Air Plan Approval; California; Northern Sierra Air Quality Management District; Reasonably Available Control Technology, 59331-59335 [2019-23828]

Download as PDF Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 213 / Monday, November 4, 2019 / Proposed Rules B. Section 110(l) Demonstration In this action, EPA is proposing to approve Ohio’s request to approve updated rules related to the NOX SIP Call into its SIP. Ohio EPA’s submission includes a noninterference demonstration intended to show that its SIP revision is approvable under Section 110(l) of the CAA; such a demonstration is sometimes called an anti-backsliding demonstration. Section 110(l) provides that EPA cannot approve a SIP revision if the revision would interfere with any applicable requirement concerning attainment or reasonable further progress (RFP), or any other applicable requirement of the CAA. Additionally, section 110(l) makes clear that each SIP revision is subject to the requirements of section 110(l). As such, EPA will only approve a SIP revision that removes or modifies control measures in the SIP if the state has demonstrated that such removal or modification would not interfere with attainment and maintenance of the NAAQS, RFP, or any other applicable requirement of the CAA. EPA generally considers whether the SIP revision would worsen, preserve, or improve the status quo in air quality. For the reasons explained below, we find that EPA’s proposed action to update the provisions relating to the NOX SIP Call satisfies the requirements of CAA section 110(l). As explained above, this action would not alter the NOX SIP Call emission budgets that limit emissions in the state. The alternate monitoring requirements at OAC Chapter 3745–14 are permanent, enforceable and sufficient to determine whether Ohio’s sources are in compliance with the control measures adopted to meet the NOX SIP Call’s emissions requirements. Given continued implementation of SIP requirements governing the unchanged amounts of allowable emissions, accompanied by replacement monitoring requirements sufficient to ensure compliance with the unchanged emissions requirements, this SIP revision is not expected to result in increases in emissions that could interfere with other statutory or regulatory requirements. Importantly, the substitute measure ensures compliance with the existing NOX SIP Call budgets and thus will preserve the status quo in air quality. For these reasons, we conclude that the revisions will not interfere with attainment and maintenance of the NAAQS, RFP, or any other applicable requirement of the CAA. For the reasons explained above, EPA is proposing to approve Ohio EPA’s SIP VerDate Sep<11>2014 17:22 Nov 01, 2019 Jkt 250001 submission under section 110(l) of the CAA. III. What action is EPA taking? EPA is proposing to approve Ohio EPA’s request to modify its SIP to include the revisions at OAC Chapter 3745–14. IV. Incorporation by Reference In this rule, 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, EPA is proposing to incorporate by reference OAC rules 3745–14–01, 3745–14–04, and 3745–14–08, with a state-effective date of August 22, 2019. EPA has made, and will continue to make, these documents generally available through www.regulations.gov and at the EPA Region 5 Office (please contact the person identified in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section of this preamble for more information). V. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews Under the CAA, the Administrator is required to approve a SIP submission that complies with the provisions of the CAA 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 CAA. Accordingly, this action merely approves state law as meeting Federal requirements and does not impose additional requirements beyond those imposed by state law. For that reason, this action: • Is not a significant regulatory action subject to review by the Office of Management and Budget under Executive Orders 12866 (58 FR 51735, October 4, 1993) and 13563 (76 FR 3821, January 21, 2011); • 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 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 PO 00000 Frm 00017 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 59331 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 CAA; and • Does not provide EPA with the discretionary authority to address, as appropriate, disproportionate human health or environmental effects, using practicable and legally permissible methods, under Executive Order 12898 (59 FR 7629, February 16, 1994). In addition, 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). 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, Sulfur oxides. Dated: October 17, 2019. Cathy Stepp, Regional Administrator, Region 5. [FR Doc. 2019–23704 Filed 11–1–19; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6560–50–P ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY 40 CFR Part 52 [EPA–R09–OAR–2019–0528; FRL–10001– 68–Region 9] Air Plan Approval; California; Northern Sierra Air Quality Management District; Reasonably Available Control Technology Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). ACTION: Proposed rule. AGENCY: The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is proposing to approve a revision to the Northern Sierra Air Quality Management District (NSAQMD or ‘‘District’’) portion of the California SUMMARY: E:\FR\FM\04NOP1.SGM 04NOP1 59332 Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 213 / Monday, November 4, 2019 / Proposed Rules State Implementation Plan (SIP) under the Clean Air Act (CAA or ‘‘the Act’’). This revision concerns the District’s demonstration regarding reasonably available control technology (RACT) requirements for the 2008 8-hour ozone national ambient air quality standard (NAAQS or ‘‘standards’’) in the Western Nevada County ozone nonattainment area, which is under the jurisdiction of the NSAQMD. We are taking comments on this proposal and plan to follow with a final action. DATES: Any comments must arrive by December 4, 2019. ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, identified by Docket ID No. EPA–R09– OAR–2019–0528 at https:// www.regulations.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. 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://www.epa.gov/dockets/ commenting-epa-dockets. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Stanley Tong, EPA Region IX, 75 Hawthorne St., San Francisco, CA 94105. By phone: (415) 947–4122 or by email at tong.stanley@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 document did the State submit? B. Are there other versions of this document? C. What is the purpose of the submitted document? II. The EPA’s Evaluation and Proposed Action A. How is the EPA evaluating the submitted document? VerDate Sep<11>2014 17:22 Nov 01, 2019 Jkt 250001 B. Does the document meet the evaluation criteria? C. The EPA’s Recommendations To Further Improve the RACT SIP D. Public Comment and Proposed Action III. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews I. The State’s Submittal A. What document did the State submit? On March 26, 2018, the NSAQMD adopted the ‘‘Reasonably Available Control Technology (RACT) State Implementation Plan (SIP) Revision for Western Nevada County 8-Hour Ozone Nonattainment Area’’ (‘‘2018 RACT SIP’’), and on June 7, 2018, the California Air Resources Board (CARB) submitted it to the EPA for approval as a revision to the California SIP. On November 29, 2018, the EPA determined that the submittal for the NSAQMD’s 2018 RACT SIP 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 document? There are no previous versions of this document in the NSAQMD portion of the California SIP for the 2008 8-hour ozone NAAQS. C. What is the purpose of the submitted document? Volatile organic compounds (VOCs) and oxides of nitrogen (NOX) contribute to the production of ground-level ozone, smog, and particulate matter, which harm human health and the environment. Section 110(a) of the CAA requires states to submit regulations that control VOCs and NOX emissions. CAA sections 182(b)(2) and (f) require that SIPs for areas designated nonattainment for the ozone NAAQS and classified as Moderate or above implement RACT for any source covered by a Control Techniques Guidelines (CTG) document and for any major source of VOCs or NOX. The NSAQMD is subject to this RACT SIP requirement, as the District regulates the Western Nevada County, California, ozone nonattainment area, which was classified as Moderate for the 2008 8-hour ozone NAAQS on May 4, 2016. See 81 FR 26697, 26713. Therefore, to satisfy sections 182(b)(2) and (f) of the Act, the NSAQMD must, at a minimum, adopt RACT-level controls for all sources covered by a CTG document and for all major nonCTG sources of VOCs or NOX within the ozone nonattainment area that it regulates. The EPA issued a final rule on August 23, 2019, in which it reclassified Western Nevada County as ‘‘Serious’’ PO 00000 Frm 00018 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 nonattainment for the 2008 ozone NAAQS. See 84 FR 44238, 44250. NSAQMD adopted its RACT SIP in 2018, when it was still classified as a Moderate ozone nonattainment area. However, in anticipation of the area being reclassified as a Serious nonattainment area for the 2008 ozone NAAQS, the NSAQMD’s 2018 RACT SIP evaluated whether the District had any major VOC/NOX sources emitting at least 50 tons per year (tpy), which is the major source threshold for ozone precursors for Serious ozone nonattainment areas.1 Section III.D of the preamble to the EPA’s final rule to implement the 2008 8-hour ozone NAAQS (80 FR 12264, March 6, 2015) discusses RACT requirements. It states in part that RACT SIPs must contain adopted RACT regulations, certifications where appropriate that existing provisions are RACT, and/or negative declarations that no sources in the nonattainment area are covered by a specific CTG. Id. at 12278. It also provides that states must submit appropriate supporting information for their RACT submissions as described in the EPA’s implementation rule for the 1997 ozone NAAQS. See id. and 70 FR 71612, 71652 (November 29, 2005). The 2018 RACT SIP, including its negative declarations, provide the NSAQMD’s analysis of its compliance with CAA section 182 RACT requirements for the 2008 8-hour ozone NAAQS. The EPA’s technical support document (TSD) for this action has more information about the District’s 2018 RACT SIP submittal and the EPA’s evaluation thereof. II. The EPA’s Evaluation and Proposed Action A. How is the EPA evaluating the submitted document? Generally, SIP rules must require RACT for each category of sources covered by a CTG document as well as each major source of VOCs or NOX in ozone nonattainment areas classified as Moderate or above (see CAA sections 182(b)(2) and (f), and 40 CFR 51.1112(a) and (b)). The NSAQMD regulates an ozone nonattainment area classified as Serious for the 2008 8-hour NAAQS (40 CFR 81.305) so the District’s rules must implement RACT. Because Western Nevada County was recently reclassified as Serious nonattainment for the 2008 8hour ozone NAAQS, and because NSAQMD’s 2018 RACT SIP provided an 1 Any stationary source that emits or has the potential to emit at least 50 tpy of VOCs or NOX is a major stationary source in a Serious ozone nonattainment area (CAA section 182(b)(2), (f), and 302(j)). E:\FR\FM\04NOP1.SGM 04NOP1 Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 213 / Monday, November 4, 2019 / Proposed Rules analysis of RACT that addresses the requirements for a Serious area as well as a Moderate area in anticipation of this reclassification, we evaluated the 2018 RACT SIP submittal to determine whether it met RACT requirements for a Serious ozone nonattainment area as well those for a Moderate ozone nonattainment area. Specifically, as part of our evaluation of the 2018 RACT SIP, we evaluated NSAQMD’s 2018 RACT SIP using the 50 tpy threshold for major stationary sources of VOC or NOX in Serious ozone nonattainment areas. As part of their RACT submittals, States should also submit for SIP approval negative declarations for CTG source categories for which the States have not adopted CTG-based regulations because they have no sources above the CTG-recommended applicability threshold, regardless of whether such negative declarations were made for an earlier SIP.2 To do so, the RACT submittals should provide reasonable assurance that no sources subject to the CTGs’ requirements currently exist in the relevant ozone nonattainment area. With respect to the NSAQMD, the District’s analysis must demonstrate that each major source of VOCs or NOX in the Western Nevada County ozone nonattainment area is covered by a RACT-level rule. In addition, for each CTG source category, the District must either demonstrate that a RACT-level rule is in place, or submit a negative declaration. Guidance and policy documents that we use to evaluate CAA section 182 RACT requirements 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. EPA Office of Air Quality Planning and Standards, ‘‘Issues Relating to VOC Regulation Cutpoints, Deficiencies, and Deviations,’’ May 25, 1988 (‘‘the Bluebook,’’ revised January 11, 1990). 3. ‘‘State Implementation Plans; Nitrogen Oxides Supplement to the General Preamble; Clean Air Act Amendments of 1990 Implementation of Title I; Proposed Rule,’’ (‘‘the NOX Supplement’’), 57 FR 55620, (November 25, 1992). 4. Memorandum dated May 18, 2006, from William T. Harnett, Director, Air Quality Policy Division, to Regional Air Division Directors, Subject: ‘‘RACT Qs & As—Reasonably Available Control Technology (RACT): Questions and Answers.’’ 2 57 FR 13498, 13512 (April 16, 1992). VerDate Sep<11>2014 17:22 Nov 01, 2019 Jkt 250001 5. ‘‘Final Rule to Implement the 8hour Ozone National Ambient Air Quality Standard—Phase 2,’’ 70 FR 71612 (November 29, 2005). 6. ‘‘Implementation of the 2008 National Ambient Air Quality Standards for Ozone: State Implementation Plan Requirements,’’ 80 FR 12264 (March 6, 2015). B. Does the document meet the evaluation criteria? The NSAQMD’s 2018 RACT SIP provides the District’s demonstration that the applicable SIP for the Western Nevada County ozone nonattainment area, which is under the jurisdiction of the NSAQMD, satisfies CAA section 182 RACT requirements for the 2008 8-hour ozone NAAQS. The District’s conclusion is based on its analysis of SIP-approved requirements that apply to the following: (1) Source categories for which a CTG has been issued, and (2) major non-CTG stationary sources of VOC or NOX emissions. With respect to CTG source categories, the NSAQMD determined that it only had sources subject to the CTGs covering gasoline service stations and vapor recovery operations, gasoline tank truck vapor tightness, and cutback asphalt. The District also stated that it no longer had sources subject to the miscellaneous metal coating CTG, but ‘‘. . . would like to keep the rule in the SIP for the 2008 standard in case a new source opens . . .’’ For each of these CTG source categories, the District’s submittal provided an analysis to support the District’s finding that a District rule previously approved by the EPA into the SIP as RACT for Western Nevada County remains RACT for the 2008 8-hour ozone NAAQS. Specifically, Section 5 of NSAQMD’s 2018 RACT SIP provides a short discussion of the following District rules and why they continue to implement RACT: Rule 214, ‘‘Phase I Vapor Recovery Requirements;’’ Rule 215, ‘‘Phase II Vapor Recovery System Requirements;’’ Rule 227, ‘‘Cutback and Emulsified Asphalt Paving Materials;’’ and Rule 228, ‘‘Surface Coating of Metal Parts and Products.’’ We reviewed NSAQMD’s evaluation of its rules addressing the CTG source categories that are subject to RACT 3 in Western 3 The NSAQMD rules and corresponding CTGs are as follows. District Rule 214, ‘‘Phase I Vapor Recovery Requirements’’, corresponds to the CTGs entitled ‘‘Design Criteria for Stage I Vapor Control Systems—Gasoline Service Stations’’ (EPA–450/R– 75–102) and ‘‘Control of Volatile Organic Compound Leaks from Gasoline Tank Trucks and Vapor Collection Systems’’ (EPA–450/2–78–051). District Rule 227, ‘‘Cutback and Emulsified Asphalt Paving Materials,’’ corresponds to the CTG entitled PO 00000 Frm 00019 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 59333 Nevada County. We agree that the District’s rules are generally consistent with the CTGs and recently adopted rules in other air districts, and therefore satisfy CAA RACT requirements for the 2008 8-hour ozone NAAQS. With respect to the CTG for Miscellaneous Metal and Plastic Parts Coating, the 2018 RACT SIP states that the District has no sources subject to Tables 3–6 of this CTG, and is adopting negative declarations for coatings covered by those tables. The 2018 RACT SIP also states that the only source in the Western Nevada County ozone nonattainment area that was subject to the CTG’s Table 2 ‘‘Metal Parts and Products’’ has closed, but the District did not adopt a negative declaration for the category sources subject to Table 2, and stated its preference to leave the applicable rule—Rule 228—in the RACT SIP. We agree that Rule 228’s VOC content limits are consistent with Table 2 of the CTG and the rule continues to meet RACT. Where there are no existing sources covered by a particular CTG document, states may, in lieu of adopting RACT requirements for those sources, adopt negative declarations certifying that there are no such sources in the relevant nonattainment area. States may also use negative declarations to certify that there are no major non-CTG sources subject to RACT, where applicable. NSAQMD’s 2018 RACT SIP contains a table listing the EPA’s CTGs and annotates those CTGs for which the District is adopting a negative declaration, indicating that the District has no sources subject to the applicable CTG for the 2008 8-hour ozone NAAQS. These negative declarations are listed in Table 1 below. The District concludes that it has no sources subject to the relevant CTGs, based on a review of its permit files and emission inventory, as well as business listings and county planning records. ‘‘Control of Volatile Organic Compounds from Use of Cutback Asphalt’’ (EPA–450/2–77–37). District Rule 228, ‘‘Surface Coating of Metal Parts and Products’’, corresponds to the source category in Table 2 of the CTG entitled ‘‘Control of Volatile Organic Emissions from Existing Stationary Sources, Volume VI: Surface Coating of Miscellaneous Metal Parts and Products, and Control Techniques Guidelines for Miscellaneous Metal and Plastic Parts Coatings’’ (EPA–453/R–08– 003). We note that while NSAQMD also reviewed Rule 215, ‘‘Phase II Vapor Recovery System Requirements,’’ as meeting RACT, and the EPA has approved the rule as meeting RACT, the EPA has not published a CTG for vehicle refueling operations. E:\FR\FM\04NOP1.SGM 04NOP1 59334 Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 213 / Monday, November 4, 2019 / Proposed Rules In addition, the 2018 RACT SIP states ‘‘there are no major sources (that emit or have the potential to emit 50 tons or more per year) of ozone precursors located in the nonattainment area. . . .’’ 4 In another portion of its 2018 RACT SIP, NSAQMD states ‘‘[t]he largest stationary source of ozone precursors in the Western Nevada County ozone nonattainment area is currently a gas station that emits under 2 tons of precursors per year.’’ 5 We reviewed CARB’s emissions inventory for the NSAQMD and also performed a general internet search for potential sources subject to selected CTGs in Western Nevada County. Based on our review, we agree with the District’s negative declarations in its 2018 RACT SIP. We found that CARB’s emissions inventory for the years 2014– 2017 showed that the largest VOC and NOX emitting stationary source in the Western Nevada County ozone nonattainment area emitted less than 2 tpy of VOC and NOX. Our TSD has more information on our evaluation of the 2018 RACT SIP. Table 1 below summarizes the CTG categories for which NSAQMD has provided negative declarations. TABLE 1—NSAQMD NEGATIVE DECLARATIONS EPA document No. Title EPA–450/2–77–008 ........... EPA–450/2–77–008 ........... EPA–450/2–77–008 ........... EPA–450/2–77–008 ........... EPA–450/2–77–008 ........... EPA–450/2–77–022 ........... EPA–450/2–77–025 ........... EPA–450/2–77–026 ........... EPA–450/2–77–032 ........... EPA–450/2–77–033 ........... EPA–450/2–77–034 ........... EPA–450/2–77–035 ........... EPA–450/2–77–036 ........... EPA–450/2–78–029 ........... EPA–450/2–78–030 ........... EPA–450/2–78–032 ........... EPA–450/2–78–033 ........... EPA–450/2–78–036 ........... EPA–450/2–78–047 ........... EPA–450/3–82–009 ........... EPA–450/3–83–006 ........... EPA–450/3–83–007 ........... EPA–450/3–83–008 ........... EPA–450/3–84–015 ........... EPA–450/4–91–031 ........... EPA–453/R–96–007 ........... EPA–453/R–94–032; 61 FR 44050; 8/27/96. EPA–453/R–97–004; 59 FR 29216; 6/06/94. EPA–453/R–06–001 ........... EPA–453/R–06–002 ........... EPA–453/R–06–003 ........... EPA–453/R–06–004 ........... EPA 453/R–07–003 ............ EPA 453/R–07–004 ............ EPA 453/R–07–005 ............ EPA 453/R–08–003 ............ EPA 453/R–08–004 ............ EPA 453/R–08–005 ............ EPA 453/R–08–006 ............ EPA 452/B16–001 .............. —N/A— .............................. —N/A— .............................. Surface Coating of Cans. Surface Coating of Coils. Surface Coating of Paper. Surface Coating of Fabric. Surface Coating of Automobiles and Light-Duty Trucks. Solvent Metal Cleaning. Refinery Vacuum Producing Systems, Wastewater Separators, and Process Unit Turnarounds. Tank Truck Gasoline Loading Terminals. Surface Coating of Metal Furniture. Surface Coating of Insulation of Magnet Wire. Surface Coating of Large Appliances. Bulk Gasoline Plants. Storage of Petroleum Liquids in Fixed-Roof Tanks. Manufacture of Synthesized Pharmaceutical Products. Manufacture of Pneumatic Rubber Tires. Factory Surface Coating of Flat Wood Paneling. Graphic Arts-Rotogravure and Flexography. Leaks from Petroleum Refinery Equipment. Petroleum Liquid Storage in External Floating Roof Tanks. Large Petroleum Dry Cleaners. Leaks from Synthetic Organic Chemical Polymer and Resin Manufacturing Equipment. Leaks from Natural Gas/Gasoline Processing Plants. Manufacture of High-Density Polyethylene, Polypropylene, and Polystyrene Resins. Air Oxidation Processes in Synthetic Organic Chemical Manufacturing Industry. Reactor Processes and Distillation Operations in Synthetic Organic Chemical Manufacturing Industry. Wood Furniture Manufacturing Operations. ACT Surface Coating at Shipbuilding and Ship Repair Facilities Shipbuilding and Ship Repair Operations (Surface Coating). Aerospace MACT and Aerospace (CTG & MACT). Industrial Cleaning Solvents. Offset Lithographic Printing and Letterpress Printing. Flexible Package Printing. Flat Wood Paneling Coatings. Paper, Film, and Foil Coatings. Large Appliance Coatings. Metal Furniture Coatings. Miscellaneous Metal Parts and Plastic Parts Coatings, Tables 3–6. Fiberglass Boat Manufacturing Materials. Miscellaneous Industrial Adhesives. Automobile and Light-Duty Truck Assembly Coatings. Oil and Natural Gas Industry. Major non-CTG VOC sources. Major non-CTG NOX sources. C. The EPA’s Recommendations To Further Improve the RACT SIP Our TSD includes recommendations to improve the RACT SIP for the upcoming 2015 8-hour ozone NAAQS. These recommendations include, among other things, that the District consider amending Rule 214, ‘‘Phase 1 Vapor 4 2018 RACT SIP, 1, 5, and 12. VerDate Sep<11>2014 17:22 Nov 01, 2019 Recovery’’, to require recordkeeping for facilities that use the rule’s throughput exemption threshold, and that the District evaluate whether additional negative declarations can be adopted for the cutback/emulsified asphalt and miscellaneous metal and plastic parts CTGs. 5 Id. Jkt 250001 PO 00000 D. Public Comment and Proposed Action As authorized in section 110(k)(3) of the Act, the EPA proposes to fully approve the 2018 RACT SIP, including the negative declarations listed in Table 1, because it fulfills the RACT SIP requirements under CAA sections at 1. Frm 00020 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\04NOP1.SGM 04NOP1 Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 213 / Monday, November 4, 2019 / Proposed Rules 182(b) and (f) and 40 CFR 51.1112(a) and (b) for the 2008 ozone NAAQS. We will accept comments from the public on this proposal until December 4, 2019. If we take final action to approve the submitted document, our final action will incorporate this document into the federally enforceable SIP. III. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews Under the CAA, 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, if they meet the criteria of the 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 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 CAA; and • Does not provide the EPA with the discretionary authority to address disproportionate human health or VerDate Sep<11>2014 17:22 Nov 01, 2019 Jkt 250001 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, Nitrogen dioxide, Ozone, Volatile organic compounds. Authority: 42 U.S.C. 7401 et seq. Dated: October 21, 2019. Deborah Jordan, Acting Regional Administrator, Region IX. [FR Doc. 2019–23828 Filed 11–1–19; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6560–50–P ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY 40 CFR Part 721 [EPA–HQ–OPPT–2019–0494; FRL–10000– 54] RIN 2070–AB27 Significant New Use Rules on Certain Chemical Substances (19–4.F) Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). ACTION: Proposed rule. AGENCY: EPA is proposing significant new use rules (SNURs) under the Toxic Substances Control Act (TSCA) for 26 chemical substances which were the subject of premanufacture notices (PMNs). Five of these chemical substances are subject to Orders issued by EPA pursuant to TSCA, and the remaining 21 of these chemical substances received a ‘‘not likely to present an unreasonable risk’’ determination pursuant to TSCA. This action would require persons who intend to manufacture (defined by statute to include import) or process any of these 26 chemical substances for an activity that is proposed as a significant new use to notify EPA at least 90 days before commencing that activity. The required notification initiates EPA’s evaluation of the use, under the conditions of use for that chemical substance, within the applicable review SUMMARY: PO 00000 Frm 00021 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 59335 period. Persons may not commence manufacture or processing for the significant new use until EPA has conducted a review of the notice, made an appropriate determination on the notice, and has taken such actions as are required by that determination. DATES: Comments must be received on or before December 4, 2019. ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, identified by docket identification (ID) number EPA–HQ–OPPT–2019–0494, by one of the following methods: • Federal eRulemaking Portal: https:// www.regulations.gov. Follow the online instructions for submitting comments. Do not submit electronically any information you consider to be Confidential Business Information (CBI) or other information whose disclosure is restricted by statute. • Mail: Document Control Office (7407M), Office of Pollution Prevention and Toxics (OPPT), Environmental Protection Agency, 1200 Pennsylvania Ave. NW, Washington, DC 20460–0001. • Hand Delivery: To make special arrangements for hand delivery or delivery of boxed information, please follow the instructions at https:// www.epa.gov/dockets/contacts.html. Additional instructions on commenting or visiting the docket, along with more information about dockets generally, is available at https:// www.epa.gov/dockets. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: For technical information contact: Kenneth Moss, Chemical Control Division (7405M), Office of Pollution Prevention and Toxics, Environmental Protection Agency, 1200 Pennsylvania Ave. NW, Washington, DC 20460–0001; telephone number: (202) 564–9232; email address: moss.kenneth@epa.gov. For general information contact: The TSCA-Hotline, ABVI-Goodwill, 422 South Clinton Ave., Rochester, NY 14620; telephone number: (202) 554– 1404; email address: TSCA-Hotline@ epa.gov. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: I. General Information A. Does this action apply to me? You may be potentially affected by this action if you manufacture, process, or use the chemical substances contained in this proposed rule. The following list of North American Industrial Classification System (NAICS) codes is not intended to be exhaustive, but rather provides a guide to help readers determine whether this document applies to them. Potentially affected entities may include: • Manufacturers or processors of one or more subject chemical substances E:\FR\FM\04NOP1.SGM 04NOP1

Agencies

[Federal Register Volume 84, Number 213 (Monday, November 4, 2019)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 59331-59335]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2019-23828]


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

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

40 CFR Part 52

[EPA-R09-OAR-2019-0528; FRL-10001-68-Region 9]


Air Plan Approval; California; Northern Sierra Air Quality 
Management District; Reasonably Available Control Technology

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Proposed rule.

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

SUMMARY: The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is proposing to 
approve a revision to the Northern Sierra Air Quality Management 
District (NSAQMD or ``District'') portion of the California

[[Page 59332]]

State Implementation Plan (SIP) under the Clean Air Act (CAA or ``the 
Act''). This revision concerns the District's demonstration regarding 
reasonably available control technology (RACT) requirements for the 
2008 8-hour ozone national ambient air quality standard (NAAQS or 
``standards'') in the Western Nevada County ozone nonattainment area, 
which is under the jurisdiction of the NSAQMD. We are taking comments 
on this proposal and plan to follow with a final action.

DATES: Any comments must arrive by December 4, 2019.

ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, identified by Docket ID No. EPA-R09-
OAR-2019-0528 at https://www.regulations.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. 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://www.epa.gov/dockets/commenting-epa-dockets.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Stanley Tong, EPA Region IX, 75 
Hawthorne St., San Francisco, CA 94105. By phone: (415) 947-4122 or by 
email at [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 document did the State submit?
    B. Are there other versions of this document?
    C. What is the purpose of the submitted document?
II. The EPA's Evaluation and Proposed Action
    A. How is the EPA evaluating the submitted document?
    B. Does the document meet the evaluation criteria?
    C. The EPA's Recommendations To Further Improve the RACT SIP
    D. Public Comment and Proposed Action
III. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews

I. The State's Submittal

A. What document did the State submit?

    On March 26, 2018, the NSAQMD adopted the ``Reasonably Available 
Control Technology (RACT) State Implementation Plan (SIP) Revision for 
Western Nevada County 8-Hour Ozone Nonattainment Area'' (``2018 RACT 
SIP''), and on June 7, 2018, the California Air Resources Board (CARB) 
submitted it to the EPA for approval as a revision to the California 
SIP. On November 29, 2018, the EPA determined that the submittal for 
the NSAQMD's 2018 RACT SIP 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 document?

    There are no previous versions of this document in the NSAQMD 
portion of the California SIP for the 2008 8-hour ozone NAAQS.

C. What is the purpose of the submitted document?

    Volatile organic compounds (VOCs) and oxides of nitrogen 
(NOX) contribute to the production of ground-level ozone, 
smog, and particulate matter, which harm human health and the 
environment. Section 110(a) of the CAA requires states to submit 
regulations that control VOCs and NOX emissions. CAA 
sections 182(b)(2) and (f) require that SIPs for areas designated 
nonattainment for the ozone NAAQS and classified as Moderate or above 
implement RACT for any source covered by a Control Techniques 
Guidelines (CTG) document and for any major source of VOCs or 
NOX.
    The NSAQMD is subject to this RACT SIP requirement, as the District 
regulates the Western Nevada County, California, ozone nonattainment 
area, which was classified as Moderate for the 2008 8-hour ozone NAAQS 
on May 4, 2016. See 81 FR 26697, 26713. Therefore, to satisfy sections 
182(b)(2) and (f) of the Act, the NSAQMD must, at a minimum, adopt 
RACT-level controls for all sources covered by a CTG document and for 
all major non-CTG sources of VOCs or NOX within the ozone 
nonattainment area that it regulates.
    The EPA issued a final rule on August 23, 2019, in which it 
reclassified Western Nevada County as ``Serious'' nonattainment for the 
2008 ozone NAAQS. See 84 FR 44238, 44250. NSAQMD adopted its RACT SIP 
in 2018, when it was still classified as a Moderate ozone nonattainment 
area. However, in anticipation of the area being reclassified as a 
Serious nonattainment area for the 2008 ozone NAAQS, the NSAQMD's 2018 
RACT SIP evaluated whether the District had any major VOC/
NOX sources emitting at least 50 tons per year (tpy), which 
is the major source threshold for ozone precursors for Serious ozone 
nonattainment areas.\1\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ Any stationary source that emits or has the potential to 
emit at least 50 tpy of VOCs or NOX is a major stationary 
source in a Serious ozone nonattainment area (CAA section 182(b)(2), 
(f), and 302(j)).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Section III.D of the preamble to the EPA's final rule to implement 
the 2008 8-hour ozone NAAQS (80 FR 12264, March 6, 2015) discusses RACT 
requirements. It states in part that RACT SIPs must contain adopted 
RACT regulations, certifications where appropriate that existing 
provisions are RACT, and/or negative declarations that no sources in 
the nonattainment area are covered by a specific CTG. Id. at 12278. It 
also provides that states must submit appropriate supporting 
information for their RACT submissions as described in the EPA's 
implementation rule for the 1997 ozone NAAQS. See id. and 70 FR 71612, 
71652 (November 29, 2005). The 2018 RACT SIP, including its negative 
declarations, provide the NSAQMD's analysis of its compliance with CAA 
section 182 RACT requirements for the 2008 8-hour ozone NAAQS.
    The EPA's technical support document (TSD) for this action has more 
information about the District's 2018 RACT SIP submittal and the EPA's 
evaluation thereof.

II. The EPA's Evaluation and Proposed Action

A. How is the EPA evaluating the submitted document?

    Generally, SIP rules must require RACT for each category of sources 
covered by a CTG document as well as each major source of VOCs or 
NOX in ozone nonattainment areas classified as Moderate or 
above (see CAA sections 182(b)(2) and (f), and 40 CFR 51.1112(a) and 
(b)). The NSAQMD regulates an ozone nonattainment area classified as 
Serious for the 2008 8-hour NAAQS (40 CFR 81.305) so the District's 
rules must implement RACT. Because Western Nevada County was recently 
reclassified as Serious nonattainment for the 2008 8-hour ozone NAAQS, 
and because NSAQMD's 2018 RACT SIP provided an

[[Page 59333]]

analysis of RACT that addresses the requirements for a Serious area as 
well as a Moderate area in anticipation of this reclassification, we 
evaluated the 2018 RACT SIP submittal to determine whether it met RACT 
requirements for a Serious ozone nonattainment area as well those for a 
Moderate ozone nonattainment area. Specifically, as part of our 
evaluation of the 2018 RACT SIP, we evaluated NSAQMD's 2018 RACT SIP 
using the 50 tpy threshold for major stationary sources of VOC or 
NOX in Serious ozone nonattainment areas.
    As part of their RACT submittals, States should also submit for SIP 
approval negative declarations for CTG source categories for which the 
States have not adopted CTG-based regulations because they have no 
sources above the CTG-recommended applicability threshold, regardless 
of whether such negative declarations were made for an earlier SIP.\2\ 
To do so, the RACT submittals should provide reasonable assurance that 
no sources subject to the CTGs' requirements currently exist in the 
relevant ozone nonattainment area.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \2\ 57 FR 13498, 13512 (April 16, 1992).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    With respect to the NSAQMD, the District's analysis must 
demonstrate that each major source of VOCs or NOX in the 
Western Nevada County ozone nonattainment area is covered by a RACT-
level rule. In addition, for each CTG source category, the District 
must either demonstrate that a RACT-level rule is in place, or submit a 
negative declaration. Guidance and policy documents that we use to 
evaluate CAA section 182 RACT requirements 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. EPA Office of Air Quality Planning and Standards, ``Issues 
Relating to VOC Regulation Cutpoints, Deficiencies, and Deviations,'' 
May 25, 1988 (``the Bluebook,'' revised January 11, 1990).
    3. ``State Implementation Plans; Nitrogen Oxides Supplement to the 
General Preamble; Clean Air Act Amendments of 1990 Implementation of 
Title I; Proposed Rule,'' (``the NOX Supplement''), 57 FR 
55620, (November 25, 1992).
    4. Memorandum dated May 18, 2006, from William T. Harnett, 
Director, Air Quality Policy Division, to Regional Air Division 
Directors, Subject: ``RACT Qs & As--Reasonably Available Control 
Technology (RACT): Questions and Answers.''
    5. ``Final Rule to Implement the 8-hour Ozone National Ambient Air 
Quality Standard--Phase 2,'' 70 FR 71612 (November 29, 2005).
    6. ``Implementation of the 2008 National Ambient Air Quality 
Standards for Ozone: State Implementation Plan Requirements,'' 80 FR 
12264 (March 6, 2015).

B. Does the document meet the evaluation criteria?

    The NSAQMD's 2018 RACT SIP provides the District's demonstration 
that the applicable SIP for the Western Nevada County ozone 
nonattainment area, which is under the jurisdiction of the NSAQMD, 
satisfies CAA section 182 RACT requirements for the 2008 8-hour ozone 
NAAQS. The District's conclusion is based on its analysis of SIP-
approved requirements that apply to the following: (1) Source 
categories for which a CTG has been issued, and (2) major non-CTG 
stationary sources of VOC or NOX emissions.
    With respect to CTG source categories, the NSAQMD determined that 
it only had sources subject to the CTGs covering gasoline service 
stations and vapor recovery operations, gasoline tank truck vapor 
tightness, and cutback asphalt. The District also stated that it no 
longer had sources subject to the miscellaneous metal coating CTG, but 
``. . . would like to keep the rule in the SIP for the 2008 standard in 
case a new source opens . . .'' For each of these CTG source 
categories, the District's submittal provided an analysis to support 
the District's finding that a District rule previously approved by the 
EPA into the SIP as RACT for Western Nevada County remains RACT for the 
2008 8-hour ozone NAAQS. Specifically, Section 5 of NSAQMD's 2018 RACT 
SIP provides a short discussion of the following District rules and why 
they continue to implement RACT: Rule 214, ``Phase I Vapor Recovery 
Requirements;'' Rule 215, ``Phase II Vapor Recovery System 
Requirements;'' Rule 227, ``Cutback and Emulsified Asphalt Paving 
Materials;'' and Rule 228, ``Surface Coating of Metal Parts and 
Products.'' We reviewed NSAQMD's evaluation of its rules addressing the 
CTG source categories that are subject to RACT \3\ in Western Nevada 
County. We agree that the District's rules are generally consistent 
with the CTGs and recently adopted rules in other air districts, and 
therefore satisfy CAA RACT requirements for the 2008 8-hour ozone 
NAAQS. With respect to the CTG for Miscellaneous Metal and Plastic 
Parts Coating, the 2018 RACT SIP states that the District has no 
sources subject to Tables 3-6 of this CTG, and is adopting negative 
declarations for coatings covered by those tables. The 2018 RACT SIP 
also states that the only source in the Western Nevada County ozone 
nonattainment area that was subject to the CTG's Table 2 ``Metal Parts 
and Products'' has closed, but the District did not adopt a negative 
declaration for the category sources subject to Table 2, and stated its 
preference to leave the applicable rule--Rule 228--in the RACT SIP. We 
agree that Rule 228's VOC content limits are consistent with Table 2 of 
the CTG and the rule continues to meet RACT.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \3\ The NSAQMD rules and corresponding CTGs are as follows. 
District Rule 214, ``Phase I Vapor Recovery Requirements'', 
corresponds to the CTGs entitled ``Design Criteria for Stage I Vapor 
Control Systems--Gasoline Service Stations'' (EPA-450/R-75-102) and 
``Control of Volatile Organic Compound Leaks from Gasoline Tank 
Trucks and Vapor Collection Systems'' (EPA-450/2-78-051). District 
Rule 227, ``Cutback and Emulsified Asphalt Paving Materials,'' 
corresponds to the CTG entitled ``Control of Volatile Organic 
Compounds from Use of Cutback Asphalt'' (EPA-450/2-77-37). District 
Rule 228, ``Surface Coating of Metal Parts and Products'', 
corresponds to the source category in Table 2 of the CTG entitled 
``Control of Volatile Organic Emissions from Existing Stationary 
Sources, Volume VI: Surface Coating of Miscellaneous Metal Parts and 
Products, and Control Techniques Guidelines for Miscellaneous Metal 
and Plastic Parts Coatings'' (EPA-453/R-08-003). We note that while 
NSAQMD also reviewed Rule 215, ``Phase II Vapor Recovery System 
Requirements,'' as meeting RACT, and the EPA has approved the rule 
as meeting RACT, the EPA has not published a CTG for vehicle 
refueling operations.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Where there are no existing sources covered by a particular CTG 
document, states may, in lieu of adopting RACT requirements for those 
sources, adopt negative declarations certifying that there are no such 
sources in the relevant nonattainment area. States may also use 
negative declarations to certify that there are no major non-CTG 
sources subject to RACT, where applicable. NSAQMD's 2018 RACT SIP 
contains a table listing the EPA's CTGs and annotates those CTGs for 
which the District is adopting a negative declaration, indicating that 
the District has no sources subject to the applicable CTG for the 2008 
8-hour ozone NAAQS. These negative declarations are listed in Table 1 
below. The District concludes that it has no sources subject to the 
relevant CTGs, based on a review of its permit files and emission 
inventory, as well as business listings and county planning records.

[[Page 59334]]

    In addition, the 2018 RACT SIP states ``there are no major sources 
(that emit or have the potential to emit 50 tons or more per year) of 
ozone precursors located in the nonattainment area. . . .'' \4\ In 
another portion of its 2018 RACT SIP, NSAQMD states ``[t]he largest 
stationary source of ozone precursors in the Western Nevada County 
ozone nonattainment area is currently a gas station that emits under 2 
tons of precursors per year.'' \5\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \4\ 2018 RACT SIP, 1, 5, and 12.
    \5\ Id. at 1.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    We reviewed CARB's emissions inventory for the NSAQMD and also 
performed a general internet search for potential sources subject to 
selected CTGs in Western Nevada County. Based on our review, we agree 
with the District's negative declarations in its 2018 RACT SIP. We 
found that CARB's emissions inventory for the years 2014-2017 showed 
that the largest VOC and NOX emitting stationary source in 
the Western Nevada County ozone nonattainment area emitted less than 2 
tpy of VOC and NOX. Our TSD has more information on our 
evaluation of the 2018 RACT SIP. Table 1 below summarizes the CTG 
categories for which NSAQMD has provided negative declarations.

                                      Table 1--NSAQMD Negative Declarations
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                  EPA document No.                                               Title
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
EPA-450/2-77-008....................................  Surface Coating of Cans.
EPA-450/2-77-008....................................  Surface Coating of Coils.
EPA-450/2-77-008....................................  Surface Coating of Paper.
EPA-450/2-77-008....................................  Surface Coating of Fabric.
EPA-450/2-77-008....................................  Surface Coating of Automobiles and Light-Duty Trucks.
EPA-450/2-77-022....................................  Solvent Metal Cleaning.
EPA-450/2-77-025....................................  Refinery Vacuum Producing Systems, Wastewater Separators,
                                                       and Process Unit Turnarounds.
EPA-450/2-77-026....................................  Tank Truck Gasoline Loading Terminals.
EPA-450/2-77-032....................................  Surface Coating of Metal Furniture.
EPA-450/2-77-033....................................  Surface Coating of Insulation of Magnet Wire.
EPA-450/2-77-034....................................  Surface Coating of Large Appliances.
EPA-450/2-77-035....................................  Bulk Gasoline Plants.
EPA-450/2-77-036....................................  Storage of Petroleum Liquids in Fixed-Roof Tanks.
EPA-450/2-78-029....................................  Manufacture of Synthesized Pharmaceutical Products.
EPA-450/2-78-030....................................  Manufacture of Pneumatic Rubber Tires.
EPA-450/2-78-032....................................  Factory Surface Coating of Flat Wood Paneling.
EPA-450/2-78-033....................................  Graphic Arts-Rotogravure and Flexography.
EPA-450/2-78-036....................................  Leaks from Petroleum Refinery Equipment.
EPA-450/2-78-047....................................  Petroleum Liquid Storage in External Floating Roof Tanks.
EPA-450/3-82-009....................................  Large Petroleum Dry Cleaners.
EPA-450/3-83-006....................................  Leaks from Synthetic Organic Chemical Polymer and Resin
                                                       Manufacturing Equipment.
EPA-450/3-83-007....................................  Leaks from Natural Gas/Gasoline Processing Plants.
EPA-450/3-83-008....................................  Manufacture of High-Density Polyethylene, Polypropylene,
                                                       and Polystyrene Resins.
EPA-450/3-84-015....................................  Air Oxidation Processes in Synthetic Organic Chemical
                                                       Manufacturing Industry.
EPA-450/4-91-031....................................  Reactor Processes and Distillation Operations in Synthetic
                                                       Organic Chemical Manufacturing Industry.
EPA-453/R-96-007....................................  Wood Furniture Manufacturing Operations.
EPA-453/R-94-032; 61 FR 44050; 8/27/96..............  ACT Surface Coating at Shipbuilding and Ship Repair
                                                       Facilities Shipbuilding and Ship Repair Operations
                                                       (Surface Coating).
EPA-453/R-97-004; 59 FR 29216; 6/06/94..............  Aerospace MACT and Aerospace (CTG & MACT).
EPA-453/R-06-001....................................  Industrial Cleaning Solvents.
EPA-453/R-06-002....................................  Offset Lithographic Printing and Letterpress Printing.
EPA-453/R-06-003....................................  Flexible Package Printing.
EPA-453/R-06-004....................................  Flat Wood Paneling Coatings.
EPA 453/R-07-003....................................  Paper, Film, and Foil Coatings.
EPA 453/R-07-004....................................  Large Appliance Coatings.
EPA 453/R-07-005....................................  Metal Furniture Coatings.
EPA 453/R-08-003....................................  Miscellaneous Metal Parts and Plastic Parts Coatings,
                                                       Tables 3-6.
EPA 453/R-08-004....................................  Fiberglass Boat Manufacturing Materials.
EPA 453/R-08-005....................................  Miscellaneous Industrial Adhesives.
EPA 453/R-08-006....................................  Automobile and Light-Duty Truck Assembly Coatings.
EPA 452/B16-001.....................................  Oil and Natural Gas Industry.
--N/A--.............................................  Major non-CTG VOC sources.
--N/A--.............................................  Major non-CTG NOX sources.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

C. The EPA's Recommendations To Further Improve the RACT SIP

    Our TSD includes recommendations to improve the RACT SIP for the 
upcoming 2015 8-hour ozone NAAQS. These recommendations include, among 
other things, that the District consider amending Rule 214, ``Phase 1 
Vapor Recovery'', to require recordkeeping for facilities that use the 
rule's throughput exemption threshold, and that the District evaluate 
whether additional negative declarations can be adopted for the 
cutback/emulsified asphalt and miscellaneous metal and plastic parts 
CTGs.

D. Public Comment and Proposed Action

    As authorized in section 110(k)(3) of the Act, the EPA proposes to 
fully approve the 2018 RACT SIP, including the negative declarations 
listed in Table 1, because it fulfills the RACT SIP requirements under 
CAA sections

[[Page 59335]]

182(b) and (f) and 40 CFR 51.1112(a) and (b) for the 2008 ozone NAAQS. 
We will accept comments from the public on this proposal until December 
4, 2019. If we take final action to approve the submitted document, our 
final action will incorporate this document into the federally 
enforceable SIP.

III. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews

    Under the CAA, 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, 
if they meet the criteria of the 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 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 CAA; 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, Nitrogen dioxide, Ozone, 
Volatile organic compounds.

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

    Dated: October 21, 2019.
Deborah Jordan,
Acting Regional Administrator, Region IX.
[FR Doc. 2019-23828 Filed 11-1-19; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.