proposed, the limited disapproval of Rules 130 and
220 would trigger an obligation for EPA to promulgate a Federal
Implementation Plan unless the State of California corrects the
deficiencies, and EPA approves the related plan revisions, within two
years of the final action.
We will accept comments from the public on the proposed limited
approval and limited disapproval for the next 30 days.
IV. Incorporation by Reference
In this rule, the EPA is proposing to include in a final EPA rule
regulatory text that includes incorporation by reference. In accordance
with requirements of 1 CFR 51.5, the EPA is proposing to incorporate by
reference the NSCAPCD rules as described in Table 1 of this notice. The
EPA has made, and will continue to make, this document generally
electronically through www.regulations.gov and in hard copy at U.S.
Environmental Protection Agency Region IX (Air-3), 75 Hawthorne Street,
San Francisco, CA, 94105-3901.
V. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews
Additional information about these statutes and Executive Orders
can be found at https://www2.epa.gov/laws-regulations/laws-and-executive-orders.
A. Executive Order 12866: Regulatory Planning and Review and Executive
Order 13563: Improving Regulation and Regulatory Review
This action is not a significant regulatory action and was
therefore not submitted to the Office of Management and Budget (OMB)
for review.
B. Paperwork Reduction Act (PRA)
This action does not impose an information collection burden under
the PRA because this action does not impose additional requirements
beyond those imposed by state law.
C. Regulatory Flexibility Act (RFA)
I certify that this action will not have a significant economic
impact on a substantial number of small entities under the RFA. This
action will not impose any requirements on small entities beyond those
imposed by state law.
D. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act (UMRA)
This action does not contain any unfunded mandate as described in
UMRA, 2 U.S.C. 1531-1538, and does not significantly or uniquely affect
small governments. This action does not impose additional requirements
beyond those imposed by state law. Accordingly, no additional costs to
State, local, or tribal governments, or to the private sector, will
result from this action.
E. Executive Order 13132: Federalism
This action does not have federalism implications. It will not have
substantial direct effects on the states, on the relationship between
the national government and the states, or on the distribution of power
and responsibilities among the various levels of government.
F. Executive Order 13175: Coordination With Indian Tribal Governments
This action does not have tribal implications, as specified in
Executive Order 13175, because 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, and will not
impose substantial direct costs on tribal governments or preempt tribal
law. Thus, Executive Order 13175 does not apply to this action.
G. Executive Order 13045: Protection of Children From Environmental
Health Risks and Safety Risks
The EPA interprets Executive Order 13045 as applying only to those
regulatory actions that concern environmental health or safety risks
that the EPA has reason to believe may disproportionately affect
children, per the definition of ``covered regulatory action'' in
section 2-202 of the Executive Order. This action is not subject to
Executive Order 13045 because it does not impose additional
requirements beyond those imposed by state law.
H. Executive Order 13211: Actions That Significantly Affect Energy
Supply, Distribution, or Use
This action is not subject to Executive Order 13211, because it is
not a significant regulatory action under Executive Order 12866.
I. National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act (NTTAA)
Section 12(d) of the NTTAA directs the EPA to use voluntary
consensus standards in its regulatory activities unless to do so would
be inconsistent with applicable law or otherwise impractical. The EPA
believes that this action is not subject to the requirements of section
12(d) of the NTTAA because application of those requirements would be
inconsistent with the CAA.
J. Executive Order 12898: Federal Actions To Address Environmental
Justice in Minority Populations and Low-Income Population
The EPA lacks the discretionary authority to address environmental
justice in this rulemaking.
List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52
Environmental protection, Air pollution control, Incorporation by
reference, Intergovernmental relations, Nitrogen dioxide, Ozone,
Particulate matter, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements.
Authority: 42 U.S.C. 7401 et seq.
Dated: May 3, 2016.
Jared Blumenfeld,
Regional Administrator, Region IX.
[FR Doc. 2016-11621 Filed 5-18-16; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P
