Limited Approval, Limited Disapproval of California Air Plan Revisions, Mojave Desert Air Quality Management District, 46723-46726 [2023-15443]
Download as PDF
<![CDATA[
Federal Register / Vol. 88, No. 138 / Thursday, July 20, 2023 / Proposed Rules
Subpart B—Guaranty or Insurance of
Loans to Veterans With Electronic
Reporting
1. The authority citation for part 36,
subpart B continues to read as follows:
■
Authority: 38 U.S.C. 501 and 3720.
2. Amend § 36.4301 by:
a. Removing the definition of
‘‘Compromise sale’’;
■ b. Revising the third sentence of
‘‘Liquidation sale’’;
■ c. Revising the definition of
‘‘Repayment plan’’;
■ d. Adding, in alphabetical order, the
definition for ‘‘Short sale’’; and
■ e. Revising the definition of ‘‘Special
forbearance’’.
The revisions and addition read as
follows:
■
■
§ 36.4301
Definitions.
*
*
*
*
*
Liquidation sale. * * * This term also
includes a short sale.
*
*
*
*
*
Repayment plan. This is a
documented agreement by and between
the borrower and the holder to reinstate
a loan that is 61 or more calendar days
delinquent, by requiring the borrower to
pay each month over a fixed period
(minimum of three months duration) the
normal monthly payments plus an
agreed upon portion of the delinquency
each month.
*
*
*
*
*
Short sale. A sale to a third party for
an amount less than is sufficient to
repay the unpaid balance on the loan
where the holder has agreed in advance
to release the lien in exchange for the
proceeds of such sale.
Special forbearance. This is a
documented agreement executed by and
between the holder and the borrower
where the holder agrees to suspend all
payments or accept reduced payments
for one or more months, on a loan 61
or more calendar days delinquent, and
the borrower agrees to pay the total
delinquency at the end of the specified
period or enter into a repayment plan.
*
*
*
*
*
§ 36.4315
[Amended]
3. Amend § 36.4315(a) by removing
‘‘written’’ and adding in its place ‘‘a
documented’’.
lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with PROPOSALS1
■
§ 36.4316
Servicer reporting requirements.
*
*
*
*
*
(c) * * *
(30) Basic claim information—when
the servicer files a claim under
guaranty. The servicer shall report this
event within 365 calendar days of loan
termination for non-VA purchase
claims, and within 60 calendar days of
the approval date for VA purchase
claims.
(31) VA purchase settlement—when
VA purchases a loan and the servicer
reports the tax and insurance
information. The servicer shall report
this event within 60 calendar days of
the VA purchase approval date.
*
*
*
*
*
§ 36.4319
[Amended]
6. Amend § 36.4319 by:
■ a. Removing ‘‘special forbearance
agreements’’ and ‘‘compromise sales’’
and adding their place ‘‘special
forbearances’’ and ‘‘short sales’’,
respectively, in paragraph (a);
■ b. Removing ‘‘Compromise Sale’’ and
adding in its place ‘‘Short Sale’’ in the
table in paragraph (b); and
■ c. Removing ‘‘compromise sale’’ and
adding in its place ‘‘short sale’’ in
paragraph (c)(4).
■
§ 36.4320
[Amended]
7. Amend § 36.4320 by:
a. Removing ‘‘Refunding’’ and adding
in its place ‘‘VA purchase’’ in the
heading;
■ b. Removing ‘‘refund’’ and adding in
its place ‘‘purchase’’ in paragraph (c);
and
■ c. Removing ‘‘2900–0362’’ and adding
in its place ‘‘2900–0021’’ in the
parenthesis at the end of the section.
■
■
[Amended]
8. Amend §§ 36.4322(e)(1), (1)(ii), (2),
and (f)(1)(iii) by removing ‘‘compromise
sale’’ each place it appears and adding
‘‘short sale’’ in its place.
■
[Amended]
16:16 Jul 19, 2023
§ 36.4317
§ 36.4322
4. Amend § 36.4316 by:
a. Removing ‘‘documented’’ in
paragraphs (b)(2), (3), and (4); and
■ b. Removing ‘‘written’’ in paragraph
(b)(6).
■
■
VerDate Sep<11>2014
5. Amend § 36.4317 by:
■ a. Removing ‘‘agreement’’ in
paragraph (c)(18);
■ b. Removing ‘‘Compromise sale’’ and
‘‘compromise sale’’ and adding ‘‘Short
sale’’ and ‘‘short sale’’, respectively, in
paragraph (c)(21); and
■ c. Revising paragraphs (c)(30) and
(31).
The revisions read as follows:
■
PART 36—LOAN GUARANTY
Jkt 259001
[FR Doc. 2023–14478 Filed 7–19–23; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 8320–01–P
PO 00000
Frm 00027
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
46723
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION
AGENCY
40 CFR Part 52
[EPA–R09–OAR–2022–0889; FRL–10441–
01–R9]
Limited Approval, Limited Disapproval
of California Air Plan Revisions,
Mojave Desert Air Quality Management
District
Environmental Protection
Agency (EPA).
ACTION: Proposed rule.
AGENCY:
The Environmental Protection
Agency (EPA) is proposing a limited
approval and limited disapproval of
revisions to the Mojave Desert Air
Quality Management District
(MDAQMD or ‘‘the District’’) portion of
the California State Implementation
Plan (SIP). This revision concerns
particulate matter (PM) emissions from
all sources of air pollution emissions in
the District. 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 August 21, 2023.
ADDRESSES: Submit your comments,
identified by Docket ID No. EPA–R09–
OAR–EPA–R09–OAR–2022–0889 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
SUMMARY:
E:\FR\FM\20JYP1.SGM
20JYP1
46724
Federal Register / Vol. 88, No. 138 / Thursday, July 20, 2023 / Proposed Rules
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:
Christine Vineyard, EPA Region IX, 75
Hawthorne St., San Francisco, CA
94105. By phone: (415) 947–4125 or by
email at vineyard.christine@epa.gov.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Throughout this document, ‘‘we,’’ ‘‘us’’
and ‘‘our’’ refer to the EPA.
Table of Contents
I. The State’s Submittal
A. What rule did the State submit?
B. Are there other versions of this rule?
C. What is the purpose of the submitted
rule revisions?
II. The EPA’s Evaluation and Action
A. How is the EPA evaluating the rule?
B. Does the rule meet the evaluation
criteria?
C. What are the rule deficiencies?
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 #
MDAQMD ...........................................................
On July 8, 2021, the submittal for
MDAQMD Rule 401 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.
lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with PROPOSALS1
B. Are there other versions of this rule?
There are previous versions of Rule
401 in the SIP adopted by the
MDAQMD’s predecessor agencies. The
San Bernardino County portion of
MDAQMD adopted a version of Rule
401, Visible Emissions, on May 7, 1976,
and CARB submitted it to us on June 6,
1977. We approved this version of the
rule on September 8, 1978 (43 FR
40011). The Riverside County (Blythe/
Palo Verde Valley) portion of the
MDAQMD adopted a version of Rule
401, Visible Emissions, on March 2,
1984, and CARB submitted it to us on
July 10, 1984. We approved this version
of the rule on January 29, 1985 (50 FR
3906). The MDAQMD adopted revisions
to the SIP-approved versions on August
26, 2019, and CARB submitted them to
us on January 8, 2021. We consider the
January 8, 2021 submittal to supersede
the earlier submittals. While we can act
on only the most recently submitted
version of the rule, we have reviewed
materials provided with previous
submittals.
C. What is the purpose of the submitted
rule revisions?
Emissions of PM, including PM equal
to or less than 2.5 microns in diameter
(PM2.5) and PM equal to or less than 10
microns in diameter (PM10), contribute
to effects that are harmful to human
health and the environment, including
premature mortality, aggravation of
respiratory and cardiovascular disease,
decreased lung function, visibility
impairment, and damage to vegetation
and ecosystems. Section 110(a) of the
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:16 Jul 19, 2023
Jkt 259001
401
Rule title
Visible Emissions ..............................................
CAA requires states to submit
regulations that control PM emissions.
Rule 401 provides limits for visible
emissions from all sources of air
pollution emissions in the district. The
MDAQMD amended Rule 401 to be
consistent with the applicable California
Health & Safety Code provisions already
enforced. The EPA’s technical support
documents (TSD) has more information
about this rulemaking.
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 implement
reasonably available control measures
(RACM), including reasonably available
control technology (RACT), in Moderate
PM10 nonattainment areas (see CAA
sections 172(c)(1) and 189(a)(1)(C)). The
MDAQMD regulates a PM10
nonattainment area classified as
Moderate for the PM standard (40 CFR
81.305). An evaluation of RACM and
RACT is generally performed in context
of a broader plan.
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
PO 00000
Frm 00028
Amended
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
08/26/19
Submitted
01/08/21
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 IX, August
21, 2001 (the Little Bluebook).
4. ‘‘PM–10 Guideline Document,’’
EPA 452/R–93–008, April 1993.
5. ‘‘Fugitive Dust Background
Document and Technical Information
Document for Best Available Control
Measures,’’ EPA 450/2–92–004,
September 1992.
B. Does the rule meet the evaluation
criteria?
Rule 401 improves the SIP by
establishing equipment-specific visible
emissions limits and by clarifying
applicability and test methods for
compliance verification. The rule is
largely consistent with CAA
requirements and relevant guidance
regarding enforceability and SIP
revisions. Rule provisions which do not
meet the evaluation criteria are
summarized below and discussed
further in the TSD.
C. What are the rule deficiencies?
These provisions do not satisfy the
requirements of section 110 and part D
of title I of the Act and prevent full
approval of the SIP revision:
1. An exemption for visible emissions
resulting from an equipment breakdown
in accordance with District Rule 430,
Breakdown Provisions. This exemption
is inconsistent with long-standing
national policy requiring good
engineering practices to prevent excess
emissions at all times, including startup,
shutdown, and malfunction.
E:\FR\FM\20JYP1.SGM
20JYP1
Federal Register / Vol. 88, No. 138 / Thursday, July 20, 2023 / Proposed Rules
lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with PROPOSALS1
2. An exemption for emissions from
vessels during a breakdown condition,
as long as the discharge is reported in
accordance with District requirements.
Again, this exemption is inconsistent
with long-standing national policy
requiring good engineering practices to
prevent excess emissions at all times,
including startup, shutdown, and
malfunction.
3. An exemption for agricultural
operations necessary for the growing of
crops or raising of fowl or animals. This
is an overly broad agricultural
exemption.
4. An exemption for vessels using
steam boilers during emergency
shutdowns for safety reasons and
operational tests. This exemption is
inconsistent with long-standing national
policy requiring good engineering
practices to prevent excess emissions at
all times, including startup, shutdown,
and malfunction.
5. An exemption for smoke emissions
from tepee burners during the disposal
of forestry and agricultural residue
when the emissions result from the
startup or shutdown of the combustion
process or from the malfunction of
emission control equipment. This
exemption is inconsistent with longstanding national policy requiring good
engineering practices to prevent excess
emissions at all times, including startup,
shutdown, and malfunction.
6. An exemption for smoke emissions
from burners used to produce energy
and fired by forestry and agricultural
residues with supplementary fossil fuels
when the emissions result from the
startup or shutdown of the combustion
process or from the malfunction of
emission control equipment. This
exemption is inconsistent with longstanding national policy requiring good
engineering practices to prevent excess
emissions at all times, including startup,
shutdown, and malfunction.
simultaneously proposing a limited
disapproval of the rule under section
110(k)(3).
If we finalize this disapproval, CAA
section 110(c) would require the EPA to
promulgate a federal implementation
plan within 24 months unless we
approve subsequent SIP revisions that
correct the deficiencies identified in the
final approval.
In addition, final disapproval would
trigger the offset sanction in CAA
section 179(b)(2) 18 months after the
effective date of a final disapproval, and
the highway funding sanction in CAA
section 179(b)(1) six months after the
offset sanction is imposed. A sanction
will not be imposed if the EPA
determines that a subsequent SIP
submission corrects the deficiencies
identified in our final action before the
applicable deadline.
Note that the submitted rule has been
adopted by the MDAQMD, 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.
D. EPA Recommendations to Further
Improve the Rule
The TSD includes recommendations
for the next time the local agency
modifies the rule.
III. Incorporation by Reference
In this rulemaking, 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 Mojave
Desert Air Quality Management District
Rule 401, Visible Emissions, adopted on
August 26, 2019, which regulates
particulate matter from all sources in
the district as discussed in section I. 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).
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 August 21,
2023. If finalized, this action would
incorporate the submitted rule into the
SIP, including those provisions
identified as deficient. This approval is
limited because the EPA is
IV. 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 review state choices,
and approve those choices if they meet
the minimum criteria of the Act.
Accordingly, this proposed action is
proposing a limited approval and
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:16 Jul 19, 2023
Jkt 259001
PO 00000
Frm 00029
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
46725
limited disapproval of state law as
meeting Federal requirements and does
not impose additional requirements
beyond those imposed by state law.
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. 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.
C. 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.
D. 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.
E. 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.
F. 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
E:\FR\FM\20JYP1.SGM
20JYP1
46726
Federal Register / Vol. 88, No. 138 / Thursday, July 20, 2023 / Proposed Rules
governments or preempt tribal law.
Thus, Executive Order 13175 does not
apply to this action.
G. 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. Therefore, this action
is not subject to Executive Order 13045
because it is merely proposing a limited
approval and limited disapproval of
state law as meeting Federal
requirements. Furthermore, the EPA’s
Policy on Children’s Health does not
apply to this action.
H. 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.
lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with PROPOSALS1
I. 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.
J. Executive Order 12898: Federal
Actions To Address Environmental
Justice in Minority Populations and
Low-Income Population
Executive Order 12898 (Federal
Actions to Address Environmental
Justice in Minority Populations and
Low-Income Populations, 59 FR 7629,
Feb. 16, 1994) directs Federal agencies
to identify and address
‘‘disproportionately high and adverse
human health or environmental effects’’
of their actions on minority populations
and low-income populations to the
greatest extent practicable and
permitted by law. EPA defines
environmental justice (EJ) as ‘‘the fair
treatment and meaningful involvement
of all people regardless of race, color,
national origin, or income with respect
to the development, implementation,
and enforcement of environmental laws,
regulations, and policies.’’ EPA further
defines the term fair treatment to mean
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:16 Jul 19, 2023
Jkt 259001
that ‘‘no group of people should bear a
disproportionate burden of
environmental harms and risks,
including those resulting from the
negative environmental consequences of
industrial, governmental, and
commercial operations or programs and
policies.’’
The State did not evaluate
environmental justice considerations as
part of its SIP submittal; the CAA and
applicable implementing regulations
neither prohibit nor require such an
evaluation. EPA did not perform an EJ
analysis and did not consider EJ in this
action. Due to the nature of the action
being taken here, this action is expected
to have a neutral to positive impact on
the air quality of the affected area.
Consideration of EJ is not required as
part of this action, and there is no
information in the record inconsistent
with the stated goal of E.O. 12898 of
achieving environmental justice for
people of color, low-income
populations, and Indigenous peoples.
List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52
Environmental protection, Air
pollution control, Incorporation by
reference, Intergovernmental relations,
Particulate matter, Reporting, and
recordkeeping requirements.
Authority: 42 U.S.C. 7401 et seq.
Dated: July 13, 2023.
Martha Guzman Aceves,
Regional Administrator, Region IX.
[FR Doc. 2023–15443 Filed 7–19–23; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560–50–P
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION
AGENCY
40 CFR Part 721
[EPA–HQ–OPPT–2023–0245; FRL–10985–
03–OCSPP]
RIN 2070–AB27
Significant New Use Rules on Certain
Chemical Substances (23–2.5e);
Extension of the Comment Period
Environmental Protection
Agency (EPA).
ACTION: Proposed rule; extension of the
comment period.
AGENCY:
The Environmental Protection
Agency (EPA) is extending the comment
period for the proposed rule entitled
‘‘Significant New Use Rules on Certain
Chemical Substances (23–2.5e)’’ that
published in the Federal Register on
June 20, 2023, with an established
public comment period that was
scheduled to end on July 20, 2023. In
response to requests for additional time
SUMMARY:
PO 00000
Frm 00030
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
to develop and submit comments on the
proposed rule, EPA is extending the
comment period for an additional 30
days, i.e., from July 20, 2023, to August
19, 2023.
DATES: The comment period for the
proposed rule that published on June
20, 2023, at 88 FR 39804 (FRL–10985–
01–OCSPP), is now extended.
Comments must be received on or
before August 19, 2023.
ADDRESSES: Submit your comments,
identified by docket identification (ID)
number EPA–HQ–OPPT–2023–0245,
through the Federal eRulemaking Portal
at https://www.regulations.gov. Follow
the online instructions for submitting
comments. Do not submit electronically
any information you consider to be
Confidential Business Information (CBI)
or other information whose disclosure is
restricted by statute. Additional
instructions on commenting and visiting
the docket, along with more information
about dockets generally, is available at
https://www.epa.gov/dockets.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
For technical information contact:
William Wysong, New Chemicals
Division (7405M), Office of Pollution
Prevention and Toxics, Environmental
Protection Agency, 1200 Pennsylvania
Ave. NW, Washington, DC 20460–0001;
telephone number: (202) 564–4163;
email address: wysong.william@epa.gov.
For general information contact: The
TSCA-Hotline, ABVI-Goodwill, 422
South Clinton Ave., Rochester, NY
14620; telephone number: (202) 554–
1404; email address: TSCA-Hotline@
epa.gov.
This
document extends the public comment
period established in the Federal
Register of June 20, 2023 (88 FR 39804)
(FRL–10985–01–OCSPP) for 30 days,
from July 20, 2023, to August 19, 2023.
This extension is in response to
requests that EPA received which asked
for additional time to develop and
submit comments on the proposed rule.
After considering several factors, EPA
believes it is appropriate to extend the
comment period for 30 days to give
stakeholders additional time to review
the documents and prepare comments.
As discussed in the Federal Register of
June 20, 2023 (88 FR 39804 (FRL–
10985–01–OCSPP)), EPA has decided
that the intent of TSCA section
5(a)(1)(B) is best served by designating
a use as a significant new use as of the
date of publication of the proposed rule
rather than as of the effective date of the
final rule. If you have questions, consult
the technical person listed under FOR
FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
E:\FR\FM\20JYP1.SGM
20JYP1
]]>Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 88, Number 138 (Thursday, July 20, 2023)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 46723-46726]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2023-15443]
=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
40 CFR Part 52
[EPA-R09-OAR-2022-0889; FRL-10441-01-R9]
Limited Approval, Limited Disapproval of California Air Plan
Revisions, Mojave Desert 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 revisions to the Mojave
Desert Air Quality Management District (MDAQMD or ``the District'')
portion of the California State Implementation Plan (SIP). This
revision concerns particulate matter (PM) emissions from all sources of
air pollution emissions in the District. 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 August 21, 2023.
ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, identified by Docket ID No. EPA-R09-
OAR-EPA-R09-OAR-2022-0889 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
[[Page 46724]]
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: Christine Vineyard, EPA Region IX, 75
Hawthorne St., San Francisco, CA 94105. By phone: (415) 947-4125 or by
email at [email protected].
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Throughout this document, ``we,'' ``us'' and
``our'' refer to the EPA.
Table of Contents
I. The State's Submittal
A. What rule did the State submit?
B. Are there other versions of this rule?
C. What is the purpose of the submitted rule revisions?
II. The EPA's Evaluation and Action
A. How is the EPA evaluating the rule?
B. Does the rule meet the evaluation criteria?
C. What are the rule deficiencies?
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 # Rule title Amended Submitted
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
MDAQMD.................................. 401 Visible Emissions......... 08/26/19 01/08/21
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
On July 8, 2021, the submittal for MDAQMD Rule 401 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 are previous versions of Rule 401 in the SIP adopted by the
MDAQMD's predecessor agencies. The San Bernardino County portion of
MDAQMD adopted a version of Rule 401, Visible Emissions, on May 7,
1976, and CARB submitted it to us on June 6, 1977. We approved this
version of the rule on September 8, 1978 (43 FR 40011). The Riverside
County (Blythe/Palo Verde Valley) portion of the MDAQMD adopted a
version of Rule 401, Visible Emissions, on March 2, 1984, and CARB
submitted it to us on July 10, 1984. We approved this version of the
rule on January 29, 1985 (50 FR 3906). The MDAQMD adopted revisions to
the SIP-approved versions on August 26, 2019, and CARB submitted them
to us on January 8, 2021. We consider the January 8, 2021 submittal to
supersede the earlier submittals. While we can act on only the most
recently submitted version of the rule, we have reviewed materials
provided with previous submittals.
C. What is the purpose of the submitted rule revisions?
Emissions of PM, including PM equal to or less than 2.5 microns in
diameter (PM2.5) and PM equal to or less than 10 microns in
diameter (PM10), contribute to effects that are harmful to
human health and the environment, including premature mortality,
aggravation of respiratory and cardiovascular disease, decreased lung
function, visibility impairment, and damage to vegetation and
ecosystems. Section 110(a) of the CAA requires states to submit
regulations that control PM emissions. Rule 401 provides limits for
visible emissions from all sources of air pollution emissions in the
district. The MDAQMD amended Rule 401 to be consistent with the
applicable California Health & Safety Code provisions already enforced.
The EPA's technical support documents (TSD) has more information about
this rulemaking.
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 implement reasonably available control
measures (RACM), including reasonably available control technology
(RACT), in Moderate PM10 nonattainment areas (see CAA
sections 172(c)(1) and 189(a)(1)(C)). The MDAQMD regulates a
PM10 nonattainment area classified as Moderate for the PM
standard (40 CFR 81.305). An evaluation of RACM and RACT is generally
performed in context of a broader plan.
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 IX, August 21, 2001 (the Little Bluebook).
4. ``PM-10 Guideline Document,'' EPA 452/R-93-008, April 1993.
5. ``Fugitive Dust Background Document and Technical Information
Document for Best Available Control Measures,'' EPA 450/2-92-004,
September 1992.
B. Does the rule meet the evaluation criteria?
Rule 401 improves the SIP by establishing equipment-specific
visible emissions limits and by clarifying applicability and test
methods for compliance verification. The rule is largely consistent
with CAA requirements and relevant guidance regarding enforceability
and SIP revisions. Rule provisions which do not meet the evaluation
criteria are summarized below and discussed further in the TSD.
C. What are the rule deficiencies?
These provisions do not satisfy the requirements of section 110 and
part D of title I of the Act and prevent full approval of the SIP
revision:
1. An exemption for visible emissions resulting from an equipment
breakdown in accordance with District Rule 430, Breakdown Provisions.
This exemption is inconsistent with long-standing national policy
requiring good engineering practices to prevent excess emissions at all
times, including startup, shutdown, and malfunction.
[[Page 46725]]
2. An exemption for emissions from vessels during a breakdown
condition, as long as the discharge is reported in accordance with
District requirements. Again, this exemption is inconsistent with long-
standing national policy requiring good engineering practices to
prevent excess emissions at all times, including startup, shutdown, and
malfunction.
3. An exemption for agricultural operations necessary for the
growing of crops or raising of fowl or animals. This is an overly broad
agricultural exemption.
4. An exemption for vessels using steam boilers during emergency
shutdowns for safety reasons and operational tests. This exemption is
inconsistent with long-standing national policy requiring good
engineering practices to prevent excess emissions at all times,
including startup, shutdown, and malfunction.
5. An exemption for smoke emissions from tepee burners during the
disposal of forestry and agricultural residue when the emissions result
from the startup or shutdown of the combustion process or from the
malfunction of emission control equipment. This exemption is
inconsistent with long-standing national policy requiring good
engineering practices to prevent excess emissions at all times,
including startup, shutdown, and malfunction.
6. An exemption for smoke emissions from burners used to produce
energy and fired by forestry and agricultural residues with
supplementary fossil fuels when the emissions result from the startup
or shutdown of the combustion process or from the malfunction of
emission control equipment. This exemption is inconsistent with long-
standing national policy requiring good engineering practices to
prevent excess emissions at all times, including startup, shutdown, and
malfunction.
D. EPA Recommendations to Further Improve the Rule
The TSD includes recommendations for the next time the local agency
modifies the rule.
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 August 21, 2023. If finalized, this action would
incorporate the submitted rule into the SIP, including those provisions
identified as deficient. This approval is limited because the EPA is
simultaneously proposing a limited disapproval of the rule under
section 110(k)(3).
If we finalize this disapproval, CAA section 110(c) would require
the EPA to promulgate a federal implementation plan within 24 months
unless we approve subsequent SIP revisions that correct the
deficiencies identified in the final approval.
In addition, final disapproval would trigger the offset sanction in
CAA section 179(b)(2) 18 months after the effective date of a final
disapproval, and the highway funding sanction in CAA section 179(b)(1)
six months after the offset sanction is imposed. A sanction will not be
imposed if the EPA determines that a subsequent SIP submission corrects
the deficiencies identified in our final action before the applicable
deadline.
Note that the submitted rule has been adopted by the MDAQMD, 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 rulemaking, 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 Mojave Desert Air Quality Management
District Rule 401, Visible Emissions, adopted on August 26, 2019, which
regulates particulate matter from all sources in the district as
discussed in section I. of this preamble. The EPA has made, and will
continue to make, these materials available through www.regulations.gov
and at the EPA Region IX Office (please contact the person identified
in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section of this preamble for
more information).
IV. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews
Under the 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 review state choices,
and approve those choices if they meet the minimum criteria of the Act.
Accordingly, this proposed action is proposing a limited approval and
limited disapproval of state law as meeting Federal requirements and
does not impose additional requirements beyond those imposed by state
law.
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. 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.
C. 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.
D. 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.
E. 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.
F. 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
[[Page 46726]]
governments or preempt tribal law. Thus, Executive Order 13175 does not
apply to this action.
G. 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. Therefore, this action is not
subject to Executive Order 13045 because it is merely proposing a
limited approval and limited disapproval of state law as meeting
Federal requirements. Furthermore, the EPA's Policy on Children's
Health does not apply to this action.
H. 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.
I. 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.
J. Executive Order 12898: Federal Actions To Address Environmental
Justice in Minority Populations and Low-Income Population
Executive Order 12898 (Federal Actions to Address Environmental
Justice in Minority Populations and Low-Income Populations, 59 FR 7629,
Feb. 16, 1994) directs Federal agencies to identify and address
``disproportionately high and adverse human health or environmental
effects'' of their actions on minority populations and low-income
populations to the greatest extent practicable and permitted by law.
EPA defines environmental justice (EJ) as ``the fair treatment and
meaningful involvement of all people regardless of race, color,
national origin, or income with respect to the development,
implementation, and enforcement of environmental laws, regulations, and
policies.'' EPA further defines the term fair treatment to mean that
``no group of people should bear a disproportionate burden of
environmental harms and risks, including those resulting from the
negative environmental consequences of industrial, governmental, and
commercial operations or programs and policies.''
The State did not evaluate environmental justice considerations as
part of its SIP submittal; the CAA and applicable implementing
regulations neither prohibit nor require such an evaluation. EPA did
not perform an EJ analysis and did not consider EJ in this action. Due
to the nature of the action being taken here, this action is expected
to have a neutral to positive impact on the air quality of the affected
area. Consideration of EJ is not required as part of this action, and
there is no information in the record inconsistent with the stated goal
of E.O. 12898 of achieving environmental justice for people of color,
low-income populations, and Indigenous peoples.
List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52
Environmental protection, Air pollution control, Incorporation by
reference, Intergovernmental relations, Particulate matter, Reporting,
and recordkeeping requirements.
Authority: 42 U.S.C. 7401 et seq.
Dated: July 13, 2023.
Martha Guzman Aceves,
Regional Administrator, Region IX.
[FR Doc. 2023-15443 Filed 7-19-23; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P
