Air Plan Approval; California; Mariposa County Air Pollution Control District, 14845-14847 [2020-05331]

Download as PDF Federal Register / Vol. 85, No. 51 / Monday, March 16, 2020 / Proposed Rules III. Incorporation by Reference In this document, 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 the Georgia Rule 391–3–1–.01, entitled ‘‘Definitions,’’ effective July 20, 2017, which adds a definition for a ‘‘Pollution control project.’’ 6 7 EPA has made, and will continue to make, these materials generally available through www.regulations.gov and at the EPA Region 4 office (please contact the person identified in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section of this preamble for more information). IV. Proposed Action EPA is proposing to approve the portion of the September 19, 2006, SIP revision that adds a definition at Rule 391–3–1–.01(qqqq). EPA believes this change is consistent with the CAA and will not impact the NAAQS or interfere with any other applicable requirement of the Act. V. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews lotter on DSKBCFDHB2PROD with PROPOSALS Under the CAA, the Administrator is required to approve a SIP submission that complies with the provisions of the Act and applicable Federal regulations. See 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. This 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 6 The effective date of the change to Rule 391–3– 1–.01 made in Georgia’s September 19, 2006, SIP revision is July 13, 2006. However, for purposes of the state effective date included at 40 CFR 52.570(c), that change to Georgia’s rule is captured and superseded by Georgia’s update in a November 13, 2017, SIP revision, state effective on July 20, 2017, which EPA previously approved on December 4, 2018. See 83 FR 62466. 7 Except for (qqqq)1. and (qqqq)3. through 8., which were withdrawn from EPA consideration on November 27, 2019. VerDate Sep<11>2014 17:35 Mar 13, 2020 Jkt 250001 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 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). 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 as specified by Executive Order 13175 (65 FR 67249, November 9, 2000), nor will it impose substantial direct costs on tribal governments or preempt tribal law. List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52 Environmental protection, Air pollution control, Carbon monoxide, Incorporation by reference, Lead, Nitrogen dioxide, Ozone, Particulate matter, Sulfur oxides, Volatile organic compounds. Authority: 42 U.S.C. 7401 et seq. Dated: March 4, 2020. Mary S. Walker, Regional Administrator, Region 4. [FR Doc. 2020–05332 Filed 3–13–20; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6560–50–P PO 00000 Frm 00041 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 14845 ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY 40 CFR Part 52 [EPA–R09–OAR–2019–0291; FRL–10006– 47-Region 9] Air Plan Approval; California; Mariposa County Air Pollution Control District Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). ACTION: Proposed rule. AGENCY: The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is proposing to approve a revision to the Mariposa County Air Pollution Control District (MCAPCD) portion of the California State Implementation Plan (SIP). This revision concerns reporting of emissions of volatile organic compounds (VOCs) and oxides of nitrogen (NOX) in nonattainment areas. We are proposing to approve a local rule to require submittal of emissions statements 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 April 15, 2020. ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, identified by Docket ID No. EPA–R09– OAR–2019–0291 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: Nancy Levin, EPA Region IX, 75 Hawthorne Street, San Francisco, CA SUMMARY: E:\FR\FM\16MRP1.SGM 16MRP1 14846 Federal Register / Vol. 85, No. 51 / Monday, March 16, 2020 / Proposed Rules 94105. By phone: (415) 972–3848 or by email at levin.nancy@epa.gov. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Throughout this document, ‘‘we,’’ ‘‘us’’ and ‘‘our’’ refer to the EPA. Table of Contents I. The State’s Submittal A. What rule did the State submit? B. Are there other versions of this rule? C. What is the purpose of the submitted rule? II. The EPA’s Evaluation and Action A. How is the EPA evaluating the rule? B. Does the rule meet the evaluation criteria? C. The EPA’s recommendations to further improve the rule D. Public comment and proposed action 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 Local agency Rule # MCAPCD ........ Rule title 513 Emissions Statements ..................................................................................... On May 13, 2019, the EPA determined that Rule 513 met the completeness criteria in 40 CFR part 51 Appendix V, which must be met before formal EPA review.1 B. Are there other versions of this rule? We approved an earlier version of Rule 513, then numbered Rule 408 ‘‘Source Recordkeeping and Reporting,’’ into the SIP on August 22, 1977 (42 FR 42219). The MCAPCD renumbered and adopted revisions to Rule 408 on May 15, 2018, and CARB submitted Rule 513 ‘‘Emissions Statements’’ on April 30, 2019. Submitted Rule 513 reorganizes the information contained in SIPapproved Rule 408. It also removes a requirement for sources to retain emissions reports submitted to the District, which is not required by the Act. lotter on DSKBCFDHB2PROD with PROPOSALS C. What is the purpose of the submitted rule? Emissions of VOCs and NOX contribute to the production of groundlevel 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 VOC and NOX emissions. Rule 513 establishes requirements for the owner or operator of any stationary source that emits, or has the potential to emit, ‘‘criteria pollutants,’’ 2 to submit an annual written statement to the MCAPCD showing actual emissions of VOC and NOX or operational data to estimate actual emissions from that source. The rule was revised to comply with CAA section 182(a)(3)(B). The EPA’s technical support document (TSD) has more information about this rule. 1 Letter from Elizabeth J. Adams, EPA to Richard Corey, CARB, dated May 13, 2019. 2 The criteria pollutants are carbon monoxide, lead, nitrogen dioxide, ozone, particulate matter, and sulfur dioxide. VerDate Sep<11>2014 17:35 Mar 13, 2020 Revised Jkt 250001 II. The EPA’s Evaluation and Action A. How is the EPA evaluating the rule? Rules in the SIP 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). Areas classified as Marginal nonattainment or higher, such as the Mariposa County nonattainment area, are subject to the requirements of CAA section 182(a)(3)(B). Guidance and policy documents that we used to evaluate enforceability, revision/relaxation, and CAA requirements for the applicable criteria pollutants include the following: • ‘‘Issues Relating to VOC Regulation Cutpoints, Deficiencies, and Deviations,’’ EPA, May 25, 1988 (the Bluebook, revised January 11, 1990). • ‘‘Guidance Document for Correcting Common VOC & Other Rule Deficiencies,’’ EPA Region 9, August 21, 2001 (the Little Bluebook). • ‘‘(Draft) Guidance on the Implementation of an Emission Statement Program,’’ EPA, July 1992. B. Does the rule meet the evaluation criteria? This rule is consistent with CAA requirements and relevant guidance regarding enforceability and SIP revisions. The TSD has more information on our evaluation. C. The EPA’s Recommendations To Further Improve the Rule The TSD includes recommendations for the next time the local agency modifies the rule. PO 00000 Frm 00042 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 05/15/18 Submitted 04/30/19 D. Public Comment and Proposed Action As authorized in section 110(k)(3) of the Act, the EPA proposes to fully approve the submitted rule because it fulfills all relevant requirements. We will accept comments from the public on this proposal until April 15, 2020. 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 MCAPCD 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, E:\FR\FM\16MRP1.SGM 16MRP1 Federal Register / Vol. 85, No. 51 / Monday, March 16, 2020 / Proposed Rules 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 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). lotter on DSKBCFDHB2PROD with PROPOSALS List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52 Environmental protection, Air pollution control, Incorporation by reference, Intergovernmental relations, Ozone, Nitrogen dioxide, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements, Volatile organic compounds. Authority: 42 U.S.C. 7401 et seq. VerDate Sep<11>2014 17:35 Mar 13, 2020 Jkt 250001 Dated: March 2, 2020. John W. Busterud, Regional Administrator, Region IX. [FR Doc. 2020–05331 Filed 3–13–20; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6560–50–P ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY 40 CFR Part 52 [EPA–R06–OAR–2015–0189; FRL–10006– 02–Region 6] Air Plan Approval; Arkansas; Arkansas Regional Haze and Visibility Transport State Implementation Plan Revisions and Withdrawal of Federal Implementation Plan Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). ACTION: Proposed rule. AGENCY: Pursuant to the Clean Air Act (CAA or the Act), the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is proposing to approve a revision to the Arkansas State Implementation Plan (SIP) submitted by the State of Arkansas through the Arkansas Division of Environmental Quality (ADEQ) on August 13, 2019. The SIP submittal addresses requirements of the Act and the Regional Haze Rule for visibility protection in mandatory Class I Federal areas (Class I areas) for the first implementation period. The EPA is proposing to approve an alternative measure to best available retrofit technology (BART) for sulfur dioxide (SO2), particulate matter (PM), and nitrogen oxide (NOX) at the Domtar Ashdown Mill and elements of the SIP submittal that relate to these BART requirements at this facility. In addition, we are proposing to approve the withdrawal from the SIP the previously approved PM10 BART limit and the federal implementation plan (FIP) provisions for the Domtar Ashdown Mill. The EPA is also concurrently proposing to approve Arkansas’ interstate visibility transport provisions from the August 10, 2018, regional haze SIP submittal as supplemented by the visibility transport provisions in the October 4, 2019, interstate transport SIP submittal, which covers the following national ambient air quality standards (NAAQS): The 2006 24-hour fine particulate matter (PM2.5) NAAQS; the 2012 annual PM2.5 NAAQS; the 2008 and 2015 eight-hour ozone (O3) NAAQS; the 2010 one-hour nitrogen dioxide (NO2) NAAQS; and the 2010 one-hour SO2 NAAQS. DATES: Written comments must be received on or before April 15, 2020. SUMMARY: PO 00000 Frm 00043 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 14847 Submit your comments, identified by Docket No. EPA–R06– OAR–2015–0189, at https:// www.regulations.gov or via email to R6AIR_ARHaze@epa.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 any information electronically that is considered 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 with multimedia submissions and should include all discussion points desired. The EPA will generally not consider comments or their contents located outside of the primary submission (i.e., on the web, cloud, or other file sharing systems). For additional submission methods, please contact James E. Grady, (214) 665–6745, grady.james@epa.gov. 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-epadockets. Docket: The index to the docket for this action is available electronically at www.regulations.gov and in hard copy at the EPA Region 6, 1201 Elm Street, Suite 500, Dallas, Texas 75270–2102. While all documents in the docket are listed in the index, some information may be publicly available only at the hard copy location (e.g., copyrighted material), and some may not be publicly available at either location (e.g., CBI). FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: James E. Grady, EPA Region 6 Office, Regional Haze and SO2 Section, 1201 Elm Street, Suite 500, Dallas, TX 72570, 214–665–6745; grady.james@epa.gov. To inspect the hard copy materials, please schedule an appointment with Mr. Grady or Mr. Bill Deese at 214–665– 7253. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Throughout this document ‘‘we,’’ ‘‘us,’’ or ‘‘our’’ mean ‘‘the EPA.’’ ADDRESSES: Table of Contents I. Background A. Regional Haze Principles B. Requirements of the CAA and the EPA’s Regional Haze Rule C. BART Requirements D. BART Alternative Requirements E. Long-Term Strategy and Reasonable Progress Requirements F. Previous Actions on Arkansas Regional Haze E:\FR\FM\16MRP1.SGM 16MRP1

Agencies

[Federal Register Volume 85, Number 51 (Monday, March 16, 2020)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 14845-14847]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2020-05331]


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

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

40 CFR Part 52

[EPA-R09-OAR-2019-0291; FRL-10006-47-Region 9]


Air Plan Approval; California; Mariposa County Air Pollution 
Control District

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Proposed rule.

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

SUMMARY: The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is proposing to 
approve a revision to the Mariposa County Air Pollution Control 
District (MCAPCD) portion of the California State Implementation Plan 
(SIP). This revision concerns reporting of emissions of volatile 
organic compounds (VOCs) and oxides of nitrogen (NOX) in 
nonattainment areas. We are proposing to approve a local rule to 
require submittal of emissions statements 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 April 15, 2020.

ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, identified by Docket ID No. EPA-R09-
OAR-2019-0291 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: Nancy Levin, EPA Region IX, 75 
Hawthorne Street, San Francisco, CA

[[Page 14846]]

94105. By phone: (415) 972-3848 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 rule did the State submit?
    B. Are there other versions of this rule?
    C. What is the purpose of the submitted rule?
II. The EPA's Evaluation and Action
    A. How is the EPA evaluating the rule?
    B. Does the rule meet the evaluation criteria?
    C. The EPA's recommendations to further improve the rule
    D. Public comment and proposed action
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
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
           Local agency                Rule #                Rule title               Revised        Submitted
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
MCAPCD...........................             513  Emissions Statements.........        05/15/18        04/30/19
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    On May 13, 2019, the EPA determined that Rule 513 met the 
completeness criteria in 40 CFR part 51 Appendix V, which must be met 
before formal EPA review.\1\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ Letter from Elizabeth J. Adams, EPA to Richard Corey, CARB, 
dated May 13, 2019.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

B. Are there other versions of this rule?

    We approved an earlier version of Rule 513, then numbered Rule 408 
``Source Recordkeeping and Reporting,'' into the SIP on August 22, 1977 
(42 FR 42219). The MCAPCD renumbered and adopted revisions to Rule 408 
on May 15, 2018, and CARB submitted Rule 513 ``Emissions Statements'' 
on April 30, 2019. Submitted Rule 513 reorganizes the information 
contained in SIP-approved Rule 408. It also removes a requirement for 
sources to retain emissions reports submitted to the District, which is 
not required by the Act.

C. What is the purpose of the submitted rule?

    Emissions of VOCs and 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 VOC and NOX emissions. 
Rule 513 establishes requirements for the owner or operator of any 
stationary source that emits, or has the potential to emit, ``criteria 
pollutants,'' \2\ to submit an annual written statement to the MCAPCD 
showing actual emissions of VOC and NOX or operational data 
to estimate actual emissions from that source. The rule was revised to 
comply with CAA section 182(a)(3)(B). The EPA's technical support 
document (TSD) has more information about this rule.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \2\ The criteria pollutants are carbon monoxide, lead, nitrogen 
dioxide, ozone, particulate matter, and sulfur dioxide.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

II. The EPA's Evaluation and Action

A. How is the EPA evaluating the rule?

    Rules in the SIP 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). Areas classified as Marginal 
nonattainment or higher, such as the Mariposa County nonattainment 
area, are subject to the requirements of CAA section 182(a)(3)(B).
    Guidance and policy documents that we used to evaluate 
enforceability, revision/relaxation, and CAA requirements for the 
applicable criteria pollutants include the following:
     ``Issues Relating to VOC Regulation Cutpoints, 
Deficiencies, and Deviations,'' EPA, May 25, 1988 (the Bluebook, 
revised January 11, 1990).
     ``Guidance Document for Correcting Common VOC & Other Rule 
Deficiencies,'' EPA Region 9, August 21, 2001 (the Little Bluebook).
     ``(Draft) Guidance on the Implementation of an Emission 
Statement Program,'' EPA, July 1992.

B. Does the rule meet the evaluation criteria?

    This rule is consistent with CAA requirements and relevant guidance 
regarding enforceability and SIP revisions. The TSD has more 
information on our evaluation.

C. The EPA's Recommendations To Further Improve the Rule

    The TSD includes recommendations for the next time the local agency 
modifies the rule.

D. Public Comment and Proposed Action

    As authorized in section 110(k)(3) of the Act, the EPA proposes to 
fully approve the submitted rule because it fulfills all relevant 
requirements. We will accept comments from the public on this proposal 
until April 15, 2020. 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 MCAPCD 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,

[[Page 14847]]

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 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, Nitrogen dioxide, 
Reporting and recordkeeping requirements, Volatile organic compounds.

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

    Dated: March 2, 2020.
John W. Busterud,
Regional Administrator, Region IX.
[FR Doc. 2020-05331 Filed 3-13-20; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 6560-50-P
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.