Approval of California Air Plan Revisions, Yolo-Solano Air Quality Management District, 1001-1003 [2018-00022]

Download as PDF 1001 Federal Register / Vol. 83, No. 6 / Tuesday, January 9, 2018 / Proposed Rules The SIP is not approved to apply on any Indian reservation land or in any other area where 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). This action also does not have Federalism implications because it does 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, as specified in Executive Order 13132 (64 FR 43255, August 10, 1999). Thus Executive Order 13132 does not apply to this action. This action merely proposes to approve a state rule implementing a Federal standard, and does not alter the relationship or the distribution of power and responsibilities established in the CAA. This rulemaking also is not subject to Executive Order 13045, ‘‘Protection of Children from Environmental Health Risks and Safety Risks’’ (62 FR 19885, April 23, 1997) because it proposes to approve a state rule implementing a Federal standard. In reviewing SIP submissions, EPA’s role is to approve state choices, provided that they meet the criteria of the CAA. In this context, in the absence of a prior existing requirement for the State to use voluntary consensus standards (VCS), EPA has no authority to disapprove a state submission for failure to use VCS. It would thus be inconsistent with applicable law for EPA when it reviews a state submission, to use VCS in place of a state submission that otherwise satisfies the provisions of the CAA. Thus, the requirements of section 12(d) of the National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act of 1995 (15 U.S.C. 272 note) do not apply. This action does not impose an information collection burden under the provisions of the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.). Burden is defined at 5 CFR 1320.3(b). List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52 Environmental protection, Air pollution control, Incorporation by reference, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements, Sulfur oxides. Dated: December 21, 2017. James B. Gulliford, Regional Administrator, Region 7. [FR Doc. 2018–00026 Filed 1–8–18; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6560–50–P ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY 40 CFR Part 52 [EPA–R09–OAR–2017–0680; FRL–9972– 83—Region 9] Approval of California Air Plan Revisions, Yolo-Solano Air Quality Management District Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). ACTION: Proposed rule. AGENCY: The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is proposing to approve a revision to the Yolo-Solano Air Quality Management District (YSAQMD) portion of the California State Implementation Plan (SIP). This revision concerns emissions of volatile organic compounds (VOCs) from organic liquid storage and transfer operations. We are proposing to approve a local rule 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 February 8, 2018. ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, identified by Docket ID No. EPA–R09– OAR–2017–0680 at https://www. regulations.gov, or via email to Rebecca Newhouse, at newhouse.rebecca@ 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 SUMMARY: 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: Rebecca Newhouse, EPA Region IX, (415) 972–3004, newhouse.rebecca@ 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 rule did the State submit? B. Are there other versions of this rule? C. What is the purpose of the rule revision? II. The EPA’s Evaluation and Proposed Action A. How is the EPA evaluating the rule? B. Does the rule meet the evaluation criteria? C. EPA Recommendations To Further Improve the Rule D. Proposed Action and Request for Public Comment III. Incorporation by Reference IV. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews I. The State’s Submittal A. What rule did the State submit? Table 1 lists the rule addressed by this proposal with the dates that it was adopted by the local air agency and submitted by the California Air Resources Board (CARB). jstallworth on DSKBBY8HB2PROD with PROPOSALS TABLE 1—SUBMITTED RULE Local agency Rule No. YSAQMD .................................. 2.21 On April 17, 2017, the EPA determined that the submittal for YSAQMD Rule 2.21 met the VerDate Sep<11>2014 15:00 Jan 08, 2018 Jkt 244001 Amended/ revised Rule title Organic Liquid Storage and Transfer ................................... completeness criteria in 40 CFR part 51 Appendix V, which must be met before formal EPA review. PO 00000 Frm 00007 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 09/14/16 Submitted 01/24/17 B. Are there other versions of this rule? We approved an earlier version of Rule 2.21 into the SIP on October 31, E:\FR\FM\09JAP1.SGM 09JAP1 1002 Federal Register / Vol. 83, No. 6 / Tuesday, January 9, 2018 / Proposed Rules 2006 (71 FR 63694). The YSAQMD adopted revisions to the SIP-approved rule on March 12, 2014, and CARB submitted the revised rule to us on June 26, 2015. The YSAQMD further revised the rule on September 14, 2016, and CARB submitted the revised rule to us on January 24, 2017. We are acting on only the most recently submitted version of the rule but have reviewed materials provided with previous submittals. C. What is the purpose of the rule revision? VOCs help produce ground-level ozone, smog and particulate matter (PM), which harm human health and the environment. Section 110(a) of the CAA requires states to submit regulations that control VOC emissions. SIP-approved Rule 2.21 limits VOC emissions from organic liquid storage tanks and during transfers at bulk terminals, bulk gasoline plants, and gasoline dispensing facilities. Revisions to the SIP-approved version of Rule 2.21 adopted on March 12, 2014, and September 14, 2016, exempt gasoline dispensing facilities from Rule 2.21, remove associated vapor recovery requirements for Stage I gasoline transfers at gasoline dispensing facilities, restrict allowable primary seals for storage tanks to mechanical shoe seals, and make other clarifying changes regarding floating roof seals and deck fitting requirements. The YSAQMD exempted gasoline dispensing facilities and removed associated vapor recovery requirements from Rule 2.21 to eliminate redundancies between Rule 2.21 and SIP-approved YSAQMD Rule 2.22, which contains equivalent requirements for Phase I gasoline transfers at gasoline dispensing facilities. The EPA’s technical support document (TSD) has more information about this rule. II. The EPA’s Evaluation and Proposed Action jstallworth on DSKBBY8HB2PROD with PROPOSALS A. How is the EPA evaluating the rule? Generally, 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). Additionally, SIP rules must require Reasonably Available Control Technology (RACT) for each category of sources covered by a Control VerDate Sep<11>2014 15:00 Jan 08, 2018 Jkt 244001 Techniques Guidelines (CTG) document as well as each major source of VOCs in ozone nonattainment areas classified as moderate or above (see CAA section 182(b)(2)). The YSAQMD regulates an ozone nonattainment area classified as Severe for the 2008 8-hour ozone national ambient air quality standard (40 CFR 81.305). Therefore, the YSAQMD must implement RACT for each category of sources covered by a CTG and each major source of VOCs. Rule 2.21 applies to the following four CTG source categories: (1) External floating roof storage tanks, (2) fixed-roof storage tanks, (3) bulk gasoline terminals, and (4) bulk gasoline plants. Guidance documents that we use to evaluate submitted rules for compliance with the requirements for enforceability, SIP revisions and rule stringency 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. ‘‘Control of Volatile Organic Emissions from Storage of Petroleum Liquids in FixedRoof Tanks,’’ EPA–450/2–77–036, December 1977. 5. ‘‘Control of Volatile Organic Emissions from Petroleum Liquid Storage in External Floating Roof Tanks,’’ EPA–450/2–78–047, December 1978. 6. ‘‘Control of Volatile Organic Emissions from Bulk Gasoline Plants,’’ EPA–450/2–77– 035, December 1977. 7. ‘‘Control of Hydrocarbons from Tank Truck Gasoline Loading Terminals,’’ EPA– 450/2–77–026, October 1977. 8. ‘‘Alternative Control Techniques Document: Volatile Organic Liquid Storage in Floating and Fixed Roof Tanks,’’ EPA–453/ R–94–001, January 1994. B. Does the rule meet the evaluation criteria? This rule is 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 Rule The TSD describes additional rule revisions that we recommend for the next time the local agency modifies the rule. PO 00000 Frm 00008 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 D. Proposed Action and Request for Public Comment As authorized in section 110(k)(3) of the Act, the EPA proposes to fully approve the submitted rule because it satisfies all applicable requirements. We will accept comments from the public on this proposal until February 8, 2018. If we take final action to approve the submitted rule, our final action will incorporate this rule 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 YSAQMD rule 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, the 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 Orders 12866 (58 FR 51735, October 4, 1993) and 13563 (76 FR 3821, January 21, 2011); • is not an Executive Order 13771 (82 FR 9339, February 2, 2017) regulatory action because SIP approvals are exempted under Executive Order 12866; • does not impose an information collection burden under the provisions of the Paperwork Reduction Act (44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.); • is certified as not having a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities under the Regulatory Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 601 et seq.); • does not contain any unfunded mandate or significantly or uniquely E:\FR\FM\09JAP1.SGM 09JAP1 Federal Register / Vol. 83, No. 6 / Tuesday, January 9, 2018 / Proposed Rules 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 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, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements, Volatile organic compounds. Authority: 42 U.S.C. 7401 et seq. Dated: December 21, 2017. Alexis Strauss, Acting Regional Administrator, Region IX. [FR Doc. 2018–00022 Filed 1–8–18; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6560–50–P jstallworth on DSKBBY8HB2PROD with PROPOSALS ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY 40 CFR Part 52 [EPA–R05–OAR–2007–1092; FRL–9972– 74—Region 5] Air Plan Approval; Michigan Minor New Source Review Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). AGENCY: VerDate Sep<11>2014 15:00 Jan 08, 2018 Jkt 244001 Proposed rule; reopening of the comment period. ACTION: The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is reopening the comment period for a proposed Clean Air Act rule published August 15, 2017. An appendix to one of the documents EPA proposed to approve was not available on Regulations.gov as required; therefore, EPA is reopening the comment period for 15 days. DATES: Comments must be received on or before January 24, 2018. ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, identified by Docket ID No. EPA–R05– OAR–2007–1092 at https:// www.regulations.gov, or via email to damico.genvieve@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, 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. 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: Rachel Rineheart, Environmental Engineer, Air Permits Section, Air Programs Branch (AR–18J), Environmental Protection Agency, Region 5, 77 West Jackson Boulevard, Chicago, Illinois 60604, (312) 886–7017, Rineheart.rachel@epa.gov. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Throughout this document whenever ‘‘we,’’ ‘‘us,’’ or ‘‘our’’ is used, we mean the EPA. On August 15, 2017, EPA proposed to approve certain changes to Michigan’s minor new source review program which is contained in Part 2 of the Michigan Administrative Code. EPA had previously reopened the comment SUMMARY: PO 00000 Frm 00009 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 1003 period due to an incomplete docket from November 2, 2017 to December 4, 2017. The file containing the state’s September 2, 2003 submittal made available on Regulations.gov on September 12, 2017, was missing Attachment H which contained the state’s technical analysis of the rule changes. The missing attachment was made available on regulations.gov on December 6, 2017, and EPA is reopening the comment period for an additional 15 days. The comment period now closes on January 24, 2018. Dated: December 20, 2017. Robert Kaplan, Acting Regional Administrator, Region 5. [FR Doc. 2018–00023 Filed 1–8–18; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6560–50–P ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY 40 CFR Part 282 [EPA–R06–UST–2017–0504; FRL–9968– 28—Region 6] Oklahoma: Final Approval of State Underground Storage Tank Program Revisions and Incorporation by Reference Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). ACTION: Proposed rule. AGENCY: Pursuant to the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA or Act), the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is proposing to approve revisions to the State of Oklahoma’s Underground Storage Tank (UST) program submitted by the State. This action is based on EPA’s determination that these revisions satisfy all requirements needed for program approval. This action also proposes to codify EPA’s approval of Oklahoma’s state program and to incorporate by reference those provisions of the State regulations that we have determined meet the requirements for approval. The provisions will be subject to EPA’s inspection and enforcement authorities under sections 9005 and 9006 of RCRA subtitle I and other applicable statutory and regulatory provisions. DATES: Send written comments by February 8, 2018. ADDRESSES: Submit any comments, identified by EPA–R06–UST–2017– 0504, by one of the following methods: 1. Federal eRulemaking Portal: https:// www.regulations.gov. Follow the on-line instructions for submitting comments. 2. Email: lincoln.audray@epa.gov. 3. Mail: Audray Lincoln, Region 6, Project Officer, LUST Prevention/ SUMMARY: E:\FR\FM\09JAP1.SGM 09JAP1

Agencies

[Federal Register Volume 83, Number 6 (Tuesday, January 9, 2018)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 1001-1003]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2018-00022]


-----------------------------------------------------------------------

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

40 CFR Part 52

[EPA-R09-OAR-2017-0680; FRL-9972-83--Region 9]


Approval of California Air Plan Revisions, Yolo-Solano Air 
Quality Management District

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Proposed rule.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

SUMMARY: The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is proposing to 
approve a revision to the Yolo-Solano Air Quality Management District 
(YSAQMD) portion of the California State Implementation Plan (SIP). 
This revision concerns emissions of volatile organic compounds (VOCs) 
from organic liquid storage and transfer operations. We are proposing 
to approve a local rule 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 February 8, 2018.

ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, identified by Docket ID No. EPA-R09-
OAR-2017-0680 at https://www.regulations.gov, or via email to Rebecca 
Newhouse, at [email protected]. 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: Rebecca Newhouse, EPA Region IX, (415) 
972-3004, [email protected].

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Throughout this document, ``we,'' ``us'' and 
``our'' refer to the EPA.

Table of Contents

I. The State's Submittal
    A. What rule did the State submit?
    B. Are there other versions of this rule?
    C. What is the purpose of the rule revision?
II. The EPA's Evaluation and Proposed Action
    A. How is the EPA evaluating the rule?
    B. Does the rule meet the evaluation criteria?
    C. EPA Recommendations To Further Improve the Rule
    D. Proposed Action and Request for Public Comment
III. Incorporation by Reference
IV. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews

I. The State's Submittal

A. What rule did the State submit?

    Table 1 lists the rule addressed by this proposal with the dates 
that it was adopted by the local air agency and submitted by the 
California Air Resources Board (CARB).

                                             Table 1--Submitted Rule
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                                     Amended/
             Local agency                  Rule No.            Rule title             revised        Submitted
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
YSAQMD................................            2.21  Organic Liquid Storage          09/14/16        01/24/17
                                                         and Transfer.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    On April 17, 2017, the EPA determined that the submittal for YSAQMD 
Rule 2.21 met the completeness criteria in 40 CFR part 51 Appendix V, 
which must be met before formal EPA review.

B. Are there other versions of this rule?

    We approved an earlier version of Rule 2.21 into the SIP on October 
31,

[[Page 1002]]

2006 (71 FR 63694). The YSAQMD adopted revisions to the SIP-approved 
rule on March 12, 2014, and CARB submitted the revised rule to us on 
June 26, 2015. The YSAQMD further revised the rule on September 14, 
2016, and CARB submitted the revised rule to us on January 24, 2017. We 
are acting on only the most recently submitted version of the rule but 
have reviewed materials provided with previous submittals.

C. What is the purpose of the rule revision?

    VOCs help produce ground-level ozone, smog and particulate matter 
(PM), which harm human health and the environment. Section 110(a) of 
the CAA requires states to submit regulations that control VOC 
emissions. SIP-approved Rule 2.21 limits VOC emissions from organic 
liquid storage tanks and during transfers at bulk terminals, bulk 
gasoline plants, and gasoline dispensing facilities. Revisions to the 
SIP-approved version of Rule 2.21 adopted on March 12, 2014, and 
September 14, 2016, exempt gasoline dispensing facilities from Rule 
2.21, remove associated vapor recovery requirements for Stage I 
gasoline transfers at gasoline dispensing facilities, restrict 
allowable primary seals for storage tanks to mechanical shoe seals, and 
make other clarifying changes regarding floating roof seals and deck 
fitting requirements. The YSAQMD exempted gasoline dispensing 
facilities and removed associated vapor recovery requirements from Rule 
2.21 to eliminate redundancies between Rule 2.21 and SIP-approved 
YSAQMD Rule 2.22, which contains equivalent requirements for Phase I 
gasoline transfers at gasoline dispensing facilities. The EPA's 
technical support document (TSD) has more information about this rule.

II. The EPA's Evaluation and Proposed Action

A. How is the EPA evaluating the rule?

    Generally, 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).
    Additionally, 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 section 182(b)(2)). The YSAQMD regulates an ozone nonattainment 
area classified as Severe for the 2008 8-hour ozone national ambient 
air quality standard (40 CFR 81.305). Therefore, the YSAQMD must 
implement RACT for each category of sources covered by a CTG and each 
major source of VOCs. Rule 2.21 applies to the following four CTG 
source categories: (1) External floating roof storage tanks, (2) fixed-
roof storage tanks, (3) bulk gasoline terminals, and (4) bulk gasoline 
plants.
    Guidance documents that we use to evaluate submitted rules for 
compliance with the requirements for enforceability, SIP revisions and 
rule stringency 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. ``Control of Volatile Organic Emissions from Storage of 
Petroleum Liquids in Fixed-Roof Tanks,'' EPA-450/2-77-036, December 
1977.
    5. ``Control of Volatile Organic Emissions from Petroleum Liquid 
Storage in External Floating Roof Tanks,'' EPA-450/2-78-047, 
December 1978.
    6. ``Control of Volatile Organic Emissions from Bulk Gasoline 
Plants,'' EPA-450/2-77-035, December 1977.
    7. ``Control of Hydrocarbons from Tank Truck Gasoline Loading 
Terminals,'' EPA-450/2-77-026, October 1977.
    8. ``Alternative Control Techniques Document: Volatile Organic 
Liquid Storage in Floating and Fixed Roof Tanks,'' EPA-453/R-94-001, 
January 1994.

B. Does the rule meet the evaluation criteria?

    This rule is 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 Rule

    The TSD describes additional rule revisions that we recommend for 
the next time the local agency modifies the rule.

D. Proposed Action and Request for Public Comment

    As authorized in section 110(k)(3) of the Act, the EPA proposes to 
fully approve the submitted rule because it satisfies all applicable 
requirements. We will accept comments from the public on this proposal 
until February 8, 2018. If we take final action to approve the 
submitted rule, our final action will incorporate this rule 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 YSAQMD rule 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, the 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 Orders 
12866 (58 FR 51735, October 4, 1993) and 13563 (76 FR 3821, January 21, 
2011);
     is not an Executive Order 13771 (82 FR 9339, February 2, 
2017) regulatory action because SIP approvals are exempted under 
Executive Order 12866;
     does not impose an information collection burden under the 
provisions of the Paperwork Reduction Act (44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.);
     is certified as not having a significant economic impact 
on a substantial number of small entities under the Regulatory 
Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 601 et seq.);
     does not contain any unfunded mandate or significantly or 
uniquely

[[Page 1003]]

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 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, Reporting and 
recordkeeping requirements, Volatile organic compounds.

    Authority: 42 U.S.C. 7401 et seq.

    Dated: December 21, 2017.
Alexis Strauss,
Acting Regional Administrator, Region IX.
[FR Doc. 2018-00022 Filed 1-8-18; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.