EPA-R09-OAR-2019-0655; FRL-10012-28-Region 9 Air Plan Approval; California; San Joaquin Valley Unified Air Pollution Control District and Feather River Air Quality Management District, 56504 [2020-17181]
Download as PDF
<![CDATA[
56504
Federal Register / Vol. 85, No. 178 / Monday, September 14, 2020 / Rules and Regulations
In opposing the proposal, the ABA
stated that defining a CSA as a ‘‘single
local community’’ is unreasonable and
unlawful. The ABA largely relied on the
District Court opinion, which was
unanimously reversed by the Circuit
Court. The ABA provided examples of
CSAs that it believes might not be a
WDLC and contended that CSAs have a
‘‘daisy-chain nature’’ in which opposite
ends have little connection. It then
stated that the Circuit Court indicated
that some CSAs might not be a WDLC
and thus could be challenged on an ‘‘as
applied’’ basis. The ABA further stated
that the term ‘‘local community’’ should
not automatically include a CSA.
Rather, it stated that any presumption
that a CSA is a local community should
be rebuttable. The ABA further stated
that the Board should not adopt these
provisions while litigation remains
pending, including the possibility of an
appeal to the Supreme Court.
After reviewing the comments in light
of the unanimous Circuit Court decision
to affirm the Board’s adoption of a CSA
as a presumptive community, the Board
has determined that it is appropriate
and consistent with the Act to amend
the Chartering Manual to allow a CSA
to be re-established as a presumptive
WDLC. Much of the ABA’s argument
relied on the District Court decision that
was unanimously rejected by the threejudge Circuit Court panel. In applying
Chevron, the Circuit Court stated: ‘‘We
appreciate the District Court’s
conclusions, made after a thoughtful
analysis of the Act. But we ultimately
disagree with many of them. In this
facial challenge, we review the rule not
as armchair bankers or geographers, but
rather as lay judges cognizant that
Congress expressly delegated certain
policy choices to the NCUA. After
considering the Act’s text, purpose, and
legislative history, we hold the agency’s
policy choices ‘entirely appropriate’ for
the most part. Chevron, 467 U.S. at
865.’’ 63 With respect to CSAs, the
Circuit Court, in rejecting the District
Court’s analysis, stated:
khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with RULES
In addition to being consistent with the
Act’s text, the Combined Statistical Area
definition rationally advances the Act’s
underlying purposes. In the 1998
amendments, Congress made two relevant
findings about purpose. First, legislators
found ‘‘essential’’ to the credit-union system
a ‘‘meaningful affinity and bond among
63 Am. Bankers Ass’n, 934 F.3d at 656. See also
with respect to CSAs: ‘‘The NCUA possesses vast
discretion to define terms because Congress
expressly has given it such power. But the authority
is not boundless. The agency must craft a
reasonable definition consistent with the Act’s text
and purposes; that is central to the review we apply
at Chevron’s second step. Here, the NCUA’s
definition meets the standard.’’ Id. at 664.
VerDate Sep<11>2014
17:41 Sep 11, 2020
Jkt 250001
members, manifested by a commonality of
routine interaction [;] shared and related
work experiences, interests, or activities [;] or
the maintenance of an otherwise wellunderstood sense of cohesion or identity.’’
§ 2, 112 Stat. at 914. Second, Congress
highlighted the importance of ‘‘credit union
safety and soundness,’’ because a credit
union on firm financial footing ‘‘will enhance
the public benefit that citizens receive.’’ 64
The Circuit Court explicitly rejected
the ABA’s assertion that CSAs have a
‘‘daisy chain’’ nature, linking multiple
metropolitan areas that have nothing to
do with those at opposite ends of the
chain. As the court stated:
[T]he NCUA’s definition does not readily
create general, widely dispersed regions. Cf.
First Nat’l Bank III, 522 U.S. at 502
(indicating that community credit unions
may not be ‘composed of members from an
unlimited number of unrelated geographical
units’. Combined Statistical Areas are
geographical units well-accepted within the
government. See [81 FR at 88414]. Because
they essentially are regional hubs, the
Combined Statistical Areas concentrate
around central locations. . . . The NCUA
rationally believed that such ‘real-world
interconnections would qualify as the type of
mutual bonds suggested by the term ‘local
community.’ . . . Thus, the agency
reasonably determined that Combined
Statistical Areas ‘‘simply unif[y], as a single
community,’’ already connected neighboring
regions. [See 81 FR at 88,415.] 65
The ABA’s misinterpretation of the
Chevron doctrine was further
repudiated by the entire Circuit Court,
which rejected the ABA’s petition for a
rehearing en banc. The Board
emphasizes that the ABA repeatedly
misstates the regulatory framework for
approving a presumptive community,
both in its court filings and in its
comment letter on the proposed rule.
Under the regulatory provisions in the
Chartering Manual, established by
notice-and-comment rulemaking, there
is no automatic approval of an
application based on a CSA. Rather, an
applicant would have to establish in its
application that it can serve the entire
community, as documented in its
business and marketing plan. A further
constraint on any such CSA or portion
thereof is that its population cannot
exceed 2.5 million people. As the
Circuit Court noted:
We might well agree with the District Court
that the approval of such a geographical area
would contravene the Act. But even so, the
Association would need much more to
mount its facial pre-enforcement challenge in
this case. As the Supreme Court repeatedly
has held, ‘‘the fact that petitioner can point
to a hypothetical case in which the rule
might lead to an arbitrary result does not
64 Id.
65 Id.
PO 00000
at 665–66.
at 666–67.
Frm 00034
Fmt 4700
render the rule’’ facially invalid. Am. Hosp.
Ass’n v. NLRB, 499 U.S. 606, 619 (1991); see
also EPA v. EME Homer City Generation, L.P.
(EME Homer), 572 U.S. 489, 524 (2014) (‘‘The
possibility that the rule, in uncommon
particular applications, might exceed [the
agency]’s statutory authority does not
warrant judicial condemnation of the rule in
its entirety.’’); INS v. Nat’l Ctr. for
Immigrants’ Rights, Inc., 502 U.S. 183, 188
(1991) (‘‘That the regulation may be invalid
as applied in s[ome] cases . . . does not
mean that the regulation is facially invalid
because it is without statutory authority.’’);
cf. Barnhart v. Thomas, 540 U.S. 20, 29
(2003) (‘‘Virtually every legal (or other) rule
has imperfect applications in particular
circumstances.’’).
Here, the Association’s complaint and
the District Court’s accompanying worry
strike us as too conjectural. The NCUA
must assess the ‘‘economic advisability
of establishing’’ the proposed credit
union before approving it, [12 U.S.C.
1754], and as part of the assessment, the
organizers must propose a ‘‘realistic’’
business plan showing how the
institution and its branches would serve
all members in the local community, see
[12 CFR. part 701, app. B, ch. 1 section
IV.D.] The Association has failed to
demonstrate the plausibility of a local
community that is defined like the
hypothetical narrow, multi-state strip
and accompanies a realistic business
plan. And if the agency were to receive
and approve such an application, a
petitioner can make an as-applied
challenge. See, e.g., EME Homer, 572
U.S. at 523–24; Buongiorno, 912 F.2d at
510.66
Thus, existing regulatory provisions
guard against the extreme examples
posited by the ABA, which claims
incorrectly that the Board must approve
them under the Chartering Manual. The
Board agrees with the ABA and the
Circuit Court that any application for a
presumptive community, including one
based on a CSA, can be challenged on
an as applied, case-by-case basis. Given
this regulatory framework, which is
subject to judicial review, the Board
agrees with the Circuit Court’s reasoning
in concluding that re-establishing the
CSA as a presumptive community is
entirely consistent with the express
authority delegated to the Board by
Congress. This provision also advances
the Act’s dual purposes of promoting
common bonds while addressing safety
and soundness considerations by
ensuring that FCUs remain
economically viable.
66 Id.
Sfmt 4700
E:\FR\FM\14SER1.SGM
at 668.
14SER1
]]>Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 85, Number 178 (Monday, September 14, 2020)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Page 56504]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2020-17181]
=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
40 CFR Part 52
EPA-R09-OAR-2019-0655; FRL-10012-28-Region 9 Air Plan Approval;
California; San Joaquin Valley Unified Air Pollution Control District
and Feather River Air Quality Management District
AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).
ACTION: Final rule.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is taking final
action to approve revisions to the San Joaquin Valley Unified Air
Pollution Control District (SJVUAPCD or District) and the Feather River
Air Quality Management District (FRAQMD) portions of the California
State Implementation Plan (SIP) under the Clean Air Act (CAA or Act).
For the SJVUAPCD, these revisions concern a rule intended to track
information related to emissions of volatile organic compounds (VOCs)
and particulate matter (PM) from commercial charbroilers, and an
administrative rule for the registration of certain emission units
historically exempted from the SJVUAPCD's permit requirements. We are
approving into the California SIP amendments to a SJVUAPCD local rule,
which require owners and operators of commercial underfired
charbroilers to submit a one-time information report and which subject
certain underfired charbroilers to registration and weekly
recordkeeping requirements. We are also approving a SJVUAPCD rule
addressing registration requirements for these and certain other
emission units. For the FRAQMD, these revisions concern a negative
declaration for the Control Techniques Guidelines (CTG) for the Oil and
Natural Gas Industry.
DATES: This rule is effective October 14, 2020.
ADDRESSES: The EPA has established a docket for this action under
Docket ID No. EPA-R09-OAR-2019-0655. All documents in the docket are
listed on the https://www.regulations.gov website. Although listed in
the index, some information is not publicly available, e.g.,
Confidential Business Information (CBI) or other information the
disclosure of which is restricted by statute. Certain other material,
such as copyrighted material, is not placed on the internet and will be
publicly available only in hard copy form. Publicly available docket
materials are available through https://www.regulations.gov, or please
contact the person identified in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT
section for additional availability information.
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]. Or Nicole Law, EPA Region IX, 75
Hawthorne St., San Francisco, CA 94105. By phone: (415) 947-4126 or by
email at [email protected].
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Throughout this document, ``we,'' ``us'' and
``our'' refer to the EPA.
Table of Contents
I. Proposed Action
II. Public Comments and EPA Responses
III. EPA Action
IV. Incorporation by Reference
V. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews
I. Proposed Action
On May 29, 2020 (85 FR 32327), the EPA proposed to approve the
following documents listed in Table 1 into the California SIP.
Table 1--Submitted Documents
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Local agency Rule or document Adopted/ amended Submitted
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
SJVUAPCD................................ Rule 2250--Permit-Exempt Adopted 10/19/2006........ \1\ 4/30/2020
Equipment Registration.
SJVUAPCD................................ Rule 4692--Commercial Amended 06/21/2018........ \2\ 11/21/2018
Charbroiling.
FRAQMD.................................. Reasonably Available Adopted 08/06/2018........ \3\ 12/07/2018
Control Technology (RACT)
State Implementation Plan
(SIP) Revision for the
South Sutter County
Portion of the Sacramento
Metropolitan
Nonattainment Area for 8-
Hour ozone--Negative
Declaration for Control
Techniques Guidelines for
the Oil and Natural Gas
Industry.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
We proposed to approve SJVUAPCD Rule 2250 and amended Rule 4692,
and FRAQMD's negative declaration for the Control Techniques Guidelines
for the Oil and Natural Gas Industry (EPA-453/B-16-001), because we
determined that they comply with the relevant CAA requirements. Our
proposed action contains more information on the documents and our
evaluation.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ This submittal was transmitted to the EPA by a letter from
CARB dated April 30, 2020.
\2\ This submittal was transmitted to the EPA by a letter from
CARB dated November 16, 2018.
\3\ This submittal was transmitted to the EPA by a letter from
CARB dated December 2, 2018.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
II. Public Comments and EPA Responses
The EPA's proposed action provided a 30-day public comment period.
The public comment period closed on June 29, 2020. During this period,
we received one anonymous comment that supported our proposed approval.
III. EPA Action
No comments were submitted that change our assessment of the rules
and negative declaration as described in our proposed action.
Therefore, as authorized in section 110(k)(3) of the Act, the EPA is
fully approving the documents listed in Table 1 into the California
SIP.
IV. Incorporation by Reference
In this rule, the EPA is finalizing regulatory text that includes
incorporation by reference. In accordance with the requirements of 1
CFR 51.5, the EPA is finalizing the incorporation by reference of the
SJVUAPCD rules described in the amendments to 40 CFR part 52 set forth
below. The EPA has made, and will continue to make, these documents
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).
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 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 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 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, 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 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).
The Congressional Review Act, 5 U.S.C. 801 et seq., as added by the
Small Business Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act of 1996, generally
provides that before a rule may take effect, the agency promulgating
the rule must submit a rule report, which includes a copy of the rule,
to each House of the Congress and to the Comptroller General of the
United States. The EPA will submit a report containing this action and
other required information to the U.S. Senate, the U.S. House of
Representatives, and the Comptroller General of the United States prior
to publication of the rule in the Federal Register. A major rule cannot
take effect until 60 days after it is published in the Federal
Register. This action is not a ``major rule'' as defined by 5 U.S.C.
804(2).
Under section 307(b)(1) of the CAA, petitions for judicial review
of this action must be filed in the United States Court of Appeals for
the appropriate circuit by November 13, 2020. Filing a petition for
reconsideration by the Administrator of this final rule does not affect
the finality of this action for the purposes of judicial review nor
does it extend the time within which a petition for judicial review may
be filed, and shall not postpone the effectiveness of such rule or
action. This action may not be challenged later in proceedings to
enforce its requirements. (See section 307(b)(2).)
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, Volatile
organic compounds.
Dated: July 31, 2020.
John Busterud,
Regional Administrator, Region IX.
For the reasons stated in the preamble, the EPA amends Part 52,
chapter I, title 40 of the Code of Federal Regulations as follows:
PART 52--APPROVAL AND PROMULGATION OF IMPLEMENTATION PLANS
0
1. The authority citation for part 52 continues to read as follows:
Authority: 42 U.S.C. 7401 et seq.
Subpart F--California
0
2. Section 52.220 is amended by adding paragraphs (c)(310)(i)(A)(2) and
(c)(379)(i)(C)(8), revising paragraph (c)(527)(i)(B) and adding
paragraph (c)(540) to read as follows:
Sec. 52.220 Identification of plan--in part.
* * * * *
(c) * * *
(310) * * *
(i) * * *
(A) * * *
(2) Previously approved on June 3, 2003 in paragraph
(c)(310)(i)(A)(1) of this section and now deleted with replacement in
paragraph (c)(527)(i)(B)(1) of this section, Rule 4692, adopted on
March 21, 2002.
* * * * *
(379) * * *
(i) * * *
(C) * * *
(8) Previously approved on November 3, 2011 in paragraph
(c)(379)(i)(C)(5) of this section and now deleted with replacement in
paragraph (c)(527)(i)(B)(1) of this section, Rule 4692, ``Commercial
Charbroiling,'' amended on September 17, 2009.
* * * * *
(527) * * *
(i) * * *
(B) San Joaquin Valley Unified Air Pollution Control District.
(1) Rule 4692, ``Commercial Charbroiling,'' amended on June 21,
2018.
(2) [Reserved]
* * * * *
(540) New regulations for the following APCD were submitted on
April 30, 2020, by the Governor's designee, as an attachment to a
letter dated April 30, 2020.
(i) Incorporation by reference.
(A) San Joaquin Valley Unified Air Pollution Control District.
(1) Rule 2250, ``Permit-Exempt Equipment Registration,'' adopted
October 19, 2006.
(2) [Reserved]
(B) [Reserved]
(ii) [Reserved]
Sec. 52.222 [AMENDED]
0
3. Section 52.222 is amended by revising paragraph (a)(11) to read as
follows:
(a) * * *
(11) Feather River Air Quality Management District.
(i) Negative declarations for Feather River Air Quality Management
District.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
2006 RACT SIP 2009 RACT SIP 2014 RACT SIP
CTG source category Negative declaration submitted 7/11/ submitted 10/27/ submitted 9/29/
CTG reference document 07 09 14
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Aerospace........................... EPA-453/R-97-004-- X ............... X
Control of VOC
Emissions from Coating
Operations at
Aerospace
Manufacturing and
Rework.
Automobile Coating; Metal Coil EPA-450/2-77-008-- X ............... X
Container, & Closure; Paper & Control of Volatile
Fabric. Organic Emissions from
Existing Stationary
Sources--Volume II
Surface Coating of
Cans, Coils, Paper,
Fabrics, Automobiles,
and Light-Duty Trucks.
Automobile and Light-Duty Truck EPA-453/R-08-006-- ............... X X
Assembly Coatings. Control Techniques
Guidelines for
Automobile and Light-
Duty Assembly Coatings.
Cutback Asphalt..................... EPA-450/2-77-037-- X ............... X
Control of Volatile
Organic Emissions from
Use of Cutback Asphalt.
Dry Cleaning........................ EPA-450/3-82-009-- X ............... X
Control of Volatile
Organic Compound
Emissions from Large
Petroleum Dry Cleaners.
Flat Wood Paneling Coatings......... EPA-453/R-06-004-- ............... X X
Control Techniques
Guidelines for Flat
Wood Paneling Coatings.
Fiberglass Boat Manufacturing EPA-453/R-08-004-- ............... X X
Materials. Control Techniques
Guidelines for
Fiberglass Boat
Manufacturing
Materials.
Flexible Package Printing........... EPA-453/R06-003-- ............... X X
Control Techniques
Guidelines for
Flexible Package
Printing.
Gasoline Loading Terminal........... EPA-450/2-77-026-- X ............... X
Control of
Hydrocarbons from Tank
Truck Gasoline Loading
Terminals.
Gasoline Trucks..................... EPA-450/2-78-051-- X ............... X
Control of Volatile
Organic Compound Leaks
from Gasoline Tank
Trucks and Vapor
Collection Systems.
Gasoline Bulk Plants................ EPA-450/2-77-035-- X ............... X
Control of Volatile
Organic Emissions from
Gasoline Bulk Plants.
Graphic Arts Rotogravure and EPA-450/2-78-033-- X ............... X
Flexography. Control of Volatile
Organic Emissions from
Existing Stationary
Sources--Volume VIII:
Rotogravure and
Flexography.
Industrial Cleaning Solvents........ EPA-453/R-06-001-- X X X
Control Techniques
Guidelines for
Industrial Cleaning
Solvents.
Large Appliance Coating............. EPA-450/2-77-034-- X ............... X
Control of Volatile
Organic Emissions from
Existing Stationary
Sources, Volume V:
Surface Coating of
Large Appliances.
Large Appliance Coating............. EPA-453/R-07-004-- ............... X X
Control Techniques for
Large Appliance
Coatings.
Magnet Wire Coating................. EPA-450/2-77-033-- X ............... X
Control of Volatile
Organic Emissions from
Existing Stationary
Sources--Volume IV:
Surface Coating of
Insulation of Magnet
Wire.
Metal Can Coating; Metal Coil EPA-450/2-77-008-- X ............... X
Coating. Control of Volatile
Organic Emissions from
Existing Stationary
Sources--Volume II:
Surface Coating of
Cans, Coils, Paper,
Fabrics, Automobiles,
and Light-Duty Trucks.
Metal Furniture..................... EPA-450/2-77-032-- X ............... X
Control of Volatile
Organic Emissions from
Existing Stationary
Sources--Volume III:
Surface Coating of
Metal Furniture.
Metal Furniture Coatings............ EPA-453/R-07-005-- ............... X X
Control Techniques
Guidelines for Metal
Furniture Coatings.
Metal Parts and Products............ EPA-450/2-78-015-- X ............... X
Control of Volatile
Organic Emissions from
Existing Stationary
Sources--Volume VI:
Surface Coating of
Miscellaneous Parts
and Products.
Miscellaneous Industrial Adhesives.. EPA-453/R-08-005-- X X X
Control Techniques
Guidelines for
Miscellaneous
Industrial Adhesives.
Miscellaneous Metal and Plastic EPA-453/R-08-003-- ............... X X
Parts Coatings. Control Techniques
Guidelines for
Miscellaneous Metal
and Plastic Parts
Coatings.
Natural Gas/Gasoline................ EPA-450/2-83-007-- X ............... X
Control of VOC
Equipment Leaks from
Natural Gas/Gasoline
Processing Plants.
Offset Lithographic Printing and EPA-453/R-06-002-- ............... X X
Letterpress Printing. Control Techniques
Guidelines for Offset
Lithographic Printing
and Letterpress
Printing.
Paper and Fabric Coating............ EPA-450/2-77-008-- X ............... X
Control of Volatile
Organic Emissions from
Existing Stationary
Sources--Volume II:
Surface Coating of
Cans, Coils, Paper,
Fabrics, Automobiles,
and Light-Duty Trucks.
Paper, Film, and Foil Coatings...... EPA-453/R-07-003-- ............... X X
Control Techniques
Guidelines for Paper,
Film, and Foil
Coatings.
Petroleum Liquid Storage Tanks...... EPA-450/2-77-036-- X ............... X
Control of VOC
Emissions from Storage
of Petroleum Liquids
in Fixed Roof Tanks.
Petroleum Liquid Storage Tanks...... EPA-450/2-78-047-- X ............... X
Control of VOC
Emissions from
Petroleum Liquid
Storage in External
Floating Roof Tanks.
Pharmaceutical Products............. EPA-450/2-78-029-- X ............... X
Control of Volatile
Organic Emissions from
Manufacture of
Synthesized
Pharmaceutical
Products.
Resin Manufacturing................. EPA-450/3-83-008-- X ............... X
Control of VOC
Emissions from
Manufacture of High-
Density Polyethylene,
Polypropylene, and
Polystyrene Resins.
Resin Manufacturing................. EPA-450/3-83-006-- X ............... X
Control of VOC
Fugitive Emissions
from Synthetic Organic
Chemical Polymer and
Resin Manufacturing
Equipment.
Refineries.......................... EPA-450/2-77-025-- X ............... X
Control of Refinery
Vacuum Producing
Systems, Wastewater
Separators, and
Process Unit
Turnarounds.
Refineries.......................... EPA-450/2-78-036-- X ............... X
Control of VOC Leaks
from Petroleum
Refinery Equipment.
Rubber Tire Manufacturing........... EPA-450/2-78-030-- X ............... X
Control of Volatile
Organic Emissions from
Manufacture of
Pneumatic Rubber Tires.
Ship Coatings....................... 61 FR 44050 X ............... X
Shipbuilding and Ship
Repair Operations
(Surface Coating).
Ship Coatings....................... EPA-453/R-94-032-- ............... ............... X
Alternative Control
Technology Document--
Surface Coating
Operations at
Shipbuilding and Ship
Repair Operations
(Surface Coating).
Solvent Cleaning Degreasers......... EPA-450/2-77-022-- X ............... X
Control of Volatile
Organic Emissions from
Solvent Metal Cleaning.
Synthetic Organic Chemical EPA-450/3-84-015-- X ............... X
Manufacturing. Control of VOC
Emissions from Air
Oxidation Processes in
Synthetic Organic
Chemical Manufacturing
Industry.
Synthetic Organic Chemical EPA-450/4-91-031-- X ............... X
Manufacturing. Control of VOC
Emissions from Reactor
Processes and
Distillation
Operations in
Synthetic Organic
Chemical Manufacturing
Industry.
Wood Coating Factory Surface of Flat EPA-450/2-78-032-- X ............... X
Wood Paneling. Control of Volatile
Organic Emissions from
Existing Stationary
Sources--Volume VII:
Factory Surface of
Flat Wood Paneling.
Wood Furniture Coating.............. EPA-453/R-96-007-- X ............... X
Control of VOC
Emissions from Wood
Furniture
Manufacturing
Operations.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
(ii) A negative declaration for the Control Techniques Guidelines
for the Oil and Natural Gas Industry, EPA 453/B-16-001, was submitted
on December 7, 2018, as an attachment to a letter dated December 2,
2018, and adopted on August 6, 2018, titled: ``Reasonably Available
Control Technology (RACT) State Implementation Plan (SIP) Revision for
the South Sutter County Portion of the Sacramento Metropolitan
Nonattainment Area for 8-Hour ozone--Negative Declaration for Control
Techniques Guidelines for the Oil and Natural Gas Industry.''
* * * * *
[FR Doc. 2020-17181 Filed 9-11-20; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P
