81 FR 53280 - Revisions to the California State Implementation Plan, Sacramento Metropolitan Air Quality Management District
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY Federal Register Volume 81, Issue 156 (August 12, 2016)
Federal Register Volume 81, Issue 156 (August 12, 2016)
| Page Range | 53280-53284 | |
| FR Document | 2016-18900 |
[Federal Register Volume 81, Number 156 (Friday, August 12, 2016)] [Rules and Regulations] [Pages 53280-53284] From the Federal Register Online [www.thefederalregister.org] [FR Doc No: 2016-18900] ======================================================================= ----------------------------------------------------------------------- ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY 40 CFR Part 52 [EPA-R09-OAR-2012-0959; FRL-9948-11-Region 9] Revisions to the California State Implementation Plan, Sacramento Metropolitan Air Quality Management District AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). [[Page 53281]] ACTION: Final rule. ----------------------------------------------------------------------- SUMMARY: The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is finalizing a partial approval and partial disapproval of revisions to the Sacramento Metropolitan Air Quality Management District (SMAQMD or District) portion of the California State Implementation Plan (SIP). This action was proposed in the Federal Register on January 15, 2016 and concerns the District's demonstration regarding Reasonably Available Control Technology (RACT) requirements for the 1997 8-hour ozone National Ambient Air Quality Standard (NAAQS). Under authority of the Clean Air Act (CAA or the Act), this action directs California to correct RACT deficiencies in the SMAQMD portion of the California SIP. DATES: This rule is effective on September 30, 2016. ADDRESSES: The EPA has established docket number \1\ EPA-R09-OAR-2012- 0959 for this action. Generally, documents in the docket for this action are available electronically at www.regulations.gov or in hard copy at EPA Region IX, 75 Hawthorne Street, San Francisco, California 94015-3901. While all documents in the docket are listed at www.regulations.gov, some information may be publicly available only at the hard copy location (e.g., copyrighted material, large maps), and some may not be publicly available in either location (e.g., Confidential Business Information (CBI)). To inspect the hard copy materials, please schedule an appointment during normal business hours with the contact listed in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section. --------------------------------------------------------------------------- \1\ Our proposal indicated that the docket number for this action was EPA-R09-2012-959. This final action corrects the docket number to ``0959'' to conform to numbering convention. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: James Shears, EPA Region IX, (213) --------------------------------------------------------------------------- 244-1810, shears.james@epa.gov. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Throughout this document, ``we,'' ``us'' and ``our'' refer to the EPA. Table of Contents I. Proposed Action II. Public Comments and EPA Responses III. Final Action and CAA Consequences IV. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews I. Proposed Action On January 15, 2016 (81 FR 2136), the EPA proposed to partially approve and partially disapprove the following documents that were submitted for incorporation into the California SIP: ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Local agency Document Adopted Submitted ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- SMAQMD................................. Reasonably Available Control Technology 10/26/06 7/11/07 (RACT) as Applicable to the 8-hour Ozone Standard, dated October 26, 2006 (``2006 RACT SIP''). SMAQMD................................. Reasonably Available Control Technology 10/23/08 1/21/09 (RACT) Update as Applicable to the 8- Hour Ozone Standard, dated October 23, 2008 (``Updated RACT SIP''). ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- We proposed to approve the 2006 RACT SIP and Updated RACT SIP with the exception of Rule 455, Pharmaceutical Manufacturing, and the municipal waste landfill category as satisfying the RACT requirements of CAA section 182(b)(2) and (f). Also under CAA section 110(k)(3), we proposed to disapprove those elements of the 2006 RACT SIP and Updated RACT SIP that pertain to Rule 455 and the municipal waste landfill category because we found that these elements did not meet all of the applicable CAA requirements. In particular, we found that Rule 455, Pharmaceuticals Manufacturing, (amended 11/29/83 and 9/5/96) lacks test methods, recordkeeping, and monitoring requirements that are necessary to support enforcement of the rule. See CAA section 110(a). We also found that the California SIP did not contain any provisions to implement RACT for volatile organic compounds (VOCs) at the Kiefer landfill, which is a major source of VOCs located within the Sacramento Metro area. SMAQMD's submittal also included a number of negative declarations. CAA Sections 182(b)(2) and (f) require that SIPs for ozone nonattainment areas classified as moderate or above implement RACT for any source covered by a Control Techniques Guidelines (CTG) document and any major stationary source of VOCs or nitrogen oxides (NOX ). If an ozone nonattainment area does not have any stationary sources covered by a particular CTG, then the area may submit a negative declaration certifying that there are no such sources in the relevant nonattainment area in lieu of adopting RACT requirements for that category. We proposed approval of SMAQMD's negative declarations because we determined that they complied with relevant CAA requirements. Our proposed action contains more information on the basis for this rulemaking and on our evaluation of the 2006 RACT SIP and Updated RACT SIP. II. Public Comments and EPA Responses The EPA's proposed action provided a 30-day public comment period. During this period, we received no comments. III. Final Action and CAA Consequences A. Final Action For the reasons provided in our January 15, 2016 proposed rule, the EPA is partially approving and partially disapproving SMAQMD's 2006 RACT SIP and Updated RACT SIP under CAA section 110(k)(3). In particular, we are approving all elements of the 2006 RACT SIP and Updated RACT SIP, with the exception of elements pertaining to Rule 455, Pharmaceutical Manufacturing, and the municipal waste landfill category, as satisfying the RACT requirements of CAA section 182(b)(2) and (f). We are disapproving those elements of the 2006 RACT SIP and Updated RACT SIP that pertain to Rule 455 and the municipal waste landfill category because we have determined that they do not meet all of the applicable CAA requirements. B. CAA Consequences of Final Partial Disapproval The EPA is committed to working with the District and CARB to resolve the identified RACT deficiencies. We note that SMAQMD will not be required to submit a revised CAA section 182 RACT SIP demonstration for the 1997 8-hour ozone NAAQS if it submits for SIP approval, rules and/or permit provisions that implement RACT for the pharmaceutical manufacturing source category, as well as RACT for VOCs for the Kiefer landfill, and the EPA fully approves them into the SIP. On April 28, 2016, SMAQMD repealed Rule 455 and adopted amendments to Rule 464, Organic Chemical Manufacturing Operations to incorporate the pharmaceutical manufacturing requirements from Rule 455 along with other improvements to implement RACT into Rule 464. SMAQMD plans, [[Page 53282]] in July 2016, to adopt the relevant portions of the Kiefer landfill permit into the SIP to implement RACT. Because we are finalizing a partial disapproval of the 2006 RACT SIP and Updated RACT SIP, the EPA must promulgate a federal implementation plan (FIP) under section 110(c) unless we approve subsequent SIP revisions that correct the rule deficiencies within 24 months of the effective date of this action. In addition, sanctions will be imposed under CAA section 179 and 40 CFR 52.31, unless the EPA approves subsequent SIP revisions that correct the rule deficiencies or issues an interim final determination that submitted revisions correct the deficiencies within 18 months of the effective date of this action. IV. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews Additional information about these statutes and Executive Orders can be found at http://www2.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 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. This action is not subject to Executive Order 13045 because it does not impose additional requirements beyond those imposed by state law. 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 The EPA lacks the discretionary authority to address environmental justice in this rulemaking. K. Congressional Review Act (CRA) This action is subject to the CRA, and the EPA will submit a rule report to each House of the Congress and to the Comptroller General of the United States. This action is not a ``major rule'' as defined by 5 U.S.C. 804(2). L. Petitions for Judicial Review Under CAA section 307(b)(1), petitions for judicial review of this action must be filed in the United States Court of Appeals for the appropriate circuit by October 11, 2016. Filing a petition for reconsideration by the Administrator of this final rule does not affect the finality of this rule for the purposes of judicial review nor does it extend the time within which a petition for judicial review may be filed, and shall not postpone the effectiveness of such rule or action. This action may not be challenged later in proceedings to enforce its requirements (see section 307(b)(2)). List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52 Environmental protection, Air pollution control, Incorporation by reference, Intergovernmental relations, Nitrogen dioxide, Ozone, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements, Volatile organic compounds. Dated: May 19, 2016. Alexis Strauss, Acting Regional Administrator, Region IX. Part 52, Chapter I, Title 40 of the Code of Federal Regulations is amended as follows: PART 52--APPROVAL AND PROMULGATION OF IMPLEMENTATION PLANS 0 1. The authority citation for Part 52 continues to read as follows: Authority: 42 U.S.C. 7401 et seq. Subpart F--California 0 2. Section 52.220 is amended by adding paragraphs (c)(382)(ii)(C) and (c)(475) to read as follows: Sec. 52.220 Identification of plan--in part. * * * * * (c) * * * (382) * * * (ii) * * * (C) Sacramento Metropolitan Air Quality Management District. [[Page 53283]] (1) Reasonably Available Control Technology (RACT) as Applicable to the 8-Hour Ozone Standard, dated October 26, 2006, as adopted October 26, 2006, excluding the RACT determinations for: (i) Pharmaceutical Products Manufacturing Source Category; and (ii) Kiefer Landfill (RACT for volatile organic compounds). * * * * * (475) A new plan for the following AQMD was submitted January 21, 2009 by the Governor's designee. (i) [Reserved] (ii) Additional Material. (A) Sacramento Metropolitan Air Quality Management District. (1) Reasonably Available Control Technology (RACT) Update as Applicable to the 8-Hour Ozone Standard, dated October 23, 2008, adopted October 23, 2008. * * * * * 0 3. Section 52.222 is amended by adding paragraph (a)(2)(iv) to read as follows: Sec. 52.222 Negative declarations. (a) * * * (2) * * * (iv) Negative declarations for Sacramento Metropolitan Air Quality Management District. ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Updated Negative declaration--CTG Submitted 7/11/ submitted 1/21/ CTG Source category reference document 07, adopted 10/ 09, adopted 10/ 26/06 23/08 ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Aerospace Coating......................... EPA-453/R-97-004 and 59 FR 29216 ............... X (6/06/94)--Control of Volatile Organic Compound Emissions from Coating Operations at Aerospace Manufacturing and Rework Operations. Automobile Coating........................ EPA-450/2-77-008--Control of X ............... Volatile Organic Emissions from Existing Stationary Sources, Volume II: Surface Coating of Cans, Coils, Paper, Fabrics, Automobiles, and Light-Duty Trucks. Dry Cleaning (Petroleum Solvent).......... EPA-450/3-82-009--Control of X ............... Volatile Organic Compound Emissions from Large Petroleum Dry Cleaners. Graphic Arts (Rotogravure)................ EPA-450/2-78-033--Control of ............... X Volatile Organic Emissions from Existing Stationary Sources, Volume VIII: Graphic Arts- Rotogravure and Flexography. Large Appliance Coating................... EPA-450/2-77-034--Control of X ............... Volatile Organic Emissions from Existing Stationary Sources, Volume V: Surface Coating of Large Appliances. Large Appliance Coating................... EPA-453/R-07-004--Control ............... X Techniques Guidelines for Large Appliance Coatings. Magnetic Wire Coating..................... EPA-450/2-77-033--Control of X ............... Volatile Organic Emissions from Existing Stationary Sources, Volume IV: Surface Coating for Insulation of Magnetic Wire. Metal Coil Coating........................ EPA-450/2-77-008--Control of X ............... Volatile Organic Emissions from Existing Stationary Sources, Volume II: Surface Coating of Cans, Coils, Paper, Fabrics, Automobiles, and Light-Duty Trucks. Natural Gas/Gasoline Processing........... EPA-450/2-83-007--Control of X ............... Volatile Organic Compound Equipment Leaks from Natural Gas/ Gasoline Processing Plants. Paper and Fabric Coating.................. EPA-450/2-77-008--Control of X ............... Volatile Organic Emissions from Existing Stationary Sources, Volume II: Surface Coating of Cans, Coils, Paper, Fabrics, Automobiles, and Light-Duty Trucks. Resin Manufacturing (High-Density EPA-450/3-83-008--Control of X ............... Polyethylene, Polypropylene, and Volatile Organic Compound Polystyrene). Emissions from Manufacture of High-Density Polyethylene, Polypropylene, and Polystyrene Resins. Refineries................................ EPA-450/2-77-025--Control of X ............... Refinery Vacuum Producing Systems, Wastewater Separators and Process Unit Turnarounds. EPA-450/2-78-036--Control of X ............... Volatile Organic Compound Leaks from Petroleum Refinery Equipment. Rubber Tire Manufacturing................. EPA-450/2-78-030--Control of X ............... Volatile Organic Emissions from Manufacture of Pneumatic Rubber Tires. Ship Coating.............................. 61 FR 44050--Control Techniques X ............... Guidelines for Shipbuilding and Ship Repair Operations (Surface Coating). Wood Coating (Flat Wood Paneling)......... EPA-450/2-78-032--Control of X ............... Volatile Organic Emissions from Existing Stationary Sources, Volume VII: Factory Surface Coating of Flat Wood Paneling. Flat Wood Paneling Coatings............... EPA-453/R06-004--Control ............... X Techniques Guidelines for Flat Wood Paneling Coatings. Paper, Film and Foil...................... EPA-453/R-07-004--Control ............... X Techniques Guidelines for Paper, Film, and Foil Coatings. ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- * * * * * 0 4. Section 52.237 is amended by adding paragraph (b) to read as follows: Sec. 52.237 Part D disapproval. * * * * * (b) The following Reasonably Available Control Technology (RACT) determinations are disapproved because they do not meet the requirements of Part D of the Clean Air Act. (1) Sacramento Air Quality Management District. (i) RACT Determinations for the Pharmaceutical Products Manufacturing Source Category and the Kiefer Landfill (volatile organic compounds only), in [[Page 53284]] the submittal titled ``Reasonably Available Control Technology (RACT) as Applicable to the 8-Hour Ozone Standard,'' dated October 26, 2006, as adopted on October 26, 2006 and submitted on July 11, 2007. (ii) [Reserved] (2) [Reserved] [FR Doc. 2016-18900 Filed 8-11-16; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6560-50-P
![53280 Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 156 / Friday, August 12, 2016 / Rules and Regulations
data in the desired format, reporting and to the extent practicable—the costs disabilities. This priority will promote
burden (time and financial resources) is of cumulative regulations; the efficient and effective use of Federal
minimized, collection instruments are (3) In choosing among alternative funds.
clearly understood, and the Department regulatory approaches, select those Intergovernmental Review: This
can properly assess the impact of approaches that maximize net benefits program is subject to Executive Order
collection requirements on respondents. (including potential economic, 12372 and the regulations in 34 CFR
This final priority contains environmental, public health and safety, part 79. One of the objectives of the
information collection requirements that and other advantages; distributive Executive order is to foster an
are approved by OMB under the impacts; and equity); intergovernmental partnership and
National Interpreter Education program (4) To the extent feasible, specify strengthened federalism. The Executive
1820–0018; this final priority does not performance objectives, rather than the order relies on processes developed by
affect the currently approved data behavior or manner of compliance a State and local governments for
collection. regulated entity must adopt; and coordination and review of proposed
(5) Identify and assess available Federal financial assistance.
Executive Orders 12866 and 13563 alternatives to direct regulation, This document provides early
Regulatory Impact Analysis including economic incentives—such as notification of our specific plans and
user fees or marketable permits—to actions for this program.
Under Executive Order 12866, the encourage the desired behavior, or Accessible Format: Individuals with
Secretary must determine whether this provide information that enables the disabilities can obtain this document in
regulatory action is ‘‘significant’’ and, public to make choices. an accessible format (e.g., braille, large
therefore, subject to the requirements of Executive Order 13563 also requires print, audiotape, or compact disc) on
the Executive order and subject to an agency ‘‘to use the best available request to the program contact person
review by the Office of Management and techniques to quantify anticipated listed under FOR FURTHER INFORMATION
Budget (OMB). Section 3(f) of Executive present and future benefits and costs as CONTACT.
Order 12866 defines a ‘‘significant accurately as possible.’’ The Office of Electronic Access to This Document:
regulatory action’’ as an action likely to Information and Regulatory Affairs of The official version of this document is
result in a rule that may— OMB has emphasized that these the document published in the Federal
(1) Have an annual effect on the techniques may include ‘‘identifying Register. Free Internet access to the
economy of $100 million or more, or changing future compliance costs that official edition of the Federal Register
adversely affect a sector of the economy, might result from technological and the Code of Federal Regulations is
productivity, competition, jobs, the innovation or anticipated behavioral available via the Federal Digital System
environment, public health or safety, or changes.’’ at: www.gpo.gov/fdsys. At this site, you
State, local, or tribal governments or We are issuing this final priority only can view this document, as well as all
communities in a material way (also on a reasoned determination that its other documents of this Department
referred to as an ‘‘economically benefits justify its costs. In choosing published in the Federal Register, in
significant’’ rule); among alternative regulatory text or Portable Document Format
(2) Create serious inconsistency or approaches, we selected those (PDF). To use PDF you must have
otherwise interfere with an action taken approaches that maximize net benefits. Adobe Acrobat Reader, which is
or planned by another agency; Based on the analysis that follows, the available free at the site.
(3) Materially alter the budgetary Department believes that this regulatory You may also access documents of the
impacts of entitlement grants, user fees, action is consistent with the principles Department published in the Federal
or loan programs or the rights and in Executive Order 13563. Register by using the article search
obligations of recipients thereof; or We also have determined that this feature at: www.federalregister.gov.
(4) Raise novel legal or policy issues regulatory action does not unduly Specifically, through the advanced
arising out of legal mandates, the interfere with State, local, and tribal search feature at this site, you can limit
President’s priorities, or the principles governments in the exercise of their your search to documents published by
stated in the Executive order. governmental functions. the Department.
This final regulatory action is not a In accordance with both Executive Dated: August 9, 2016.
significant regulatory action subject to orders, the Department has assessed the Sue Swenson,
review by OMB under section 3(f) of potential costs and benefits, both Acting Assistant Secretary for Special
Executive Order 12866. quantitative and qualitative, of this Education and Rehabilitative Services.
We have also reviewed this final regulatory action. The potential costs [FR Doc. 2016–19273 Filed 8–11–16; 8:45 am]
regulatory action under Executive Order are those resulting from statutory
BILLING CODE 4000–01–P
13563, which supplements and requirements and those we have
explicitly reaffirms the principles, determined as necessary for
structures, and definitions governing administering the Department’s
regulatory review established in ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION
programs and activities.
Executive Order 12866. To the extent Through this priority, training will be AGENCY
permitted by law, Executive Order provided to working interpreters for 40 CFR Part 52
13563 requires that an agency— English-ASL interpreter training in
(1) Propose or adopt regulations only specialty areas. These activities will [EPA–R09–OAR–2012–0959; FRL–9948–11–
upon a reasoned determination that help interpreters to more effectively Region 9]
their benefits justify their costs meet the communication needs of
ehiers on DSK5VPTVN1PROD with RULES
Revisions to the California State
(recognizing that some benefits and individuals who are deaf or hard of
Implementation Plan, Sacramento
costs are difficult to quantify); hearing and individuals who are Deaf-
Metropolitan Air Quality Management
(2) Tailor its regulations to impose the blind. The training ultimately will
District
least burden on society, consistent with improve the quality of VR services and
obtaining regulatory objectives and the competitive integrated employment AGENCY: Environmental Protection
taking into account—among other things outcomes achieved by individuals with Agency (EPA).
VerDate Sep<11>2014 14:21 Aug 11, 2016 Jkt 238001 PO 00000 Frm 00036 Fmt 4700 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\12AUR1.SGM 12AUR1](https://thefederalregister.org/doc/81_FR_53436/page/1.svg)
![Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 156 / Friday, August 12, 2016 / Rules and Regulations 53283
(1) Reasonably Available Control (475) A new plan for the following ■ 3. Section 52.222 is amended by
Technology (RACT) as Applicable to the AQMD was submitted January 21, 2009 adding paragraph (a)(2)(iv) to read as
8-Hour Ozone Standard, dated October by the Governor’s designee. follows:
26, 2006, as adopted October 26, 2006, (i) [Reserved]
excluding the RACT determinations for: (ii) Additional Material. § 52.222 Negative declarations.
(A) Sacramento Metropolitan Air
(i) Pharmaceutical Products (a) * * *
Quality Management District.
Manufacturing Source Category; and (1) Reasonably Available Control (2) * * *
(ii) Kiefer Landfill (RACT for volatile Technology (RACT) Update as (iv) Negative declarations for
organic compounds). Applicable to the 8-Hour Ozone Sacramento Metropolitan Air Quality
Standard, dated October 23, 2008, Management District.
* * * * *
adopted October 23, 2008.
* * * * *
Updated
Submitted submitted
7/11/07,
CTG Source category Negative declaration—CTG reference document 1/21/09,
adopted adopted
10/26/06 10/23/08
Aerospace Coating .......................... EPA–453/R–97–004 and 59 FR 29216 (6/06/94)—Control of Volatile ........................ X
Organic Compound Emissions from Coating Operations at Aerospace
Manufacturing and Rework Operations.
Automobile Coating ......................... EPA–450/2–77–008—Control of Volatile Organic Emissions from Exist- X ........................
ing Stationary Sources, Volume II: Surface Coating of Cans, Coils,
Paper, Fabrics, Automobiles, and Light-Duty Trucks.
Dry Cleaning (Petroleum Solvent) ... EPA–450/3–82–009—Control of Volatile Organic Compound Emissions X ........................
from Large Petroleum Dry Cleaners.
Graphic Arts (Rotogravure) ............. EPA–450/2–78–033—Control of Volatile Organic Emissions from Exist- ........................ X
ing Stationary Sources, Volume VIII: Graphic Arts–Rotogravure and
Flexography.
Large Appliance Coating ................. EPA–450/2–77–034—Control of Volatile Organic Emissions from Exist- X ........................
ing Stationary Sources, Volume V: Surface Coating of Large Appli-
ances.
Large Appliance Coating ................. EPA–453/R–07–004—Control Techniques Guidelines for Large Appli- ........................ X
ance Coatings.
Magnetic Wire Coating .................... EPA–450/2–77–033—Control of Volatile Organic Emissions from Exist- X ........................
ing Stationary Sources, Volume IV: Surface Coating for Insulation of
Magnetic Wire.
Metal Coil Coating ........................... EPA–450/2–77–008—Control of Volatile Organic Emissions from Exist- X ........................
ing Stationary Sources, Volume II: Surface Coating of Cans, Coils,
Paper, Fabrics, Automobiles, and Light-Duty Trucks.
Natural Gas/Gasoline Processing ... EPA–450/2–83–007—Control of Volatile Organic Compound Equipment X ........................
Leaks from Natural Gas/Gasoline Processing Plants.
Paper and Fabric Coating ............... EPA–450/2–77–008—Control of Volatile Organic Emissions from Exist- X ........................
ing Stationary Sources, Volume II: Surface Coating of Cans, Coils,
Paper, Fabrics, Automobiles, and Light-Duty Trucks.
Resin Manufacturing (High-Density EPA–450/3–83–008—Control of Volatile Organic Compound Emissions X ........................
Polyethylene, Polypropylene, and from Manufacture of High-Density Polyethylene, Polypropylene, and
Polystyrene). Polystyrene Resins.
Refineries ......................................... EPA–450/2–77–025—Control of Refinery Vacuum Producing Systems, X ........................
Wastewater Separators and Process Unit Turnarounds.
EPA–450/2–78–036—Control of Volatile Organic Compound Leaks X ........................
from Petroleum Refinery Equipment.
Rubber Tire Manufacturing .............. EPA–450/2–78–030—Control of Volatile Organic Emissions from Manu- X ........................
facture of Pneumatic Rubber Tires.
Ship Coating .................................... 61 FR 44050—Control Techniques Guidelines for Shipbuilding and Ship X ........................
Repair Operations (Surface Coating).
Wood Coating (Flat Wood Paneling) EPA–450/2–78–032—Control of Volatile Organic Emissions from Exist- X ........................
ing Stationary Sources, Volume VII: Factory Surface Coating of Flat
Wood Paneling.
Flat Wood Paneling Coatings .......... EPA–453/R06–004—Control Techniques Guidelines for Flat Wood Pan- ........................ X
eling Coatings.
Paper, Film and Foil ........................ EPA–453/R–07–004—Control Techniques Guidelines for Paper, Film, ........................ X
and Foil Coatings.
* * * * * (b) The following Reasonably (1) Sacramento Air Quality
ehiers on DSK5VPTVN1PROD with RULES
Available Control Technology (RACT) Management District.
■ 4. Section 52.237 is amended by
determinations are disapproved because (i) RACT Determinations for the
adding paragraph (b) to read as follows:
they do not meet the requirements of Pharmaceutical Products Manufacturing
§ 52.237 Part D disapproval. Part D of the Clean Air Act. Source Category and the Kiefer Landfill
* * * * * (volatile organic compounds only), in
VerDate Sep<11>2014 14:21 Aug 11, 2016 Jkt 238001 PO 00000 Frm 00039 Fmt 4700 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\12AUR1.SGM 12AUR1](https://thefederalregister.org/doc/81_FR_53436/page/4.svg)
![53284 Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 156 / Friday, August 12, 2016 / Rules and Regulations
the submittal titled ‘‘Reasonably copy at EPA Region 6, 1445 Ross Texas and other states could no longer
Available Control Technology (RACT) Avenue, Suite 700, Dallas, Texas 75202– rely on the implementation of the Clean
as Applicable to the 8-Hour Ozone 2733. Air Interstate Rule (CAIR) to satisfy
Standard,’’ dated October 26, 2006, as FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Carl emission reduction obligations with
adopted on October 26, 2006 and Young, 214–665–6645, young.carl@ respect to the 2008 ozone NAAQS (81
submitted on July 11, 2007. epa.gov. FR 21290, 21294–5). The EPA is
(ii) [Reserved] finalizing its proposed disapproval in
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
(2) [Reserved] this action.
Throughout this document, ‘‘we,’’ ‘‘us,’’
[FR Doc. 2016–18900 Filed 8–11–16; 8:45 am] We received three comments during
and ‘‘our’’ means the EPA.
BILLING CODE 6560–50–P the comment period on our proposed
I. Background SIP disapproval. The comments were
This rulemaking addresses an submitted by the State of Texas (Texas
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION infrastructure SIP submittal from the Commission on Environmental Quality
AGENCY state of Texas addressing, among other ‘‘TCEQ’’), Luminant (a Texas electricity
things, the requirements of CAA section producer) and a member of the public.
40 CFR Part 52 A synopsis of the comments and our
110(a)(2)(D)(i)(I), also known as the
[EPA–R06–OAR–2012–0985; FRL–9950–50– good neighbor provision (or interstate responses are provided below.
Region 6] transport prongs 1 and 2), with respect II. Response to Comments
to the 2008 ozone NAAQS. The
Approval and Promulgation of Air background for this action is discussed Comment: Comments were received
Quality Implementation Plans; Texas; in detail in our April 11, 2016 proposal from a member of the public that was
Interstate Transport of Air Pollution for (81 FR 21290). In that action we supportive of the EPA’s basis for its
the 2008 Ozone National Ambient Air proposed to disapprove the portion of proposed action, but added that (1) the
Quality Standards the December 13, 2012 Texas SIP public can better understand how we
submittal pertaining to CAA section are using the most current information
AGENCY: Environmental Protection
110(a)(2)(D)(i)(I) which requires that the if we clarify and explain how the
Agency (EPA).
State prohibit any emissions activity projections and modeling discussed in
ACTION: Final rule.
within the state from emitting air the evaluation for our proposal are
SUMMARY: The Environmental Protection pollutants which will significantly informed by recent ozone monitoring
Agency (EPA) is disapproving the contribute to nonattainment (prong 1) or data, and (2) the commenter stated that
portion of a Texas State Implementation interfere with maintenance (prong 2) of the EPA took too long to propose action
Plan (SIP) submittal pertaining to the 2008 ozone NAAQS in other states.1 on the Texas SIP revision, noting that
interstate transport of air pollution In proposing to disapprove the SIP Texas would benefit from earlier review
which will significantly contribute to submittal as to prongs 1 and 2 of the of its analysis by the EPA.
nonattainment or interfere with good neighbor provision, we noted Response: We agree with the
maintenance of the 2008 ozone National several deficiencies in Texas’ submittal: commenter’s conclusion that Texas’s
Ambient Air Quality Standard (NAAQS) (1) Texas limited its discussion of data SIP submittal was inadequate to address
in other states. Disapproval establishes only to areas designated nonattainment the statutory interstate transport
a 2-year deadline for the EPA to in states that are geographically closest requirements with respect to the 2008
promulgate a Federal Implementation to Texas (Arizona, Arkansas, Colorado, ozone NAAQS. With respect to the
Plan (FIP) for Texas to address the Clean Illinois, Indiana, Louisiana, Mississippi, commenter’s first concern, the
Air Act (CAA) interstate transport Missouri, Tennessee, and Wisconsin); projections and modeling released c in
requirements pertaining to significant and (2) Texas did not give the ‘‘interfere the August 4, 2015 NODA and the
contribution to nonattainment and with maintenance’’ clause of CAA proposed CSAPR Update, which we also
interference with maintenance of the section 110(a)(2)(D)(i)(I) independent o recited in the EPA’s proposed action
2008 ozone NAAQS in other states, significance because its analysis did not on the Texas SIP submittal. In our
unless the EPA approves a SIP that attempt to evaluate the potential impact CSAPR Update proposal, we explained
meets these requirements. Disapproval of Texas emissions on areas that are how the CSAPR Update Rule proposed
does not start a mandatory sanctions currently measuring clean data, but that to use recent ozone monitoring data to
clock for Texas. may have issues maintaining that air inform our evaluation of interstate
DATES: This rule is effective on quality.2 Finally, the EPA explained that transport (80 FR 75706, 75724). We
September 12, 2016. proposed to identify as nonattainment
1 In a separate action, we disapproved the portion receptors those monitoring sites that (1)
ADDRESSES: The EPA has established a
of the SIP submittal pertaining to the CAA section measured ozone concentrations that
docket for this action under Docket ID 110(a)(2)(D)(i)(II) requirement to address the exceed the NAAQS based on monitoring
No. EPA–R06–OAR–2012–0985. All interstate transport of air pollution which will
data from years 2012–2014, and (2) are
documents in the docket are listed on interfere with other states’ programs for visibility
projected to exceed the NAAQS in 2017
the http://www.regulations.gov Web protection (81 FR 296, January 5, 2016). We
proposed to approve the other portions of the
site. Although listed in the index, some infrastructure SIP submittal on February 8, 2016 (81 2008 ozone NAAQS. See Notice of Data Availability
information is not publicly available, FR 6483). (NODA), 80 FR 46271, (August 4, 2015) and the
e.g., Confidential Business Information 2 In addition, the EPA cited at proposal certain proposed CSAPR Update, 80 FR 75706 (December
or other information whose disclosure is technical information the agency had released in 3, 2015). We also noted at proposal that the EPA
order to facilitate efforts to address interstate technical information in the NODA and the
restricted by statute. Certain other
ehiers on DSK5VPTVN1PROD with RULES
transport requirements for the 2008 ozone NAAQS, proposed CSAPR Update accounted for the
material, such as copyrighted material, and that this information was used to support the emission reductions resulting from controls listed
is not placed on the Internet and will be proposed Cross-State Air Pollution Rule Update for in the SIP, implemented within the state, and
publicly available only in hard copy. the 2008 ozone NAAQS (CSAPR Update) (81 FR nonetheless showed that Texas will contribute to
21299, 21292). We noted that such information downwind air quality problems. The CSAPR
Publicly available docket materials are contradicts Texas’ conclusions that its SIP Update, however, is outside the scope of this action,
available either electronically through contained adequate provisions to meet the CAA and is irrelevant to the question of whether the
http://www.regulations.gov or in hard interstate transport requirements with respect to the Texas SIP should be disapproved.
VerDate Sep<11>2014 14:21 Aug 11, 2016 Jkt 238001 PO 00000 Frm 00040 Fmt 4700 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\12AUR1.SGM 12AUR1](https://thefederalregister.org/doc/81_FR_53436/page/5.svg)
Document Created: 2018-02-09 11:32:58
Document Modified: 2018-02-09 11:32:58
| Category | Regulatory Information | |
| Collection | Federal Register | |
| sudoc Class | AE 2.7: GS 4.107: AE 2.106: | |
| Publisher | Office of the Federal Register, National Archives and Records Administration | |
| Section | Rules and Regulations | |
| Action | Final rule. | |
| Dates | This rule is effective on September 30, 2016. | |
| Contact | James Shears, EPA Region IX, (213) | |
| FR Citation | 81 FR 53280 | |
| CFR Associated | Environmental Protection; Air Pollution Control; Incorporation by Reference; Intergovernmental Relations; Nitrogen Dioxide; Ozone; Reporting and Recordkeeping Requirements and Volatile Organic Compounds |
2024 Federal Register | Disclaimer | Privacy Policy
USC | CFR | eCFR