Air Plan Revisions; California; Eastern Kern Air Pollution Control District; Tehama County Air Pollution Control District; San Diego County Air Pollution Control District Emissions Statement Requirements, 57120-57122 [2024-15045]
Download as PDF
<![CDATA[
lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with PROPOSALS1
57120
Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 134 / Friday, July 12, 2024 / Proposed Rules
to, the transactions described in
paragraph (c) of this section as listed
transactions for purposes of § 1.6011–
4(b)(2) effective on [date of publication
of final regulations in the Federal
Register].
(2) Obligations of participants with
respect to prior periods. Taxpayers who
have filed a tax return (including an
amended return) reflecting their
participation in transactions described
in paragraph (a) of this section prior to
[date of publication of final regulations
in the Federal Register], must disclose
the transactions as required by § 1.6011–
4(d) and (e) provided that the period of
limitations for assessment of tax (as
determined under section 6501 of the
Code, including section 6501(c)) for any
taxable year in which the taxpayer
participated has not ended on or before
[date of publication of final regulations
in the Federal Register]. However,
taxpayers who have filed a disclosure
statement regarding their participation
in the transaction with the Office of Tax
Shelter Analysis pursuant to Notice
2015–73, 2015–46 I.R.B. 660, will be
treated as having made the disclosure
with respect to the transaction pursuant
to the final regulations for the taxable
years for which the taxpayer filed
returns before [date of publication of
final regulations in the Federal
Register]. If a taxpayer described in the
preceding sentence participates in the
basket contract listed transaction in a
taxable year for which the taxpayer files
a return on or after [date of publication
of final regulations in the Federal
Register], the taxpayer must file a
disclosure statement with the Office of
Tax Shelter Analysis at the same time
the taxpayer files its return for the first
such taxable year.
(3) Obligations of material advisors
with respect to prior periods. Material
advisors defined in § 301.6111–3(b) of
this chapter who have previously made
a tax statement with respect to a
transaction described in paragraph (a) of
this section have disclosure and list
maintenance obligations as described in
§§ 301.6111–3 and 301.6112–1 of this
chapter, respectively. Notwithstanding
§ 301.6111–3(b)(4)(i) and (iii) of this
chapter, material advisors are required
to disclose only if they have made a tax
statement on or after the date that is six
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:10 Jul 11, 2024
Jkt 262001
years before [date of publication of final
regulations in the Federal Register].
Douglas W. O’Donnell,
Deputy Commissioner.
[FR Doc. 2024–14787 Filed 7–11–24; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4830–01–P
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION
AGENCY
40 CFR Part 52
[EPA–R09–OAR–2023–0625; FRL–11613–
01–R9]
Air Plan Revisions; California; Eastern
Kern Air Pollution Control District;
Tehama County Air Pollution Control
District; San Diego County Air
Pollution Control District Emissions
Statement Requirements
Environmental Protection
Agency (EPA).
ACTION: Proposed rule.
AGENCY:
The Environmental Protection
Agency (EPA) is proposing to approve
revisions, under the Clean Air Act (CAA
or ‘‘Act’’), to portions of the California
State Implementation Plan (SIP)
regarding emissions statements (ES)
requirements for the 2015 ozone
national ambient air quality standards
(NAAQS). In addition, we are proposing
that the following California
nonattainment areas (NAAs) meet the
ES requirements for the 2015 ozone
NAAQS: Tuscan Buttes, Kern County
(Eastern Kern), and San Diego County.
We are taking comments on this
proposal and plan to follow with a final
action.
DATES: Comments must be received on
or before August 12, 2024.
ADDRESSES: Submit your comments,
identified by Docket ID No. EPA–R09–
OAR–2023–0625 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 (e.g., audio or video) must
be accompanied by a written comment.
SUMMARY:
PO 00000
Frm 00026
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
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 a
disability 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: Sina
Schwenk-Mueller, EPA Region IX, 75
Hawthorne St., San Francisco, CA
94105. By phone: (415) 947–4100 or by
email at schwenkmueller.sina@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 rules did the State submit?
B. Are there other versions of these rules?
C. What is the purpose of the submitted
rules or rule revisions?
II. The EPA’s Evaluation and Action
A. How is the EPA evaluating the rules?
B. Do the rules meet the evaluation
criteria?
C. The EPA’s Recommendations To Further
Improve the Rule(s)
D. Proposed Action and Public Comment
III. Incorporation by Reference
IV. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews
I. The State’s Submittal
A. What rules did the State submit?
The California Air Resources Board
submitted rules for the the Eastern Kern
Air Pollution Control District (APCD),
Tehama County APCD, and San Diego
County APCD portions of the California
SIP.
Table 1 lists the rules submitted for
approval into the SIP with the dates that
the rules were adopted or revised by the
local or State air agencies and submitted
by the States to fulfill CAA section
182(a)(3)(B) Emissions Statements
(‘‘section 182(a)(3)(B)’’) requirements.
E:\FR\FM\12JYP1.SGM
12JYP1
Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 134 / Friday, July 12, 2024 / Proposed Rules
57121
TABLE 1—SUBMITTED RULES
Rule No.
Rule title
Eastern Kern APCD .........
Rule 108.2 ........
Tehama County APCD .....
San Diego County APCD
Rule 2:20 ..........
Rule 19.3 ..........
Emission Statement Requirements.
Emission Statement ........
Emission Information .......
Table 1 also list the dates that the EPA
determined that the submittals met the
completeness criteria in 40 Code of
Federal Regulations (CFR) part 51,
appendix V or were deemed by
operation of law to meet the
completeness criteria in 40 CFR part 51,
appendix V (‘‘complete by operation of
law’’ or COL), which must be met before
formal EPA review.
B. Are there other versions of these
rules?
There is no previous version of
Tehama County APCD Rule 2:20 in the
SIP. We approved an earlier version of
Eastern Kern APCD Rule 108.2 into the
SIP on May 26, 2004 (69 FR 29880). If
we take final action to approve the
submitted version of Rule 108.2, it will
replace the existing SIP-approved
version. We approved an earlier version
of San Diego APCD Rule 19.3 into the
SIP on March 9, 2000 (65 FR 12472). If
we take final action to approve the
submitted version of Rule 19.3, it will
replace the existing SIP-approved
version.
lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with PROPOSALS1
Amended/
adopted
Agency
C. What is the purpose of the submitted
rules or rule revisions?
Under the CAA, a SIP must require
stationary sources in ozone NAAs
classified as ‘‘Marginal’’ or above to
report annual emissions of nitrogen
oxides (NOX) and volatile organic
compounds(VOCs). See CAA section
182(a)(3)(B). Whenever the EPA
promulgates a new ozone NAAQS, the
State and/or air district must submit a
new or amended rule to ensure that the
section 182(a)(3)(B) requirements are
met.
Section 182(a)(3)(B)(i) requires States
to submit a SIP revision that requires
that owners or operators of stationary
sources provide the State with a
statement of actual emissions of VOCs
and NOX at least annually. Such
statements must also include a
certification that the information is
accurate to the best knowledge of the
individual certifying the statement.1
1 Section 182(a)(3)(B)(ii) ‘‘The State may waive
the application of clause (i) to any class or category
of stationary sources which emit less than 25 tons
per year of volatile organic compounds or oxides of
nitrogen if the State, in its submissions under
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:10 Jul 11, 2024
Jkt 262001
Submitted
8/4/22
12/7/22
3/1/22
12/9/21
7/5/22
3/9/22
Deemed complete
Complete by Operation of Law (COL)
6/7/23.
COL 1/5/23.
COL 9/9/22.
In lieu of submitting a new or
amended rule, the State and/or air
district may submit for SIP approval a
certification that an existing SIPapproved rule satisfies the emissions
statement requirements of CAA section
182(a)(3)(B) for the relevant ozone
NAAQS. Specifically, the preamble to
the EPA’s ‘‘Implementation of the 2015
National Ambient Air Quality Standards
for Ozone: Nonattainment Area State
Implementation Plan Requirements’’
states that ‘‘[W]here an air agency
determines that an existing regulation is
adequate to meet applicable
nonattainment area planning
requirements of CAA section 182 . . .
for a revised ozone NAAQS, that air
agency’s SIP revision may provide a
written statement certifying that
determination in lieu of submitting new
revised regulations.’’ 2 The EPA’s
technical support document (TSD),
which is in the docket for this
rulemaking, has more information about
these rules.
1. ‘‘Implementation of the 2015
National Ambient Air Quality Standards
for Ozone: Nonattainment Area State
Implementation Plan Requirements,’’ 83
FR 62998 (December 6, 2018).
2. ‘‘(Draft) Guidance on the
Implementation of an Emission
Statement Program,’’ EPA, July 1992.
3. ‘‘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).
4. ‘‘Issues Relating to VOC Regulation
Cutpoints, Deficiencies, and
Deviations,’’ EPA, May 25, 1988 (the
Bluebook, revised January 11, 1990).
5. ‘‘Guidance Document for Correcting
Common VOC & Other Rule
Deficiencies,’’ EPA Region 9, August 21,
2001 (the Little Bluebook).
II. The EPA’s Evaluation and Action
These rules meet CAA requirements
and are consistent with relevant
guidance regarding enforceability, SIP
revisions, and emissions statement
requirements. The TSD has more
information on our evaluation.
A. How is the EPA evaluating the rules?
Rules in the SIP must be enforceable
(see CAA section 110(a)(2)), must not
interfere with applicable requirements
concerning attainment and reasonable
further progress or other CAA
requirements (see CAA section 110(l)),
and must not modify certain SIP control
requirements in nonattainment areas
without ensuring equivalent or greater
emissions reductions (see CAA section
193). Areas classified as Marginal
nonattainment or higher are subject to
the requirements of CAA section
182(a)(3)(B).
Guidance and policy documents that
we used to evaluate enforceability,
revision/relaxation, and rule stringency
requirements for the applicable criteria
pollutants include the following:
subparagraphs (1) or (3)(A), provides an inventory
of emissions from such class or category of sources,
based on the use of the emission factors established
by the Administrator or other methods acceptable
to the Administrator.’’
2 ‘‘Implementation of the 2015 National Ambient
Air Quality Standards for Ozone: Nonattainment
Area State Implementation Plan Requirements,’’ 83
FR 62998 (December 6, 2018).
PO 00000
Frm 00027
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
B. Do the rules meet the evaluation
criteria?
C. The EPA’s Recommendations To
Further Improve the Rule(s)
The TSD includes recommendations
for the next time the local agency
modifies the rules or submit
certifications.
D. Proposed Action and Public
Comment
As authorized in section 110(k)(3) of
the Act, the EPA proposes to fully
approve the submitted rules because
they fulfill all relevant requirements.
We are also proposing that the following
2015 ozone nonattainment areas have
met CAA section 182(a)(3)(B)
requirements: Kern County (Eastern
Kern), CA, Tuscan Buttes, CA, San
Diego, CA. We will accept comments
from the public on this proposal until
August 12, 2024. If we take final action
to approve the submitted rules, our final
action will incorporate these rules into
the federally enforceable SIP.
E:\FR\FM\12JYP1.SGM
12JYP1
57122
Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 134 / Friday, July 12, 2024 / Proposed Rules
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 rules described in table 1, which
require sources to submit emission
statements. The EPA has made, and will
continue to make, these materials
available through https://
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).
lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with PROPOSALS1
IV. Statutory and Executive Order
Reviews
Under the Clean Air Act, the
Administrator is required to approve a
SIP submission that complies with the
provisions of the Act and applicable
Federal regulations. 42 U.S.C. 7410(k);
40 CFR 52.02(a). Thus, in reviewing SIP
submissions, the EPA’s role is to
approve State choices, provided that
they meet the criteria of the Clean Air
Act. Accordingly, this proposed action
merely proposes to approve State law as
meeting Federal requirements and does
not impose additional requirements
beyond those imposed by State law. For
that reason, this proposed action:
• Is not a significant regulatory action
subject to review by the Office of
Management and Budget under
Executive Orders 12866 (58 FR 51735,
October 4, 1993) and 14094 (88 FR
21879, April 11, 2023);
• Does not impose an information
collection burden under the provisions
of the Paperwork Reduction Act (44
U.S.C. 3501 et seq.);
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:10 Jul 11, 2024
Jkt 262001
• Is certified as not having a
significant economic impact on a
substantial number of small entities
under the Regulatory Flexibility Act (5
U.S.C. 601 et seq.);
• Does not contain any unfunded
mandate or significantly or uniquely
affect small governments, as described
in the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act
of 1995 (Pub. L. 104–4);
• Does not have federalism
implications as specified in Executive
Order 13132 (64 FR 43255, August 10,
1999);
• Is not subject to Executive Order
13045 (62 FR 19885, April 23, 1997)
because it proposes to approve a State
program;
• Is not a significant regulatory action
subject to Executive Order 13211 (66 FR
28355, May 22, 2001); and
• Is not subject to requirements of
section 12(d) of the National
Technology Transfer and Advancement
Act of 1995 (15 U.S.C. 272 note) because
application of those requirements would
be inconsistent with the Clean Air Act.
In addition, the SIP is not approved
to apply on any Indian reservation land
or in any other area where the EPA or
an Indian tribe has demonstrated that a
tribe has jurisdiction. In those areas of
Indian country, the rulemaking does not
have Tribal implications and will not
impose substantial direct costs on Tribal
governments or preempt Tribal law as
specified by Executive Order 13175 (65
FR 67249, November 9, 2000).
Executive Order 12898 (Federal
Actions To Address Environmental
Justice in Minority Populations and
Low-Income Populations, 59 FR 7629,
February 16, 1994) directs Federal
agencies to identify and address
‘‘disproportionately high and adverse
PO 00000
Frm 00028
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 9990
human health or environmental effects’’
of their actions on minority populations
and low-income populations to the
greatest extent practicable and
permitted by law. The 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.’’ The 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 EJ
considerations as part of its SIP
submittal; the CAA and applicable
implementing regulations neither
prohibit nor require such an evaluation.
The EPA did not perform an EJ analysis
and did not consider EJ in this action.
List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52
Environmental protection, Air
pollution control, Incorporation by
reference, Intergovernmental relations,
Nitrogen oxides, Ozone, Particulate
matter, Reporting and recordkeeping
requirements, Volatile organic
compounds.
Dated: July 2, 2024.
Martha Guzman Aceves,
Regional Administrator, Region IX.
[FR Doc. 2024–15045 Filed 7–11–24; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560–50–P
E:\FR\FM\12JYP1.SGM
12JYP1
]]>Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 89, Number 134 (Friday, July 12, 2024)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 57120-57122]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2024-15045]
=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
40 CFR Part 52
[EPA-R09-OAR-2023-0625; FRL-11613-01-R9]
Air Plan Revisions; California; Eastern Kern Air Pollution
Control District; Tehama County Air Pollution Control District; San
Diego County Air Pollution Control District Emissions Statement
Requirements
AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).
ACTION: Proposed rule.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is proposing to
approve revisions, under the Clean Air Act (CAA or ``Act''), to
portions of the California State Implementation Plan (SIP) regarding
emissions statements (ES) requirements for the 2015 ozone national
ambient air quality standards (NAAQS). In addition, we are proposing
that the following California nonattainment areas (NAAs) meet the ES
requirements for the 2015 ozone NAAQS: Tuscan Buttes, Kern County
(Eastern Kern), and San Diego County. We are taking comments on this
proposal and plan to follow with a final action.
DATES: Comments must be received on or before August 12, 2024.
ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, identified by Docket ID No. EPA-R09-
OAR-2023-0625 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 (e.g.,
audio or video) 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 a disability
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: Sina Schwenk-Mueller, EPA Region IX,
75 Hawthorne St., San Francisco, CA 94105. By phone: (415) 947-4100 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 rules did the State submit?
B. Are there other versions of these rules?
C. What is the purpose of the submitted rules or rule revisions?
II. The EPA's Evaluation and Action
A. How is the EPA evaluating the rules?
B. Do the rules meet the evaluation criteria?
C. The EPA's Recommendations To Further Improve the Rule(s)
D. Proposed Action and Public Comment
III. Incorporation by Reference
IV. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews
I. The State's Submittal
A. What rules did the State submit?
The California Air Resources Board submitted rules for the the
Eastern Kern Air Pollution Control District (APCD), Tehama County APCD,
and San Diego County APCD portions of the California SIP.
Table 1 lists the rules submitted for approval into the SIP with
the dates that the rules were adopted or revised by the local or State
air agencies and submitted by the States to fulfill CAA section
182(a)(3)(B) Emissions Statements (``section 182(a)(3)(B)'')
requirements.
[[Page 57121]]
Table 1--Submitted Rules
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Amended/
Agency Rule No. Rule title adopted Submitted Deemed complete
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Eastern Kern APCD............ Rule 108.2........... Emission 8/4/22 12/7/22 Complete by
Statement Operation of
Requirements. Law (COL) 6/7/
23.
Tehama County APCD........... Rule 2:20............ Emission 3/1/22 7/5/22 COL 1/5/23.
Statement.
San Diego County APCD........ Rule 19.3............ Emission 12/9/21 3/9/22 COL 9/9/22.
Information.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Table 1 also list the dates that the EPA determined that the
submittals met the completeness criteria in 40 Code of Federal
Regulations (CFR) part 51, appendix V or were deemed by operation of
law to meet the completeness criteria in 40 CFR part 51, appendix V
(``complete by operation of law'' or COL), which must be met before
formal EPA review.
B. Are there other versions of these rules?
There is no previous version of Tehama County APCD Rule 2:20 in the
SIP. We approved an earlier version of Eastern Kern APCD Rule 108.2
into the SIP on May 26, 2004 (69 FR 29880). If we take final action to
approve the submitted version of Rule 108.2, it will replace the
existing SIP-approved version. We approved an earlier version of San
Diego APCD Rule 19.3 into the SIP on March 9, 2000 (65 FR 12472). If we
take final action to approve the submitted version of Rule 19.3, it
will replace the existing SIP-approved version.
C. What is the purpose of the submitted rules or rule revisions?
Under the CAA, a SIP must require stationary sources in ozone NAAs
classified as ``Marginal'' or above to report annual emissions of
nitrogen oxides (NOX) and volatile organic compounds(VOCs).
See CAA section 182(a)(3)(B). Whenever the EPA promulgates a new ozone
NAAQS, the State and/or air district must submit a new or amended rule
to ensure that the section 182(a)(3)(B) requirements are met.
Section 182(a)(3)(B)(i) requires States to submit a SIP revision
that requires that owners or operators of stationary sources provide
the State with a statement of actual emissions of VOCs and
NOX at least annually. Such statements must also include a
certification that the information is accurate to the best knowledge of
the individual certifying the statement.\1\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ Section 182(a)(3)(B)(ii) ``The State may waive the
application of clause (i) to any class or category of stationary
sources which emit less than 25 tons per year of volatile organic
compounds or oxides of nitrogen if the State, in its submissions
under subparagraphs (1) or (3)(A), provides an inventory of
emissions from such class or category of sources, based on the use
of the emission factors established by the Administrator or other
methods acceptable to the Administrator.''
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
In lieu of submitting a new or amended rule, the State and/or air
district may submit for SIP approval a certification that an existing
SIP-approved rule satisfies the emissions statement requirements of CAA
section 182(a)(3)(B) for the relevant ozone NAAQS. Specifically, the
preamble to the EPA's ``Implementation of the 2015 National Ambient Air
Quality Standards for Ozone: Nonattainment Area State Implementation
Plan Requirements'' states that ``[W]here an air agency determines that
an existing regulation is adequate to meet applicable nonattainment
area planning requirements of CAA section 182 . . . for a revised ozone
NAAQS, that air agency's SIP revision may provide a written statement
certifying that determination in lieu of submitting new revised
regulations.'' \2\ The EPA's technical support document (TSD), which is
in the docket for this rulemaking, has more information about these
rules.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\2\ ``Implementation of the 2015 National Ambient Air Quality
Standards for Ozone: Nonattainment Area State Implementation Plan
Requirements,'' 83 FR 62998 (December 6, 2018).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
II. The EPA's Evaluation and Action
A. How is the EPA evaluating the rules?
Rules in the SIP must be enforceable (see CAA section 110(a)(2)),
must not interfere with applicable requirements concerning attainment
and reasonable further progress or other CAA requirements (see CAA
section 110(l)), and must not modify certain SIP control requirements
in nonattainment areas without ensuring equivalent or greater emissions
reductions (see CAA section 193). Areas classified as Marginal
nonattainment or higher are subject to the requirements of CAA section
182(a)(3)(B).
Guidance and policy documents that we used to evaluate
enforceability, revision/relaxation, and rule stringency requirements
for the applicable criteria pollutants include the following:
1. ``Implementation of the 2015 National Ambient Air Quality
Standards for Ozone: Nonattainment Area State Implementation Plan
Requirements,'' 83 FR 62998 (December 6, 2018).
2. ``(Draft) Guidance on the Implementation of an Emission
Statement Program,'' EPA, July 1992.
3. ``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).
4. ``Issues Relating to VOC Regulation Cutpoints, Deficiencies, and
Deviations,'' EPA, May 25, 1988 (the Bluebook, revised January 11,
1990).
5. ``Guidance Document for Correcting Common VOC & Other Rule
Deficiencies,'' EPA Region 9, August 21, 2001 (the Little Bluebook).
B. Do the rules meet the evaluation criteria?
These rules meet CAA requirements and are consistent with relevant
guidance regarding enforceability, SIP revisions, and emissions
statement requirements. The TSD has more information on our evaluation.
C. The EPA's Recommendations To Further Improve the Rule(s)
The TSD includes recommendations for the next time the local agency
modifies the rules or submit certifications.
D. Proposed Action and Public Comment
As authorized in section 110(k)(3) of the Act, the EPA proposes to
fully approve the submitted rules because they fulfill all relevant
requirements. We are also proposing that the following 2015 ozone
nonattainment areas have met CAA section 182(a)(3)(B) requirements:
Kern County (Eastern Kern), CA, Tuscan Buttes, CA, San Diego, CA. We
will accept comments from the public on this proposal until August 12,
2024. If we take final action to approve the submitted rules, our final
action will incorporate these rules into the federally enforceable SIP.
[[Page 57122]]
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 rules described in table 1, which require sources to
submit emission statements. The EPA has made, and will continue to
make, these materials available through https://www.regulations.gov and
at the EPA Region IX Office (please contact the person identified in
the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section of this preamble for more
information).
IV. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews
Under the Clean Air Act, the Administrator is required to approve a
SIP submission that complies with the provisions of the Act and
applicable Federal regulations. 42 U.S.C. 7410(k); 40 CFR 52.02(a).
Thus, in reviewing SIP submissions, the EPA's role is to approve State
choices, provided that they meet the criteria of the Clean Air Act.
Accordingly, this proposed action merely proposes to approve State law
as meeting Federal requirements and does not impose additional
requirements beyond those imposed by State law. For that reason, this
proposed action:
Is not a significant regulatory action subject to review
by the Office of Management and Budget under Executive Orders 12866 (58
FR 51735, October 4, 1993) and 14094 (88 FR 21879, April 11, 2023);
Does not impose an information collection burden under the
provisions of the Paperwork Reduction Act (44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.);
Is certified as not having a significant economic impact
on a substantial number of small entities under the Regulatory
Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 601 et seq.);
Does not contain any unfunded mandate or significantly or
uniquely affect small governments, as described in the Unfunded
Mandates Reform Act of 1995 (Pub. L. 104-4);
Does not have federalism implications as specified in
Executive Order 13132 (64 FR 43255, August 10, 1999);
Is not subject to Executive Order 13045 (62 FR 19885,
April 23, 1997) because it proposes to approve a State program;
Is not a significant regulatory action subject to
Executive Order 13211 (66 FR 28355, May 22, 2001); and
Is not subject to requirements of section 12(d) of the
National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act of 1995 (15 U.S.C. 272
note) because application of those requirements would be inconsistent
with the Clean Air Act.
In addition, the SIP is not approved to apply on any Indian
reservation land or in any other area where the EPA or an Indian tribe
has demonstrated that a tribe has jurisdiction. In those areas of
Indian country, the rulemaking does not have Tribal implications and
will not impose substantial direct costs on Tribal governments or
preempt Tribal law as specified by Executive Order 13175 (65 FR 67249,
November 9, 2000).
Executive Order 12898 (Federal Actions To Address Environmental
Justice in Minority Populations and Low-Income Populations, 59 FR 7629,
February 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.
The 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.'' The 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 EJ considerations as part of its SIP
submittal; the CAA and applicable implementing regulations neither
prohibit nor require such an evaluation. The EPA did not perform an EJ
analysis and did not consider EJ in this action.
List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52
Environmental protection, Air pollution control, Incorporation by
reference, Intergovernmental relations, Nitrogen oxides, Ozone,
Particulate matter, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements, Volatile
organic compounds.
Dated: July 2, 2024.
Martha Guzman Aceves,
Regional Administrator, Region IX.
[FR Doc. 2024-15045 Filed 7-11-24; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P
