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 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. 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 https://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 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. 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 https://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