Limited Approval, Limited Disapproval of California Air Plan Revision; Yolo-Solano Air Quality Management District, 11480-11482 [2021-03197]

Download as PDF 11480 Federal Register / Vol. 86, No. 36 / Thursday, February 25, 2021 / Proposed Rules that this action is one of a category of actions that do not individually or cumulatively have a significant effect on the human environment. This proposed rule promulgates the operating regulations or procedures for drawbridges. Normally such actions are categorically excluded from further review, under paragraph L49, of Chapter 3, Table 3–1 of the U.S. Coast Guard Environmental Planning Implementation Procedures. Neither a Record of Environmental Consideration nor a Memorandum for the Record are required for this rule. We seek any comments or information that may lead to the discovery of a significant environmental impact from this proposed rule. G. Protest Activities The Coast Guard respects the First Amendment rights of protesters. Protesters are asked to contact the person listed in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section to coordinate protest activities so that your message can be received without jeopardizing the safety or security of people, places or vessels. V. Public Participation and Request for Comments We view public participation as essential to effective rulemaking, and will consider all comments and material received during the comment period. Your comment can help shape the outcome of this rulemaking. If you submit a comment, please include the docket number for this rulemaking, indicate the specific section of this document to which each comment applies, and provide a reason for each suggestion or recommendation. We encourage you to submit comments through the Federal eRulemaking Portal at https:// www.regulations.gov. If your material cannot be submitted using https:// www.regulations.gov, contact the person in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section of this document for alternate instructions. We accept anonymous comments. All comments received will be posted without change to https:// www.regulations.gov and will include any personal information you have provided. For more about privacy and submissions in response to this document, see DHS’s eRulemaking System of Records notice (85 FR 14226, March 11, 2020). Documents mentioned in this NPRM as being available in this docket and all public comments, will be in our online docket at https://www.regulations.gov and can be viewed by following that VerDate Sep<11>2014 16:43 Feb 24, 2021 Jkt 253001 website’s instructions. Additionally, if you go to the online docket and sign up for email alerts, you will be notified when comments are posted or a final rule is published. List of Subjects in 33 CFR Part 117 Bridges. For the reasons discussed in the preamble, the Coast Guard proposes to amend 33 CFR part 117 as follows: PART 117—DRAWBRIDGE OPERATION REGULATIONS 1. The authority citation for part 117 continues to read as follows: ■ Authority: 33 U.S.C. 499; 33 CFR 1.05–1; and Department of Homeland Security Delegation No. 0170.1. 2. Amend § 117.371 by revising paragraphs (a) and (b) to read as follows: ■ § 117.371 Savannah River. (a) The draw of the James P. Houlihan (SR 25) Bridge, mile 21.6 at Port Wentworth, Georgia, shall open if at least a 24 hour advance notice is given. Openings can be arranged by contacting Georgia Department of Transportation Savannah Area Office at 1–912–651– 2144. (b) The draw of the CSX Transportation Railroad Bridge, mile 27.4 near Hardeeville, South Carolina, shall open if at least a 24 hour advance notice is given. Openings can be arranged by contacting CSX Transportation at 1–800–232–0144. * * * * * Dated: February 1, 2021. Eric C. Jones, Rear Admiral, U. S. Coast Guard, Commander, Seventh Coast Guard District. [FR Doc. 2021–03683 Filed 2–24–21; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 9110–04–P ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY 40 CFR Part 52 [EPA–R09–OAR–2018–0601; FRL–10019– 96–Region 9] Limited Approval, Limited Disapproval of California Air Plan Revision; YoloSolano Air Quality Management District Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). ACTION: Proposed rule. Management District (YSAQMD) portion of the California State Implementation Plan (SIP). This revision concerns emissions of volatile organic compounds (VOCs) from solvent cleaning and degreasing operations. We are proposing action on a local rule that regulates these emission sources under the Clean Air Act (CAA or the Act). We are taking comments on this proposal and plan to follow with a final action. DATES: Comments must be received on or before March 29, 2021. ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, identified by Docket ID No. EPA–R09– OAR–2018–0601 at http:// 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 http://www.epa.gov/dockets/ commenting-epa-dockets. If you need assistance in a language other than English or if you are a person with disabilities who needs a reasonable accommodation at no cost to you, please contact the person identified in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Arnold Lazarus, EPA Region IX (415) 972–3024, lazarus.arnold@epa.gov. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Throughout this document, ‘‘we,’’ ‘‘us’’ and ‘‘our’’ refer to the EPA. AGENCY: Table of Contents The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is proposing a limited approval and limited disapproval of a revision to the Yolo-Solano Air Quality 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? SUMMARY: PO 00000 Frm 00008 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\25FEP1.SGM 25FEP1 Federal Register / Vol. 86, No. 36 / Thursday, February 25, 2021 / Proposed Rules B. Does the rule meet the evaluation criteria? C. What is the rule deficiency? D. EPA Recommendations To Further Improve the Rule E. Proposed Action And Public Comment III. Incorporation by Reference IV. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews I. The State’s Submittal A. What rule did the State submit? 11481 adopted by the local air agency and submitted by the California Air Resources Board (CARB). Table 1 lists the rule addressed by this proposal with the date that it was TABLE 1—SUBMITTED RULE Local agency Rule No. YSAQMD ................................ 2.31 On February 9, 2018, the submittal for YSAQMD Rule 2.31 was deemed by operation of law to meet the completeness criteria in 40 CFR part 51 Appendix V, which must be met before formal EPA review. B. Are there other versions of this rule? There is a previous version of Rule 2.31 in the SIP, revised on May 8, 2013, submitted to the EPA by CARB on February 10, 2014, and approved into the SIP on April 28, 2015 (80 FR 23449). There have been no other versions submitted since the SIP-approved version. C. What is the purpose of the submitted rule? VOCs 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 emissions of VOCs. The purpose of Rule 2.31 is to limit the emissions of VOCs from solvent cleaning operations and solvent degreasing operations, and from the storage and disposal of materials used for such operations. The EPA’s technical support document (TSD) has more information about this rule. 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). Generally, SIP rules must require Reasonably Available Control Technology (RACT) for each category of sources covered by a Control Techniques Guidelines (CTG) document as well as each major source of VOCs in ozone nonattainment areas classified as VerDate Sep<11>2014 16:43 Feb 24, 2021 Jkt 253001 Rule title Revised Solvent Cleaning and Degreasing ......................................... Moderate or above (see CAA section 182(b)(2)). The YSAQMD regulates an ozone nonattainment area classified as Severe nonattainment for the 2008 and 1997 8-hour ozone National Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS); 1 and Moderate nonattainment for the 2015 8hour ozone NAAQS.2 Therefore, this rule must implement RACT. Guidance and policy documents that we use to evaluate enforceability, revision/relaxation and rule stringency requirements for the applicable criteria pollutants include the following: 1. ‘‘State Implementation Plans; General Preamble for the Implementation of Title I of the Clean Air Act Amendments of 1990,’’ 57 FR 13498 (April 16, 1992); 57 FR 18070 (April 28, 1992). 2. ‘‘Issues Relating to VOC Regulation Cutpoints, Deficiencies, and Deviations,’’ EPA, May 25, 1988 (the Bluebook, revised January 11, 1990). 3. ‘‘Guidance Document for Correcting Common VOC & Other Rule Deficiencies,’’ EPA Region 9, August 21, 2001 (the Little Bluebook). 4. ‘‘Control of Volatile Organic Emissions from Solvent Metal Cleaning,’’ EPA–450/2– 77–022, November 1977. 5. ‘‘Control Technique Guidelines for Industrial Cleaning Solvents’’ EPA–453/R– 06–001, September 2006. 6. ‘‘Control of Volatile Organic Compound Emissions from Coating Operations at Aerospace manufacturing and Rework Operations’’ EPA–453/R–97–004, December 1997. 7. ‘‘Control Technique Guidelines for Flexible Package Printing’’ EPA 453/R–06– 003, September 2006. B. Does the rule meet the evaluation criteria? Rule 2.31 improves the SIP by establishing one more stringent emission limit and by clarifying monitoring, recording and recordkeeping provisions. The rule is largely consistent with CAA requirements and with relevant guidance regarding enforceability and SIP revisions. The rule provision that does not meet the evaluation criteria is 1 (40 CFR 81.305). 2 Id. PO 00000 Frm 00009 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 04/12/2017 Submitted 08/09/2017 summarized below and discussed further in the TSD. C. What is the rule deficiency? The following provision does not satisfy the requirements of section 110 and part D of title I of the Act and prevents full approval of the SIP revision. Section 110.6 exempts from the requirements of Rule 2.31 ‘‘[a]ny solvent degreasing operations that are subject to the NESHAP requirements of 40 CFR part 63 Subpart T- National Emission Standards for Halogenated Solvent Cleaning.’’ CAA Section 182(b)(2) (‘‘Reasonably available control technology’’) states that ‘‘[t]he State shall submit a revision to the applicable implementation plan to include provisions to require the implementation of reasonably available control technology . . . .’’ Historically, some states and districts believed that they could rely on NESHAP requirements to satisfy RACT SIP requirements, especially where a district had been delegated authority to enforce the NESHAP rule. However, delegation of authority to a district or state to enforce a NESHAP rule does not put that rule or its emission limitations into the SIP. Thus, this exemption under section 110.6 of YSAQMD rule 2.31 does not meet CAA section 182(b)(2) because the RACT requirements for sources subject to the NESHAP requirements of 40 CFR Subpart T are not included in the SIP. D. EPA Recommendations To Further Improve the Rule None, except to correct the deficiency regarding the NESHAP exemption. E. Proposed Action and Public Comment As authorized in sections 110(k)(3) and 301(a) of the Act, the EPA is proposing a limited approval and limited disapproval of the submitted rule. We will accept comments from the public on this proposal until March 29, 2021. If finalized, the action will incorporate the submitted rule into the SIP, including the provision identified E:\FR\FM\25FEP1.SGM 25FEP1 11482 Federal Register / Vol. 86, No. 36 / Thursday, February 25, 2021 / Proposed Rules as deficient. This approval is limited because the EPA is simultaneously proposing a limited disapproval of the rule under section 110(k)(3). In addition, a final limited disapproval would trigger sanctions under CAA section 179 and 40 CFR 52.31 unless the EPA approves subsequent SIP revisions that correct the rule deficiencies within 18 months of the effective date of the final action. Note that the submitted rule has been adopted by the YSAQMD, and the EPA’s final limited disapproval would not prevent the local agency from enforcing it. The limited disapproval also would not prevent any portion of the rule from being incorporated by reference into the federally enforceable SIP as discussed in a July 9, 1992 EPA memo found at: https://www.epa.gov/sites/production/ files/2015-07/documents/procsip.pdf. III. Incorporation by Reference In this rule, the EPA is proposing to include in a final EPA rule regulatory text that includes incorporation by reference. In accordance with requirements of 1 CFR 51.5, the EPA is proposing to incorporate by reference the YSAQMD rules described in Table 1 of this preamble. The EPA has made, and will continue to make, these materials available through www.regulations.gov and at the EPA Region IX Office (please contact the person identified in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section of this preamble for more information). IV. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews Additional information about these statutes and Executive Orders can be found at http://www.epa.gov/lawsregulations/laws-and-executive-orders. A. Executive Order 12866: Regulatory Planning and Review and Executive Order 13563: Improving Regulation and Regulatory Review This action is not a significant regulatory action and was therefore not submitted to the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) for review. B. Executive Order 13771: Reducing Regulations and Controlling Regulatory Costs This action is not expected to be an Executive Order 13771 regulatory action because this action is not significant under Executive Order 12866. C. Paperwork Reduction Act (PRA) This action does not impose an information collection burden under the PRA because this action does not VerDate Sep<11>2014 16:43 Feb 24, 2021 Jkt 253001 impose additional requirements beyond those imposed by state law. D. Regulatory Flexibility Act (RFA) I certify that this action will not have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities under the RFA. This action will not impose any requirements on small entities beyond those imposed by state law. E. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act (UMRA) This action does not contain any unfunded mandate as described in UMRA, 2 U.S.C. 1531–1538, and does not significantly or uniquely affect small governments. This action does not impose additional requirements beyond those imposed by state law. Accordingly, no additional costs to state, local, or tribal governments, or to the private sector, will result from this action. F. Executive Order 13132: Federalism This action does not have federalism implications. It will not have substantial direct effects on the states, on the relationship between the national government and the states, or on the distribution of power and responsibilities among the various levels of government. G. Executive Order 13175: Coordination With Indian Tribal Governments This action does not have tribal implications, as specified in Executive Order 13175, because 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, and will not impose substantial direct costs on tribal governments or preempt tribal law. Thus, Executive Order 13175 does not apply to this action. I. Executive Order 13211: Actions That Significantly Affect Energy Supply, Distribution, or Use This action is not subject to Executive Order 13211, because it is not a significant regulatory action under Executive Order 12866. J. National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act (NTTAA) Section 12(d) of the NTTAA directs the EPA to use voluntary consensus standards in its regulatory activities unless to do so would be inconsistent with applicable law or otherwise impractical. The EPA believes that this action is not subject to the requirements of section 12(d) of the NTTAA because application of those requirements would be inconsistent with the CAA. K. Executive Order 12898: Federal Actions To Address Environmental Justice in Minority Populations and Low-Income Population The EPA lacks the discretionary authority to address environmental justice in this rulemaking. List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52 Environmental protection, Air pollution control, Incorporation by reference, Intergovernmental relations, Ozone, Particulate matter, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements, Volatile organic compounds. Authority: 42 U.S.C. 7401 et seq. Dated: February 9, 2021. Deborah Jordan, Acting Regional Administrator, Region IX. [FR Doc. 2021–03197 Filed 2–24–21; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6560–50–P ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY 40 CFR Part 52 [EPA–R09–OAR–2021–0014; FRL–10020– 56–Region 9] H. Executive Order 13045: Protection of Children From Environmental Health Risks and Safety Risks Air Plan Approval; California; San Joaquin Valley Unified Air Pollution Control District The EPA interprets Executive Order 13045 as applying only to those regulatory actions that concern environmental health or safety risks that the EPA has reason to believe may disproportionately affect children, per the definition of ‘‘covered regulatory action’’ in section 2–202 of the Executive Order. This action is not subject to Executive Order 13045 because it does not impose additional requirements beyond those imposed by state law. AGENCY: PO 00000 Frm 00010 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). ACTION: Proposed rule. The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is proposing to approve a revision to the San Joaquin Valley Unified Air Pollution Control District (SJVUAPCD or ‘‘the District’’) portion of the California State Implementation Plan (SIP). This revision concerns emissions of oxides of nitrogen (NOX) and particulate matter (PM) from SUMMARY: E:\FR\FM\25FEP1.SGM 25FEP1

Agencies

[Federal Register Volume 86, Number 36 (Thursday, February 25, 2021)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 11480-11482]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2021-03197]


=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

40 CFR Part 52

[EPA-R09-OAR-2018-0601; FRL-10019-96-Region 9]


Limited Approval, Limited Disapproval of California Air Plan 
Revision; Yolo-Solano Air Quality Management District

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Proposed rule.

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

SUMMARY: The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is proposing a 
limited approval and limited disapproval of a revision to the Yolo-
Solano Air Quality Management District (YSAQMD) portion of the 
California State Implementation Plan (SIP). This revision concerns 
emissions of volatile organic compounds (VOCs) from solvent cleaning 
and degreasing operations. We are proposing action on a local rule that 
regulates these emission sources under the Clean Air Act (CAA or the 
Act). We are taking comments on this proposal and plan to follow with a 
final action.

DATES: Comments must be received on or before March 29, 2021.

ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, identified by Docket ID No. EPA-R09-
OAR-2018-0601 at http://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 http://www.epa.gov/dockets/commenting-epa-dockets. If you need assistance in a 
language other than English or if you are a person with disabilities 
who needs a reasonable accommodation at no cost to you, please contact 
the person identified in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Arnold Lazarus, EPA Region IX (415) 
972-3024, [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?

[[Page 11481]]

    B. Does the rule meet the evaluation criteria?
    C. What is the rule deficiency?
    D. EPA Recommendations To Further Improve the Rule
    E. Proposed Action And Public Comment
III. Incorporation by Reference
IV. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews

I. The State's Submittal

A. What rule did the State submit?

    Table 1 lists the rule addressed by this proposal with the date 
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 No.              Rule title              Revised        Submitted
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
YSAQMD.............................            2.31  Solvent Cleaning and             04/12/2017      08/09/2017
                                                      Degreasing.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    On February 9, 2018, the submittal for YSAQMD Rule 2.31 was deemed 
by operation of law to meet the completeness criteria in 40 CFR part 51 
Appendix V, which must be met before formal EPA review.

B. Are there other versions of this rule?

    There is a previous version of Rule 2.31 in the SIP, revised on May 
8, 2013, submitted to the EPA by CARB on February 10, 2014, and 
approved into the SIP on April 28, 2015 (80 FR 23449). There have been 
no other versions submitted since the SIP-approved version.

C. What is the purpose of the submitted rule?

    VOCs 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 emissions of VOCs. The purpose of Rule 2.31 is to limit the 
emissions of VOCs from solvent cleaning operations and solvent 
degreasing operations, and from the storage and disposal of materials 
used for such operations. The EPA's technical support document (TSD) 
has more information about this rule.

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).
    Generally, SIP rules must require Reasonably Available Control 
Technology (RACT) for each category of sources covered by a Control 
Techniques Guidelines (CTG) document as well as each major source of 
VOCs in ozone nonattainment areas classified as Moderate or above (see 
CAA section 182(b)(2)). The YSAQMD regulates an ozone nonattainment 
area classified as Severe nonattainment for the 2008 and 1997 8-hour 
ozone National Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS); \1\ and Moderate 
nonattainment for the 2015 8-hour ozone NAAQS.\2\ Therefore, this rule 
must implement RACT.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ (40 CFR 81.305).
    \2\ Id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Guidance and policy documents that we use to evaluate 
enforceability, revision/relaxation and rule stringency requirements 
for the applicable criteria pollutants include the following:

    1. ``State Implementation Plans; General Preamble for the 
Implementation of Title I of the Clean Air Act Amendments of 1990,'' 
57 FR 13498 (April 16, 1992); 57 FR 18070 (April 28, 1992).
    2. ``Issues Relating to VOC Regulation Cutpoints, Deficiencies, 
and Deviations,'' EPA, May 25, 1988 (the Bluebook, revised January 
11, 1990).
    3. ``Guidance Document for Correcting Common VOC & Other Rule 
Deficiencies,'' EPA Region 9, August 21, 2001 (the Little Bluebook).
    4. ``Control of Volatile Organic Emissions from Solvent Metal 
Cleaning,'' EPA-450/2-77-022, November 1977.
    5. ``Control Technique Guidelines for Industrial Cleaning 
Solvents'' EPA-453/R-06-001, September 2006.
    6. ``Control of Volatile Organic Compound Emissions from Coating 
Operations at Aerospace manufacturing and Rework Operations'' EPA-
453/R-97-004, December 1997.
    7. ``Control Technique Guidelines for Flexible Package 
Printing'' EPA 453/R-06-003, September 2006.

B. Does the rule meet the evaluation criteria?

    Rule 2.31 improves the SIP by establishing one more stringent 
emission limit and by clarifying monitoring, recording and 
recordkeeping provisions. The rule is largely consistent with CAA 
requirements and with relevant guidance regarding enforceability and 
SIP revisions. The rule provision that does not meet the evaluation 
criteria is summarized below and discussed further in the TSD.

C. What is the rule deficiency?

    The following provision does not satisfy the requirements of 
section 110 and part D of title I of the Act and prevents full approval 
of the SIP revision. Section 110.6 exempts from the requirements of 
Rule 2.31 ``[a]ny solvent degreasing operations that are subject to the 
NESHAP requirements of 40 CFR part 63 Subpart T- National Emission 
Standards for Halogenated Solvent Cleaning.'' CAA Section 182(b)(2) 
(``Reasonably available control technology'') states that ``[t]he State 
shall submit a revision to the applicable implementation plan to 
include provisions to require the implementation of reasonably 
available control technology . . . .'' Historically, some states and 
districts believed that they could rely on NESHAP requirements to 
satisfy RACT SIP requirements, especially where a district had been 
delegated authority to enforce the NESHAP rule. However, delegation of 
authority to a district or state to enforce a NESHAP rule does not put 
that rule or its emission limitations into the SIP. Thus, this 
exemption under section 110.6 of YSAQMD rule 2.31 does not meet CAA 
section 182(b)(2) because the RACT requirements for sources subject to 
the NESHAP requirements of 40 CFR Subpart T are not included in the 
SIP.

D. EPA Recommendations To Further Improve the Rule

    None, except to correct the deficiency regarding the NESHAP 
exemption.

E. Proposed Action and Public Comment

    As authorized in sections 110(k)(3) and 301(a) of the Act, the EPA 
is proposing a limited approval and limited disapproval of the 
submitted rule. We will accept comments from the public on this 
proposal until March 29, 2021. If finalized, the action will 
incorporate the submitted rule into the SIP, including the provision 
identified

[[Page 11482]]

as deficient. This approval is limited because the EPA is 
simultaneously proposing a limited disapproval of the rule under 
section 110(k)(3).
    In addition, a final limited disapproval would trigger sanctions 
under CAA section 179 and 40 CFR 52.31 unless the EPA approves 
subsequent SIP revisions that correct the rule deficiencies within 18 
months of the effective date of the final action.
    Note that the submitted rule has been adopted by the YSAQMD, and 
the EPA's final limited disapproval would not prevent the local agency 
from enforcing it. The limited disapproval also would not prevent any 
portion of the rule from being incorporated by reference into the 
federally enforceable SIP as discussed in a July 9, 1992 EPA memo found 
at: https://www.epa.gov/sites/production/files/2015-07/documents/procsip.pdf.

III. Incorporation by Reference

    In this rule, the EPA is proposing to include in a final EPA rule 
regulatory text that includes incorporation by reference. In accordance 
with requirements of 1 CFR 51.5, the EPA is proposing to incorporate by 
reference the YSAQMD rules described in Table 1 of this preamble. The 
EPA has made, and will continue to make, these materials available 
through www.regulations.gov and at the EPA Region IX Office (please 
contact the person identified in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT 
section of this preamble for more information).

IV. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews

    Additional information about these statutes and Executive Orders 
can be found at http://www.epa.gov/laws-regulations/laws-and-executive-orders.

A. Executive Order 12866: Regulatory Planning and Review and Executive 
Order 13563: Improving Regulation and Regulatory Review

    This action is not a significant regulatory action and was 
therefore not submitted to the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) 
for review.

B. Executive Order 13771: Reducing Regulations and Controlling 
Regulatory Costs

    This action is not expected to be an Executive Order 13771 
regulatory action because this action is not significant under 
Executive Order 12866.

C. Paperwork Reduction Act (PRA)

    This action does not impose an information collection burden under 
the PRA because this action does not impose additional requirements 
beyond those imposed by state law.

D. Regulatory Flexibility Act (RFA)

    I certify that this action will not have a significant economic 
impact on a substantial number of small entities under the RFA. This 
action will not impose any requirements on small entities beyond those 
imposed by state law.

E. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act (UMRA)

    This action does not contain any unfunded mandate as described in 
UMRA, 2 U.S.C. 1531-1538, and does not significantly or uniquely affect 
small governments. This action does not impose additional requirements 
beyond those imposed by state law. Accordingly, no additional costs to 
state, local, or tribal governments, or to the private sector, will 
result from this action.

F. Executive Order 13132: Federalism

    This action does not have federalism implications. It will not have 
substantial direct effects on the states, on the relationship between 
the national government and the states, or on the distribution of power 
and responsibilities among the various levels of government.

G. Executive Order 13175: Coordination With Indian Tribal Governments

    This action does not have tribal implications, as specified in 
Executive Order 13175, because 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, and will not 
impose substantial direct costs on tribal governments or preempt tribal 
law. Thus, Executive Order 13175 does not apply to this action.

H. Executive Order 13045: Protection of Children From Environmental 
Health Risks and Safety Risks

    The EPA interprets Executive Order 13045 as applying only to those 
regulatory actions that concern environmental health or safety risks 
that the EPA has reason to believe may disproportionately affect 
children, per the definition of ``covered regulatory action'' in 
section 2-202 of the Executive Order. This action is not subject to 
Executive Order 13045 because it does not impose additional 
requirements beyond those imposed by state law.

I. Executive Order 13211: Actions That Significantly Affect Energy 
Supply, Distribution, or Use

    This action is not subject to Executive Order 13211, because it is 
not a significant regulatory action under Executive Order 12866.

J. National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act (NTTAA)

    Section 12(d) of the NTTAA directs the EPA to use voluntary 
consensus standards in its regulatory activities unless to do so would 
be inconsistent with applicable law or otherwise impractical. The EPA 
believes that this action is not subject to the requirements of section 
12(d) of the NTTAA because application of those requirements would be 
inconsistent with the CAA.

K. Executive Order 12898: Federal Actions To Address Environmental 
Justice in Minority Populations and Low-Income Population

    The EPA lacks the discretionary authority to address environmental 
justice in this rulemaking.

List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52

    Environmental protection, Air pollution control, Incorporation by 
reference, Intergovernmental relations, Ozone, Particulate matter, 
Reporting and recordkeeping requirements, Volatile organic compounds.

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

    Dated: February 9, 2021.
Deborah Jordan,
Acting Regional Administrator, Region IX.
[FR Doc. 2021-03197 Filed 2-24-21; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P