82 FR 43202 - Revisions to California State Implementation Plan; Bay Area Air Quality Management District; Emission Reduction Credit Banking
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY Federal Register Volume 82, Issue 177 (September 14, 2017)
Federal Register Volume 82, Issue 177 (September 14, 2017)
| Page Range | 43202-43205 | |
| FR Document | 2017-19451 |
[Federal Register Volume 82, Number 177 (Thursday, September 14, 2017)] [Proposed Rules] [Pages 43202-43205] From the Federal Register Online [www.thefederalregister.org] [FR Doc No: 2017-19451] ======================================================================= ----------------------------------------------------------------------- ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY 40 CFR Part 52 [EPA-R09-OAR-2017-0130; FRL-9967-68-Region 9] Revisions to California State Implementation Plan; Bay Area Air Quality Management District; Emission Reduction Credit Banking AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). ACTION: Proposed rule. ----------------------------------------------------------------------- SUMMARY: The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is proposing action on a revision to the Bay Area Air Quality Management District (BAAQMD or District) portion of the California State Implementation Plan (SIP). We are proposing a conditional approval of one rule. This revision consists of updates to provisions governing the issuance and banking of Emission Reduction Credits for use in the review and permitting of major sources and major modifications under part D of title I of the Clean Air Act (CAA). We are taking comments on this proposal and plan to follow with a final action. DATES: Any comments must arrive by October 16, 2017. ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, identified by Docket ID No. EPA-R09- OAR-2017-0130 at https://www.regulations.gov, or via email to [email protected]. For comments submitted at Regulations.gov, follow the online instructions for submitting comments. Once submitted, comments cannot be removed or edited from Regulations.gov. For either manner of submission, 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://www2.epa.gov/dockets/commenting-epa-dockets. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Laura Yannayon, EPA Region 9, (415) 972-3534, [email protected]. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Throughout this document, the terms ``we,'' ``us,'' and ``our'' refer to EPA. Table of Contents I. The State's Submittal A. What rule did the State submit? B. What is the existing BAAQMD rule governing banking of Emission Reduction Credits in the California SIP? C. What is the purpose of this proposed rule? II. EPA's Evaluation A. How is EPA evaluating the rule? B. Does the rule meet the evaluation criteria? III. Proposed Action and Public Comment IV. Incorporation by Reference V. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews I. The State's Submittal A. What rule did the State submit? On April 22, 2013, the California Air Resources Board (CARB) submitted an amended rule, BAAQMD Regulation 2, Rule 4 (Rule 2-4), for approval as a revision to the BAAQMD portion of the California SIP under the CAA. Regulation 2 contains the District's air quality permitting programs. Rule 2-4 contains requirements applicable to the banking of Emission Reduction Credits (ERCs) for use in the District's air quality permitting programs. Table 1 lists the rule addressed by this proposal with the dates that it was adopted by BAAQMD and submitted to the EPA by CARB, which is the governor's designee for California SIP submittals. [[Page 43203]] Table 1--Submitted Rule ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Adopted/ Regulation & rule number Rule title amended Submitted ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Regulation 2, Rule 4 (Rule 2-4)............ Permits, Emissions Banking......... 12/19/12 4/22/13 ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- On June 26, 2013, Regulation 2, Rule 4 was deemed to meet the completeness criteria in 40 CFR part 51, appendix V, which must be met before formal EPA review. The submittal includes evidence of public notice and adoption of the amended rule. While we can only take action on the most recently submitted version of each regulation (which supersedes earlier submitted versions), we have reviewed materials provided with previous submittals. B. What is the existing BAAQMD rule governing banking of Emission Reduction Credits in the California SIP? The existing SIP-approved banking rule in the Bay Area consists of the rule identified in Table 2. This rule includes requirements for the generation and use of ERCs in nonattainment areas. Consistent with the District's stated intent to have the submitted banking rule replace the existing SIP-approved banking rule in its entirety, EPA's conditional approval of the regulation identified in Table 1 would have the effect of entirely superseding our prior approval of the same rule in the current SIP-approved program. Table 2--Existing SIP Rule ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- BAAQMD EPA approval Regulation & rule No. Rule title adoption date date FR citation ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 2-4............................. Permits, Emissions 6/15/1994 1/26/1999 64 FR 3850. Banking. ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- C. What is the purpose of this proposed rule? The purpose of this proposed rule is to present our evaluation under the CAA and EPA's regulations of the amended banking rule submitted by CARB on April 22, 2013, as identified in Table 1. We provide our reasoning in general terms later in this preamble and provide a more detailed analysis in our Technical Support Document (TSD), which is available in the docket for this proposed rulemaking. II. EPA's Evaluation A. How is EPA evaluating the rule? In general, banking rules allow a permitting authority to evaluate whether certain emission reductions meet the offset integrity criteria found in 40 CFR 51.165(a)(3)(ii)(C)(1)(i) and CAA section 173(c)(1) at the time of ERC issuance, and, if found to meet these criteria, to certify that finding by issuing an ERC Certificate. This process provides the Certificate-holder with a greater degree of certainty as to the validity of their ERCs for future use as offsets. Since the intent of a banking program is to pre-review an emission reduction to determine whether it will meet the offset integrity criteria, we considered these criteria in our evaluation. In addition, we used EPA's Emissions Trading Policy Statement (ETPS),\1\ which provides guidance on emissions trading, including the banking of ERCs for future use. EPA also evaluated the rules for compliance with the CAA requirements for SIP revisions in CAA sections 110(a)(2) and 110(l), and the additional requirements laid out in 40 CFR 51.165(a)(3). --------------------------------------------------------------------------- \1\ 51 FR 43814, December 4, 1986. --------------------------------------------------------------------------- Our TSD, which can be found in the docket for this rule, contains a more detailed evaluation and discussion of the approval criteria. B. Does the rule meet the evaluation criteria? With respect to procedural requirements, CAA sections 110(a)(2) and 110(l) require that revisions to a SIP be adopted by the State after reasonable notice and public hearing. Based on our review of the public process documentation included in the April 22, 2013 submittal, we find that the BAAQMD has provided sufficient evidence of public notice, and an opportunity for comment and a public hearing prior to adoption and submittal of these rules to EPA. With respect to substantive requirements, we have evaluated Rule 2- 4 to ensure it does not conflict with the requirements applicable to offsets in accordance with the CAA and regulatory requirements that apply to nonattainment NSR permit programs under part D of title I of the Act. For the most part, the submitted banking rule satisfies the applicable requirements and will strengthen the SIP by updating the rule and adding requirements to address fine particulate matter (PM2.5 ). However, the submitted banking rule also contains three deficiencies that prevent full approval. Further in this preamble, we discuss generally our evaluation of BAAQMD's submitted rule and describe the identified deficiencies. Our TSD contains a more detailed evaluation and recommendations for program improvements. First, Rule 2-4 is deficient because, while it defines the term ERCs as emission reductions ``that are in excess of the reductions required by applicable regulatory requirements, and that are real, permanent, quantifiable, and enforceable,'' it does not contain any enforceable provisions requiring the Air Pollution Control Officer to determine that the emission reductions under review meet the offset integrity criteria prior to issuing an ERC Certificate. Second, Rule 2-4 is deficient because it incorporates the emission reduction calculation procedures found in Rule 2-2 subsection 605.2. On August 1, 2016, EPA finalized a limited approval and limited disapproval of BAAQMD's Rule 2-2--New Source Review \2\ because it contained deficiencies regarding the calculation of emission reductions. Specifically, EPA disapproved Rule 2-2 subsection 605.2 because it allows existing ``fully-offset'' sources to generate ERCs based on the difference between the post-modification potential to emit (PTE) and the pre-modification PTE. This may result in crediting emission reductions that are not ``actual'' reductions, as required by the Act. See 42 U.S.C. 7503(c)(1). --------------------------------------------------------------------------- \2\ 81 FR 50339, August 1, 2016. --------------------------------------------------------------------------- Third, Rule 2-4 is deficient because Section 2-4-302.3 allows ERC Certificates to be issued that do not [[Page 43204]] adequately ensure the permanency of an emission reduction due to a facility closure. With respect to the substantive requirements of CAA section 110(l), we have determined that our approval of Rule 2-4, as described in more detail in our TSD, represents a strengthening of the rule as compared to the District's current SIP-approved banking rule that we approved on January 26, 1999 (64 FR 3850), and that our conditional approval of the current SIP submittal would not interfere with any applicable requirement concerning attainment and Reasonable Further Progress or any other applicable requirement of the Act. III. Proposed Action and Public Comment Because the rule deficiencies described previously are inappropriate for inclusion in the SIP, EPA cannot grant full approval of this rule under section 110(k)(3) of the Act. However, in a letter dated August 28, 2017, the District committed to adopt and submit specific enforceable measures to address these deficiencies. The District committed to submit these revisions to CARB by October 1, 2018. In addition, in a letter dated August 29, 2017, CARB committed to submit the adopted rule revisions to EPA no later than November 1, 2018. Accordingly, pursuant to section 110(k)(4) of the Act, EPA is proposing a conditional approval of the submitted rule. We are proposing to conditionally approve the submitted rule based on our determination that separate from the deficiencies listed previously, the rule: Ensures that issued ERCs will meet the criteria laid out in 40 CFR 51.165(a)(3)(ii)(C)(1)(i) at the time of ERC issuance; satisfies the requirements of 40 CFR 51.165(a)(3)(i); satisfies the applicable requirements found in the ETPS; and satisfies the requirements of 40 CFR 51.165(a)(3)(ii)(C)(1)(ii), which requires pre-base year shutdown credits to be explicitly added back in to the most recent applicable air quality plans. Moreover, we conclude that if the District submits the changes it has committed to submit, these deficiencies will be cured. In support of this proposed action, we have concluded that our conditional approval of the submitted rule would comply with section 110(l) of the Act because the amended rule, as a whole, would not interfere with continued attainment of the National Ambient Air Quality Standards in the Bay Area. The intended effect of our proposed conditional approval action is to update the applicable SIP with current BAAQMD rules and provide BAAQMD the opportunity to correct the identified deficiencies, as discussed in their commitment letter dated August 28, 2017. If we finalize this action as proposed, our action would be codified through revisions to 40 CFR 52.220 (Identification of plan) and 40 CFR 52.232 (Part D conditional approval). If the State meets its commitment to submit the required measures by November 1, 2018, the revisions to Rule 2-4 will remain a part of the SIP until EPA takes final action approving or disapproving the new SIP revisions. However, if the District fails to submit these revisions within the required timeframe, the conditional approval will automatically become a disapproval, and EPA will issue a finding of disapproval. EPA is not required to propose the finding of disapproval. There are no sanctions or Federal Implementation Plan (FIP) implications should the conditional approval become a disapproval. Sanctions would not be imposed under CAA section 179(b) because the submittal of Rule 2-4 is discretionary (i.e., not required to be included in the SIP). See ETPS, 51 FR 43,813 at 43,825 (``[S]tates are by no means required to adopt banking procedures, but . . . banks may help states and communities realize important planning and environmental benefits.''). A FIP would not be imposed under CAA section 110(c)(1) because the disapproval does not reveal a deficiency in the SIP that such a FIP must correct. Specifically: (1) The deficiencies identified herein do not impact or undermine the requirement that offsets satisfy the requirements of 40 CFR 51.165, including the requirement that offsets must satisfy the offset integrity criteria enumerated in 40 CFR 51.165(a)(3)(ii)(C)(1)(i) at the time of use; and (2) Rule 2-4 is not a required CAA submittal because states and air districts have the discretion, but are not required, to adopt banking rules. We will accept comments from the public on the proposed conditional approval of Rule 2-4 for the next 30 days. IV. 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 BAAQMD Regulation 2, Rule 4 (Permits, Emissions Banking), which is discussed in section I.A. of this preamble. The EPA has made, and will continue to make, this document generally available electronically through https://www.regulations.gov and in hard copy at the appropriate EPA office (see the ADDRESSES section of this preamble for more information). V. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews Additional information about these statutes and Executive Orders can be found at https://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 [[Page 43205]] 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. List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52 Environmental protection, Air pollution control, Incorporation by reference, Intergovernmental relations, Nitrogen dioxide, Ozone, Particulate Matter, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements. Authority: 42 U.S.C. 7401 et seq. Dated: August 31, 2017. Deborah Jordan, Acting Regional Administrator, Region IX. [FR Doc. 2017-19451 Filed 9-13-17; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6560-50-P
![43202 Federal Register / Vol. 82, No. 177 / Thursday, September 14, 2017 / Proposed Rules
to previous notices (80 FR 69161; 81 FR Accountability System Negotiated restricted by statute. Multimedia
22039; 81 FR 54768; 82 FR 5473) you Rulemaking Committee is in the public submissions (audio, video, etc.) must be
must submit a new nomination package. interest. accompanied by a written comment.
Previous applications will not be Authority: 20 U.S.C. 6301; 5 U.S.C. 561; 5 The written comment is considered the
considered. The BIE will not consider U.S.C. Appendix 2. official comment and should include
nominations for Federal representatives. discussion of all points you wish to
Dated: September 1, 2017.
Only the Secretary may nominate make. The EPA will generally not
Federal employees to the Committee. Michael S. Black, consider comments or comment
Nominations must include the Acting Assistant Secretary—Indian Affairs. contents located outside of the primary
following information about each [FR Doc. 2017–19111 Filed 9–13–17; 8:45 am] submission (i.e. on the web, cloud, or
nominee: BILLING CODE 4337–15–P other file sharing system). For
(1) A current letter from the entity additional submission methods, please
representing one of the interest(s) contact the person identified in the FOR
identified supporting the nomination of ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section.
the individual to serve as a AGENCY For the full EPA public comment policy,
representative for the Committee; information about CBI or multimedia
(2) A resume reflecting the nominee’s 40 CFR Part 52 submissions, and general guidance on
qualifications and experience in Indian [EPA–R09–OAR–2017–0130; FRL–9967–68– making effective comments, please visit
education; resume to include the Region 9] https://www2.epa.gov/dockets/
nominee’s name, Tribal affiliation (if commenting-epa-dockets.
applicable), job title, major job duties, Revisions to California State FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
employer, business address, business Implementation Plan; Bay Area Air Laura Yannayon, EPA Region 9, (415)
telephone and fax numbers (and Quality Management District; Emission 972–3534, yannayon.laura@epa.gov.
business email address, if applicable); Reduction Credit Banking
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
(3) The interest(s) to be represented by
AGENCY: Environmental Protection Throughout this document, the terms
the nominee (see section V, part F) and
Agency (EPA). ‘‘we,’’ ‘‘us,’’ and ‘‘our’’ refer to EPA.
whether the nominee will represent
other interest(s) related to this ACTION: Proposed rule. Table of Contents
rulemaking; and I. The State’s Submittal
SUMMARY: The Environmental Protection
(4) A brief description of how the A. What rule did the State submit?
Agency (EPA) is proposing action on a
nominee will represent the views of the B. What is the existing BAAQMD rule
revision to the Bay Area Air Quality
identified interest(s), communicate with governing banking of Emission
Management District (BAAQMD or
constituents, and have a clear means to Reduction Credits in the California SIP?
District) portion of the California State C. What is the purpose of this proposed
reach agreement on behalf of the
Implementation Plan (SIP). We are rule?
interest(s) they are representing.
proposing a conditional approval of one II. EPA’s Evaluation
(5) A statement on whether the
rule. This revision consists of updates to A. How is EPA evaluating the rule?
nominee is only representing one
provisions governing the issuance and B. Does the rule meet the evaluation
interest or whether the expectation is criteria?
banking of Emission Reduction Credits
that the nominee represents a specific III. Proposed Action and Public Comment
for use in the review and permitting of
group of interests. IV. Incorporation by Reference
major sources and major modifications
To be considered, nominations must V. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews
under part D of title I of the Clean Air
be received by the close of business on
Act (CAA). We are taking comments on
the date listed in the DATES section, at I. The State’s Submittal
this proposal and plan to follow with a
the location indicated in the ADDRESSES
final action. A. What rule did the State submit?
section.
Public Availability of Comments: DATES: Any comments must arrive by On April 22, 2013, the California Air
Before including your address, phone October 16, 2017. Resources Board (CARB) submitted an
number, email address, or other ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, amended rule, BAAQMD Regulation 2,
personal identifying information in your identified by Docket ID No. EPA–R09– Rule 4 (Rule 2–4), for approval as a
comment, you should be aware that OAR–2017–0130 at https:// revision to the BAAQMD portion of the
your entire comment—including your www.regulations.gov, or via email to California SIP under the CAA.
personal identifying information—may R9AirPermits@epa.gov. For comments Regulation 2 contains the District’s air
be made publicly available at any time. submitted at Regulations.gov, follow the quality permitting programs. Rule 2–4
While you can ask us in your comment online instructions for submitting contains requirements applicable to the
to withhold your personal identifying comments. Once submitted, comments banking of Emission Reduction Credits
information from public review, we cannot be removed or edited from (ERCs) for use in the District’s air
cannot guarantee that we will be able to Regulations.gov. For either manner of quality permitting programs.
do so. submission, the EPA may publish any Table 1 lists the rule addressed by this
comment received to its public docket. proposal with the dates that it was
asabaliauskas on DSKBBXCHB2PROD with PROPOSALS
VII. Certification Do not submit electronically any adopted by BAAQMD and submitted to
For the above reasons, I hereby certify information you consider to be the EPA by CARB, which is the
that the Bureau of Indian Education Confidential Business Information (CBI) governor’s designee for California SIP
Standards, Assessments, and or other information whose disclosure is submittals.
VerDate Sep<11>2014 16:07 Sep 13, 2017 Jkt 241001 PO 00000 Frm 00008 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\14SEP1.SGM 14SEP1](https://thefederalregister.org/doc/82_FR_43379/page/1.svg)
![43204 Federal Register / Vol. 82, No. 177 / Thursday, September 14, 2017 / Proposed Rules
adequately ensure the permanency of an the opportunity to correct the identified at the appropriate EPA office (see the
emission reduction due to a facility deficiencies, as discussed in their ADDRESSES section of this preamble for
closure. commitment letter dated August 28, more information).
With respect to the substantive 2017. If we finalize this action as
requirements of CAA section 110(l), we V. Statutory and Executive Order
proposed, our action would be codified
have determined that our approval of through revisions to 40 CFR 52.220 Reviews
Rule 2–4, as described in more detail in (Identification of plan) and 40 CFR Additional information about these
our TSD, represents a strengthening of 52.232 (Part D conditional approval). statutes and Executive Orders can be
the rule as compared to the District’s If the State meets its commitment to found at https://www2.epa.gov/laws-
current SIP-approved banking rule that submit the required measures by regulations/laws-and-executive-orders.
we approved on January 26, 1999 (64 FR November 1, 2018, the revisions to Rule
3850), and that our conditional approval 2–4 will remain a part of the SIP until A. Executive Order 12866: Regulatory
of the current SIP submittal would not EPA takes final action approving or Planning and Review and Executive
interfere with any applicable disapproving the new SIP revisions. Order 13563: Improving Regulation and
requirement concerning attainment and However, if the District fails to submit Regulatory Review
Reasonable Further Progress or any these revisions within the required This action is not a significant
other applicable requirement of the Act. timeframe, the conditional approval will regulatory action and was therefore not
automatically become a disapproval, submitted to the Office of Management
III. Proposed Action and Public
and EPA will issue a finding of and Budget (OMB) for review.
Comment
disapproval. EPA is not required to
Because the rule deficiencies B. Paperwork Reduction Act (PRA)
propose the finding of disapproval.
described previously are inappropriate There are no sanctions or Federal This action does not impose an
for inclusion in the SIP, EPA cannot Implementation Plan (FIP) implications information collection burden under the
grant full approval of this rule under should the conditional approval become PRA because this action does not
section 110(k)(3) of the Act. However, in a disapproval. Sanctions would not be impose additional requirements beyond
a letter dated August 28, 2017, the imposed under CAA section 179(b) those imposed by state law.
District committed to adopt and submit because the submittal of Rule 2–4 is
specific enforceable measures to address discretionary (i.e., not required to be C. Regulatory Flexibility Act (RFA)
these deficiencies. The District included in the SIP). See ETPS, 51 FR I certify that this action will not have
committed to submit these revisions to 43,813 at 43,825 (‘‘[S]tates are by no a significant economic impact on a
CARB by October 1, 2018. In addition, means required to adopt banking substantial number of small entities
in a letter dated August 29, 2017, CARB procedures, but . . . banks may help under the RFA. This action will not
committed to submit the adopted rule states and communities realize impose any requirements on small
revisions to EPA no later than important planning and environmental entities beyond those imposed by state
November 1, 2018. Accordingly, benefits.’’). A FIP would not be imposed law.
pursuant to section 110(k)(4) of the Act, under CAA section 110(c)(1) because
EPA is proposing a conditional approval D. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act
the disapproval does not reveal a
of the submitted rule. We are proposing (UMRA)
deficiency in the SIP that such a FIP
to conditionally approve the submitted must correct. Specifically: (1) The This action does not contain any
rule based on our determination that deficiencies identified herein do not unfunded mandate as described in
separate from the deficiencies listed impact or undermine the requirement UMRA, 2 U.S.C. 1531–1538, and does
previously, the rule: Ensures that issued that offsets satisfy the requirements of not significantly or uniquely affect small
ERCs will meet the criteria laid out in 40 CFR 51.165, including the governments. This action does not
40 CFR 51.165(a)(3)(ii)(C)(1)(i) at the requirement that offsets must satisfy the impose additional requirements beyond
time of ERC issuance; satisfies the offset integrity criteria enumerated in 40 those imposed by state law.
requirements of 40 CFR 51.165(a)(3)(i); CFR 51.165(a)(3)(ii)(C)(1)(i) at the time Accordingly, no additional costs to
satisfies the applicable requirements of use; and (2) Rule 2–4 is not a required state, local, or tribal governments, or to
found in the ETPS; and satisfies the CAA submittal because states and air the private sector, will result from this
requirements of 40 CFR districts have the discretion, but are not action.
51.165(a)(3)(ii)(C)(1)(ii), which requires required, to adopt banking rules.
pre-base year shutdown credits to be E. Executive Order 13132: Federalism
We will accept comments from the
explicitly added back in to the most public on the proposed conditional This action does not have federalism
recent applicable air quality plans. approval of Rule 2–4 for the next 30 implications. It will not have substantial
Moreover, we conclude that if the days. direct effects on the states, on the
District submits the changes it has relationship between the national
committed to submit, these deficiencies IV. Incorporation by Reference government and the states, or on the
will be cured. In this rule, the EPA is proposing to distribution of power and
In support of this proposed action, we include in a final EPA rule, regulatory responsibilities among the various
have concluded that our conditional text that includes incorporation by levels of government.
approval of the submitted rule would reference. In accordance with
asabaliauskas on DSKBBXCHB2PROD with PROPOSALS
comply with section 110(l) of the Act requirements of 1 CFR 51.5, the EPA is F. Executive Order 13175: Coordination
because the amended rule, as a whole, proposing to incorporate by reference With Indian Tribal Governments
would not interfere with continued BAAQMD Regulation 2, Rule 4 (Permits, This action does not have tribal
attainment of the National Ambient Air Emissions Banking), which is discussed implications, as specified in Executive
Quality Standards in the Bay Area. The in section I.A. of this preamble. The Order 13175, because the SIP is not
intended effect of our proposed EPA has made, and will continue to approved to apply on any Indian
conditional approval action is to update make, this document generally available reservation land or in any other area
the applicable SIP with current electronically through https:// where the EPA or an Indian tribe has
BAAQMD rules and provide BAAQMD www.regulations.gov and in hard copy demonstrated that a tribe has
VerDate Sep<11>2014 16:07 Sep 13, 2017 Jkt 241001 PO 00000 Frm 00010 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\14SEP1.SGM 14SEP1](https://thefederalregister.org/doc/82_FR_43379/page/3.svg)
![Federal Register / Vol. 82, No. 177 / Thursday, September 14, 2017 / Proposed Rules 43205
jurisdiction, and will not impose ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION Region 8, Mailcode 8P–AR, 1595
substantial direct costs on tribal AGENCY Wynkoop Street, Denver, Colorado
governments or preempt tribal law. 80202–1129, (303) 312–6602,
Thus, Executive Order 13175 does not 40 CFR Part 52 ostigaard.crystal@epa.gov.
apply to this action. [EPA–R08–OAR–2017–0469; FRL–9967–67– SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Region 8]
G. Executive Order 13045: Protection of I. General Information
Children From Environmental Health Approval and Promulgation of Air a. Submitting CBI. Do not submit CBI
Risks and Safety Risks Quality Implementation Plans; State of to the EPA through https://
The EPA interprets Executive Order Utah; Revisions to the Utah Division of www.regulations.gov or email. Clearly
13045 as applying only to those Administrative Rules, R307–300 mark the part or all of the information
regulatory actions that concern Series; Area Source Rule for that you claim to be CBI. For CBI
Attainment of Fine Particulate Matter information in a disk or CD–ROM that
environmental health or safety risks that
Standards you mail to the EPA, mark the outside
the EPA has reason to believe may
disproportionately affect children, per AGENCY: Environmental Protection of the disk or CD–ROM as CBI and then
the definition of ‘‘covered regulatory Agency (EPA). identify electronically within the disk or
action’’ in section 2–202 of the CD–ROM the specific information that
ACTION: Proposed rule.
Executive Order. This action is not is claimed as CBI. In addition to one
subject to Executive Order 13045 SUMMARY: The Environmental Protection complete version of the comment that
because it does not impose additional Agency (EPA) is proposing to approve includes information claimed as CBI, a
requirements beyond those imposed by portions of the fine particulate matter copy of the comment that does not
state law. (PM2.5) State Implementation Plan (SIP) contain the information claimed as CBI
and related rule revisions submitted by must be submitted for inclusion in the
H. Executive Order 13211: Actions That the State of Utah. The EPA is proposing public docket. Information so marked
Significantly Affect Energy Supply, to approve revisions submitted on May will not be disclosed except in
Distribution, or Use 9, 2013 and August 25, 2017 for Utah’s accordance with procedures set forth in
fugitive dust control rule, and to 40 CFR part 2.
This action is not subject to Executive approve the State’s associated b. Tips for Preparing Your Comments.
Order 13211, because it is not a reasonable available control measures When submitting comments, remember
significant regulatory action under (RACM) determination, submitted on to:
Executive Order 12866. December 16, 2014. This action is being i. Identify the rulemaking by docket
I. National Technology Transfer and taken under section 110 of the Clean Air number and other identifying
Advancement Act (NTTAA) Act (CAA or Act). information (subject heading, Federal
DATES: Written comments must be Register date and page number).
Section 12(d) of the NTTAA directs received on or before October 16, 2017. ii. Follow directions—The agency
the EPA to use voluntary consensus ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, may ask you to respond to specific
standards in its regulatory activities identified by Docket ID No. EPA–R08– questions or organize comments by
unless to do so would be inconsistent OAR–2017–0469 at https:// referencing a Code of Federal
with applicable law or otherwise www.regulations.gov. Follow the online Regulations (CFR) part or section
impractical. The EPA believes that this instructions for submitting comments. number.
action is not subject to the requirements Once submitted, comments cannot be iii. Explain why you agree or disagree;
of section 12(d) of the NTTAA because edited or removed from https:// suggest alternatives and substitute
application of those requirements would www.regulations.gov. The EPA may language for your requested changes.
be inconsistent with the CAA. publish any comment received to the iv. Describe any assumptions and
public docket. Do not submit provide any technical information and/
J. Executive Order 12898: Federal electronically any information you or data that you used.
Actions To Address Environmental consider to be Confidential Business v. If you estimate potential costs or
Justice in Minority Populations and Information (CBI) or other information, burdens, explain how you arrived at
Low-Income Population the disclosure of which is restricted by your estimate in sufficient detail to
statute. Multimedia submissions (audio, allow for it to be reproduced.
The EPA lacks the discretionary vi. Provide specific examples to
authority to address environmental video, etc.) must be accompanied by a
written comment. The written comment illustrate your concerns, and suggest
justice in this rulemaking. alternatives.
is considered the official comment and
List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52 should include discussion of all points vii. Explain your views as clearly as
you wish to make. The EPA will possible, avoiding the use of profanity
Environmental protection, Air generally not consider comments or or personal threats.
pollution control, Incorporation by comment contents located outside of the viii. Make sure to submit your
reference, Intergovernmental relations, primary submission (i.e., on the web, comments by the comment period
Nitrogen dioxide, Ozone, Particulate cloud, or other file sharing system). For deadline identified.
asabaliauskas on DSKBBXCHB2PROD with PROPOSALS
Matter, Reporting and recordkeeping additional submission methods, the full II. Background
requirements. EPA public comment policy,
Authority: 42 U.S.C. 7401 et seq. information about CBI or multimedia A. Regulatory Background
submissions, and general guidance on On October 17, 2006 (71 FR 61144),
Dated: August 31, 2017.
making effective comments, please visit the EPA strengthened the level of the
Deborah Jordan, https://www.epa.gov/dockets/ 24-hour PM2.5 National Ambient Air
Acting Regional Administrator, Region IX. commenting-epa-dockets. Quality Standards (NAAQS), lowering
[FR Doc. 2017–19451 Filed 9–13–17; 8:45 am] FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: the primary and secondary standards
BILLING CODE 6560–50–P Crystal Ostigaard, Air Program, EPA, from 65 micrograms per cubic meter
VerDate Sep<11>2014 16:07 Sep 13, 2017 Jkt 241001 PO 00000 Frm 00011 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\14SEP1.SGM 14SEP1](https://thefederalregister.org/doc/82_FR_43379/page/4.svg)
Document Created: 2017-09-13 23:49:15
Document Modified: 2017-09-13 23:49:15
| 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 | Proposed Rules | |
| Action | Proposed rule. | |
| Dates | Any comments must arrive by October 16, 2017. | |
| Contact | Laura Yannayon, EPA Region 9, (415) 972-3534, [email protected] | |
| FR Citation | 82 FR 43202 | |
| CFR Associated | Environmental Protection; Air Pollution Control; Incorporation by Reference; Intergovernmental Relations; Nitrogen Dioxide; Ozone; Particulate Matter and Reporting and Recordkeeping Requirements |
2025 Federal Register | Disclaimer | Privacy Policy
USC | CFR | eCFR