Approval of California Air Plan Revisions, Imperial County Air Pollution Control District, 89024-89026 [2016-29594]
Download as PDF
89024
Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 237 / Friday, December 9, 2016 / Proposed Rules
Submit your comments,
identified by Docket ID No. EPA–R09–
OAR–2016–0318 at https://
www.regulations.gov, or via email to
Steckel.Andrew@epa.gov. For comments
submitted at Regulations.gov, follow the
online instructions for submitting
comments. Once submitted, comments
cannot be removed or edited 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
ADDRESSES:
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION
AGENCY
40 CFR Part 52
[EPA–R09–OAR–2016–0318; FRL–9956–25–
Region 9]
Approval of California Air Plan
Revisions, Imperial County Air
Pollution Control District
Environmental Protection
Agency (EPA).
ACTION: Proposed rule.
AGENCY:
The Environmental Protection
Agency (EPA) is proposing to approve
revisions to the Imperial County Air
Pollution Control District (ICAPCD)
portion of the California State
Implementation Plan (SIP). These
revisions concern emissions of volatile
organic compounds (VOCs) and
particulate matter (PM) from large
confined animal facilities (LCAFs). We
are proposing to approve local rules to
regulate these emission sources under
the Clean Air Act (CAA or the Act). We
are taking comments on this proposal
and plan to follow with a final action.
DATES: Any comments must arrive by
January 9, 2017.
SUMMARY:
making effective comments, please visit
https://www2.epa.gov/dockets/
commenting-epa-dockets.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Nancy Levin, EPA Region IX, (415) 972–
3848, levin.nancy@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 or 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 Proposed 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 addressed by
this proposal with the dates that they
were adopted by the local air agency
and submitted by the California Air
Resources Board (CARB).
TABLE 1—SUBMITTED RULES
Local agency
Rule No.
ICAPCD ............
ICAPCD ............
ICAPCD ............
Rule title
217
101
202
Large Confined Animal Facilities (LCAF) Permits Required ........................
Definitions .....................................................................................................
Exemptions ...................................................................................................
On May 18, 2016, the EPA determined
that the submittal for ICAPCD Rules
217, 101 and 202 met the completeness
criteria in 40 CFR part 51 Appendix V,
which must be met before formal EPA
review.
mstockstill on DSK3G9T082PROD with PROPOSALS
B. Are there other versions of these
rules?
There are no previous versions of
Rule 217 in the SIP, although the
ICAPCD adopted an earlier version of
Rule 217 on October 10, 2006, and
CARB submitted it to us on August 24,
2007. CARB withdrew this version of
Rule 217 on May 17, 2011. We approved
earlier versions of Rules 101 and 202
into the SIP on October 2, 2014 (79 FR
59433) and May 9, 2011 (76 FR 26615),
respectively. While we can act on only
the most recently submitted version, we
have reviewed materials provided with
previous submittals.
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:22 Dec 08, 2016
Amended
Jkt 241001
C. What is the purpose of the submitted
rules or rule revisions?
VOCs contribute to the production of
ground-level ozone, smog and PM,
which harm human health and the
environment. Section 110(a) of the CAA
requires states to submit regulations that
control VOC emissions. PM, including
PM equal to or less than 2.5 microns in
diameter (PM2.5) and PM equal to or less
than 10 microns in diameter (PM10),
contributes to effects that are harmful to
human health and the environment,
including premature mortality,
aggravation of respiratory and
cardiovascular disease, decreased lung
function, visibility impairment, and
damage to vegetation and ecosystems.
Section 110(a) of the CAA requires
states to submit regulations that control
PM emissions. These rules also help to
control ammonia, which contributes to
PM formation.
Rule 217 is designed to limit VOC and
ammonia emissions from LCAFs,
PO 00000
Frm 00014
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
02/09/2016
02/09/2016
02/09/2016
Submitted
04/21/2016
04/21/2016
04/21/2016
including dairies, beef feedlots, poultry
houses, swine facilities and other
confined animal facilities. The rule
applies to operations at or above certain
size thresholds specified in the rule.1
These operations must obtain an
ICAPCD permit, submit an emissions
mitigation plan and implement
mitigation measures. Rule 217 lists
mitigation measure requirements for
each type of LCAF. The measures are
grouped into categories.2 The LCAF
owner/operator must implement the
1 Table 1 of Rule 217 provides large confined
animal facility (LCAF) thresholds for each type of
livestock for which the rule applies. For example,
the beef feedlot LCAF threshold is 3,500 beef cattle,
the dairy LCAF threshold is 500 milking cows, and
the poultry LCAF threshold is 400,000 chickens or
ducks.
2 For example, the mitigation measure
requirements for beef feedlots are grouped into the
following categories: A. Feed, B. Silage, C. Housing,
D. Solid Manure/Separated Solids, E. Liquid
Manure and F. Land Application.
E:\FR\FM\09DEP1.SGM
09DEP1
Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 237 / Friday, December 9, 2016 / Proposed Rules
requirements within each category.3
Rules 101—Definitions, and 202—
Exemptions, were revised to be
consistent with the LCAF thresholds for
dairy cows, chicken and ducks
established in Rule 217.
The EPA’s technical support
document (TSD) has more information
about these rules.
mstockstill on DSK3G9T082PROD with PROPOSALS
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, and for each non-CTG major
source of VOCs in ozone nonattainment
areas classified as moderate or above
(see CAA section 182(b)(2)). The
ICAPCD regulates sources in an ozone
nonattainment area classified as
moderate for the 1997 and the 2008 8hour ozone standards (40 CFR 81.305).
Therefore, we are evaluating whether
this rule implements RACT-level
controls for this area source category.
Rules 101 and 202 support the
requirements in Rule 217 but do not
contain emission limitations directly, so
we are not evaluating them for rule
stringency.
Generally, SIP rules must also
implement Reasonably Available
Control Measures (RACM), including
RACT, in moderate PM2.5 nonattainment
areas (see CAA sections 172(c)(1) and
189(a)(1)(C)). The ICAPCD regulates
sources in a PM2.5 nonattainment area
classified as moderate for the 2006 24hour and the 2012 annual standards. (40
CFR 81.305). RACM evaluations are
generally performed in context of a
broader implementation plan.
Therefore, we are not proposing to
determine whether this rule fulfills
RACM requirements at this time,
although we did evaluate Rule 217 with
respect to RACT-level controls in the
TSD.
3 For example, Rule 217 Table 2.1 (C. Housing)
states ‘‘An owner/operator of a beef feedlot CAF
shall implement mitigation measures 1, 2, 3, and 4
and at least one (1) additional mitigation measure
in each of the animal housing structures (e.g., each
corral, etc.):’’ and lists the mitigation measures
below, numbered 1–7.
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:22 Dec 08, 2016
Jkt 241001
Guidance and policy documents that
we use to evaluate enforceability,
revision/relaxation and rule stringency
requirements for the applicable criteria
pollutants 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); 57 FR 18070
(April 28, 1992).
2. ‘‘Issues Relating to VOC Regulation
Cutpoints, Deficiencies, and
Deviations,’’ EPA, May 25, 1988 (the
Bluebook, revised January 11, 1990).
3. ‘‘Guidance Document for Correcting
Common VOC & Other Rule
Deficiencies,’’ EPA Region 9, August 21,
2001 (the Little Bluebook).
4. ‘‘State Implementation Plans for
Serious PM–10 Nonattainment Areas,
and Attainment Date Waivers for PM–10
Nonattainment Areas Generally;
Addendum to the General Preamble for
the Implementation of Title I of the
Clean Air Act Amendments of 1990,’’ 59
FR 41998 (August 16, 1994).
B. Do the rules meet the evaluation
criteria?
We believe these rules are consistent
with CAA requirements and relevant
guidance regarding enforceability,
RACT and SIP revisions. The TSD has
more information on our evaluation.
C. EPA Recommendations To Further
Improve the Rules
The TSD describes additional rule
revisions that we recommend for the
next time the local agency modifies the
rules.
D. Public Comment and Proposed
Action
As authorized in section 110(k)(3) of
the Act, the EPA proposes to fully
approve the submitted rules because we
believe they fulfill all relevant
requirements. We will accept comments
from the public on this proposal until
January 9, 2017. Unless we receive
convincing new information during the
comment period, we intend to publish
a final approval action that will
incorporate these rules into the federally
enforceable SIP.
III. 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 ICAPCD rules described in Table 1
of this preamble. The EPA has made,
and will continue to make, these
materials available through
PO 00000
Frm 00015
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
89025
www.regulations.gov and at the EPA
Region IX Office (please contact the
person identified in the FOR FURTHER
INFORMATION CONTACT 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, EPA’s role is to approve
state choices, provided that they meet
the criteria of the Clean Air Act.
Accordingly, this proposed action
merely proposes to approve State law as
meeting federal requirements and does
not impose additional requirements
beyond those imposed by State law. For
that reason, this proposed action:
• Is not a ‘‘significant regulatory
action’’ subject to review by the Office
of Management and Budget under
Executive Order 12866 (58 FR 51735,
October 4, 1993);
• does not impose an information
collection burden under the provisions
of the Paperwork Reduction Act (44
U.S.C. 3501 et seq.);
• is certified as not having a
significant economic impact on a
substantial number of small entities
under the Regulatory Flexibility Act (5
U.S.C. 601 et seq.);
• does not contain any unfunded
mandate or significantly or uniquely
affect small governments, as described
in the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act
of 1995 (Pub. L. 104–4);
• does not have Federalism
implications as specified in Executive
Order 13132 (64 FR 43255, August 10,
1999);
• is not an economically significant
regulatory action based on health or
safety risks subject to Executive Order
13045 (62 FR 19885, April 23, 1997);
• is not a significant regulatory action
subject to Executive Order 13211 (66 FR
28355, May 22, 2001);
• is not subject to requirements of
Section 12(d) of the National
Technology Transfer and Advancement
Act of 1995 (15 U.S.C. 272 note) because
application of those requirements would
be inconsistent with the Clean Air Act;
and
• does not provide the EPA with the
discretionary authority to address
disproportionate human health or
environmental effects with practical,
appropriate and legally permissible
methods under Executive Order 12898
(59 FR 7629, February 16, 1994).
In addition, the SIP is not approved
to apply on any Indian reservation land
E:\FR\FM\09DEP1.SGM
09DEP1
89026
Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 237 / Friday, December 9, 2016 / Proposed Rules
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).
List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52
Environmental protection, Air
pollution control, Incorporation by
reference, Intergovernmental relations,
Ozone, Particulate matter, Reporting
and recordkeeping requirements,
Volatile organic compounds.
Authority: 42 U.S.C. 7401 et seq.
Dated: November 21, 2016.
Alexis Strauss,
Acting Regional Administrator, Region IX.
[FR Doc. 2016–29594 Filed 12–8–16; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560–50–P
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION
AGENCY
40 CFR Part 63
[EPA–HQ–OAR–2012–0522; FRL–9956–00–
OAR]
RIN 2060–AT14
Phosphoric Acid Manufacturing and
Phosphate Fertilizer Production Risk
and Technology Review
Environmental Protection
Agency (EPA).
ACTION: Reconsideration; proposed rule.
AGENCY:
This action proposes
amendments to the National Emission
Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutants
(NESHAP) for the Phosphoric Acid
Manufacturing and Phosphate Fertilizer
Production source categories. The
proposed amendments are in response
to two petitions for reconsideration filed
by industry stakeholders on the rule
revisions to NESHAP for the Phosphoric
Acid Manufacturing and Phosphate
Fertilizer Production source categories
that were promulgated on August 19,
2015 (80 FR 50386) (hereafter the
‘‘August 2015 Final Rule’’). We are
proposing to revise the compliance date
by which affected sources must include
emissions from oxidation reactors when
determining compliance with the total
fluoride (TF) emission limits for
superphosphoric acid (SPA) process
lines. We are also proposing to add a
new option, and clarify an existing
option, to the monitoring requirements
for low-energy absorbers. In addition,
we are proposing to revise the
mstockstill on DSK3G9T082PROD with PROPOSALS
SUMMARY:
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:22 Dec 08, 2016
Jkt 241001
compliance date for the monitoring
requirements for low-energy absorbers.
DATES: Comments. Comments must be
received on or before January 23, 2017.
Public Hearing. If anyone contacts the
EPA requesting to speak at a public
hearing by December 14, 2016, we will
hold a public hearing on December 27,
2016 on the EPA campus at 109 T.W.
Alexander Drive, Research Triangle
Park, North Carolina.
ADDRESSES: Comments. Submit your
comments, identified by Docket ID No.
EPA–HQ–OAR–2012–0522, at https://
www.regulations.gov. Follow the online
instructions for submitting comments.
Once submitted, comments cannot be
edited or removed from Regulations.gov.
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, 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.
Instructions. Direct your comments to
Docket ID No. EPA–HQ–OAR–2012–
0522. The EPA’s policy is that all
comments received will be included in
the public docket without change and
may be made available online at https://
www.regulations.gov, including any
personal information provided, unless
the comment includes information
claimed to be CBI or other information
whose disclosure is restricted by statute.
Do not submit information that you
consider to be CBI or otherwise
protected through https://
www.regulations.gov or email. The
https://www.regulations.gov Web site is
an ‘‘anonymous access’’ system, which
means the EPA will not know your
identity or contact information unless
you provide it in the body of your
comment. If you send an email
comment directly to the EPA without
going through https://
www.regulations.gov, your email
address will be automatically captured
and included as part of the comment
PO 00000
Frm 00016
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
that is placed in the public docket and
made available on the Internet. If you
submit an electronic comment, the EPA
recommends that you include your
name and other contact information in
the body of your comment and with any
disk or CD–ROM you submit. If the EPA
cannot read your comment due to
technical difficulties and cannot contact
you for clarification, the EPA may not
be able to consider your comment.
Electronic files should not include
special characters or any form of
encryption and be free of any defects or
viruses. For additional information
about the EPA’s public docket, visit the
EPA Docket Center homepage at https://
www.epa.gov/dockets.
Docket. The EPA has established a
docket for this rulemaking under Docket
ID No. EPA–HQ–OAR–2012–0522. All
documents in the docket are listed in
the Regulations.gov index. Although
listed in the index, some information is
not publicly available, e.g., CBI or other
information whose disclosure is
restricted by statute. Certain other
material, such as copyrighted material,
is not placed on the Internet and will be
publicly available only in hard copy.
Publicly available docket materials are
available either electronically in
Regulations.gov or in hard copy at the
EPA Docket Center, Room 3334, EPA
WJC West Building, 1301 Constitution
Avenue NW., Washington, DC. The
Public Reading Room is open from 8:30
a.m. to 4:30 p.m., Monday through
Friday, excluding legal holidays. The
telephone number for the Public
Reading Room is (202) 566–1744, and
the telephone number for the EPA
Docket Center is (202) 566–1742.
Public Hearing. A public hearing will
be held, if requested by December 14,
2016, to accept oral comments on this
proposed action. If a hearing is
requested, it will be held at the EPA’s
North Carolina campus located at 109
T.W. Alexander Drive, Research
Triangle Park, NC 27711. The hearing, if
requested, will begin at 10:00 a.m. (local
time) and will continue until the earlier
of 5:00 p.m. or 1 hour after the last
registered speaker has spoken. To
request a hearing, to register to speak at
a hearing, or to inquire if a hearing will
be held, please contact Ms. Pamela
Garrett at (919) 541–7966 or by email at
garrett.pamela@epa.gov. The last day to
pre-register to speak at a hearing, if one
is held, will be December 22, 2016.
Additionally, requests to speak will be
taken the day of the hearing at the
hearing registration desk, although
preferences on speaking times may not
be able to be fulfilled. Please note that
registration requests received before the
E:\FR\FM\09DEP1.SGM
09DEP1
Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 81, Number 237 (Friday, December 9, 2016)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 89024-89026]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2016-29594]
[[Page 89024]]
=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
40 CFR Part 52
[EPA-R09-OAR-2016-0318; FRL-9956-25-Region 9]
Approval of California Air Plan Revisions, Imperial County Air
Pollution Control District
AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).
ACTION: Proposed rule.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is proposing to
approve revisions to the Imperial County Air Pollution Control District
(ICAPCD) portion of the California State Implementation Plan (SIP).
These revisions concern emissions of volatile organic compounds (VOCs)
and particulate matter (PM) from large confined animal facilities
(LCAFs). We are proposing to approve local rules to regulate these
emission sources under the Clean Air Act (CAA or the Act). We are
taking comments on this proposal and plan to follow with a final
action.
DATES: Any comments must arrive by January 9, 2017.
ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, identified by Docket ID No. EPA-R09-
OAR-2016-0318 at https://www.regulations.gov, or via email to
Steckel.Andrew@epa.gov. For comments submitted at Regulations.gov,
follow the online instructions for submitting comments. Once submitted,
comments cannot be removed or edited 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: Nancy Levin, EPA Region IX, (415) 972-
3848, levin.nancy@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 or 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 Proposed 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 addressed by this proposal with the dates
that they were adopted by the local air agency and submitted by the
California Air Resources Board (CARB).
Table 1--Submitted Rules
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Local agency Rule No. Rule title Amended Submitted
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
ICAPCD............................ 217 Large Confined Animal 02/09/2016 04/21/2016
Facilities (LCAF) Permits
Required.
ICAPCD............................ 101 Definitions................. 02/09/2016 04/21/2016
ICAPCD............................ 202 Exemptions.................. 02/09/2016 04/21/2016
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
On May 18, 2016, the EPA determined that the submittal for ICAPCD
Rules 217, 101 and 202 met the completeness criteria in 40 CFR part 51
Appendix V, which must be met before formal EPA review.
B. Are there other versions of these rules?
There are no previous versions of Rule 217 in the SIP, although the
ICAPCD adopted an earlier version of Rule 217 on October 10, 2006, and
CARB submitted it to us on August 24, 2007. CARB withdrew this version
of Rule 217 on May 17, 2011. We approved earlier versions of Rules 101
and 202 into the SIP on October 2, 2014 (79 FR 59433) and May 9, 2011
(76 FR 26615), respectively. While we can act on only the most recently
submitted version, we have reviewed materials provided with previous
submittals.
C. What is the purpose of the submitted rules or rule revisions?
VOCs contribute to the production of ground-level ozone, smog and
PM, which harm human health and the environment. Section 110(a) of the
CAA requires states to submit regulations that control VOC emissions.
PM, including PM equal to or less than 2.5 microns in diameter
(PM2.5) and PM equal to or less than 10 microns in diameter
(PM10), contributes to effects that are harmful to human
health and the environment, including premature mortality, aggravation
of respiratory and cardiovascular disease, decreased lung function,
visibility impairment, and damage to vegetation and ecosystems. Section
110(a) of the CAA requires states to submit regulations that control PM
emissions. These rules also help to control ammonia, which contributes
to PM formation.
Rule 217 is designed to limit VOC and ammonia emissions from LCAFs,
including dairies, beef feedlots, poultry houses, swine facilities and
other confined animal facilities. The rule applies to operations at or
above certain size thresholds specified in the rule.\1\ These
operations must obtain an ICAPCD permit, submit an emissions mitigation
plan and implement mitigation measures. Rule 217 lists mitigation
measure requirements for each type of LCAF. The measures are grouped
into categories.\2\ The LCAF owner/operator must implement the
[[Page 89025]]
requirements within each category.\3\ Rules 101--Definitions, and 202--
Exemptions, were revised to be consistent with the LCAF thresholds for
dairy cows, chicken and ducks established in Rule 217.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ Table 1 of Rule 217 provides large confined animal facility
(LCAF) thresholds for each type of livestock for which the rule
applies. For example, the beef feedlot LCAF threshold is 3,500 beef
cattle, the dairy LCAF threshold is 500 milking cows, and the
poultry LCAF threshold is 400,000 chickens or ducks.
\2\ For example, the mitigation measure requirements for beef
feedlots are grouped into the following categories: A. Feed, B.
Silage, C. Housing, D. Solid Manure/Separated Solids, E. Liquid
Manure and F. Land Application.
\3\ For example, Rule 217 Table 2.1 (C. Housing) states ``An
owner/operator of a beef feedlot CAF shall implement mitigation
measures 1, 2, 3, and 4 and at least one (1) additional mitigation
measure in each of the animal housing structures (e.g., each corral,
etc.):'' and lists the mitigation measures below, numbered 1-7.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The EPA's technical support document (TSD) has 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, and for each non-CTG major source
of VOCs in ozone nonattainment areas classified as moderate or above
(see CAA section 182(b)(2)). The ICAPCD regulates sources in an ozone
nonattainment area classified as moderate for the 1997 and the 2008 8-
hour ozone standards (40 CFR 81.305). Therefore, we are evaluating
whether this rule implements RACT-level controls for this area source
category. Rules 101 and 202 support the requirements in Rule 217 but do
not contain emission limitations directly, so we are not evaluating
them for rule stringency.
Generally, SIP rules must also implement Reasonably Available
Control Measures (RACM), including RACT, in moderate PM2.5
nonattainment areas (see CAA sections 172(c)(1) and 189(a)(1)(C)). The
ICAPCD regulates sources in a PM2.5 nonattainment area
classified as moderate for the 2006 24-hour and the 2012 annual
standards. (40 CFR 81.305). RACM evaluations are generally performed in
context of a broader implementation plan. Therefore, we are not
proposing to determine whether this rule fulfills RACM requirements at
this time, although we did evaluate Rule 217 with respect to RACT-level
controls in the TSD.
Guidance and policy documents that we use to evaluate
enforceability, revision/relaxation and rule stringency requirements
for the applicable criteria pollutants 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); 57 FR 18070 (April 28, 1992).
2. ``Issues Relating to VOC Regulation Cutpoints, Deficiencies, and
Deviations,'' EPA, May 25, 1988 (the Bluebook, revised January 11,
1990).
3. ``Guidance Document for Correcting Common VOC & Other Rule
Deficiencies,'' EPA Region 9, August 21, 2001 (the Little Bluebook).
4. ``State Implementation Plans for Serious PM-10 Nonattainment
Areas, and Attainment Date Waivers for PM-10 Nonattainment Areas
Generally; Addendum to the General Preamble for the Implementation of
Title I of the Clean Air Act Amendments of 1990,'' 59 FR 41998 (August
16, 1994).
B. Do the rules meet the evaluation criteria?
We believe these rules are consistent with CAA requirements and
relevant guidance regarding enforceability, RACT and SIP revisions. The
TSD has more information on our evaluation.
C. EPA Recommendations To Further Improve the Rules
The TSD describes additional rule revisions that we recommend for
the next time the local agency modifies the rules.
D. Public Comment and Proposed Action
As authorized in section 110(k)(3) of the Act, the EPA proposes to
fully approve the submitted rules because we believe they fulfill all
relevant requirements. We will accept comments from the public on this
proposal until January 9, 2017. Unless we receive convincing new
information during the comment period, we intend to publish a final
approval action that will incorporate these rules into the federally
enforceable SIP.
III. 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 ICAPCD rules described in Table 1 of this preamble. The
EPA has made, and will continue to make, these materials available
through www.regulations.gov and at the EPA Region IX Office (please
contact the person identified in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT
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, EPA's role is to approve state
choices, provided that they meet the criteria of the Clean Air Act.
Accordingly, this proposed action merely proposes to approve State law
as meeting federal requirements and does not impose additional
requirements beyond those imposed by State law. For that reason, this
proposed action:
Is not a ``significant regulatory action'' subject to
review by the Office of Management and Budget under Executive Order
12866 (58 FR 51735, October 4, 1993);
does not impose an information collection burden under the
provisions of the Paperwork Reduction Act (44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.);
is certified as not having a significant economic impact
on a substantial number of small entities under the Regulatory
Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 601 et seq.);
does not contain any unfunded mandate or significantly or
uniquely affect small governments, as described in the Unfunded
Mandates Reform Act of 1995 (Pub. L. 104-4);
does not have Federalism implications as specified in
Executive Order 13132 (64 FR 43255, August 10, 1999);
is not an economically significant regulatory action based
on health or safety risks subject to Executive Order 13045 (62 FR
19885, April 23, 1997);
is not a significant regulatory action subject to
Executive Order 13211 (66 FR 28355, May 22, 2001);
is not subject to requirements of Section 12(d) of the
National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act of 1995 (15 U.S.C. 272
note) because application of those requirements would be inconsistent
with the Clean Air Act; and
does not provide the EPA with the discretionary authority
to address disproportionate human health or environmental effects with
practical, appropriate and legally permissible methods under Executive
Order 12898 (59 FR 7629, February 16, 1994).
In addition, the SIP is not approved to apply on any Indian
reservation land
[[Page 89026]]
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).
List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52
Environmental protection, Air pollution control, Incorporation by
reference, Intergovernmental relations, Ozone, Particulate matter,
Reporting and recordkeeping requirements, Volatile organic compounds.
Authority: 42 U.S.C. 7401 et seq.
Dated: November 21, 2016.
Alexis Strauss,
Acting Regional Administrator, Region IX.
[FR Doc. 2016-29594 Filed 12-8-16; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P