83 FR 19495 - Approval of California Air Plan Revisions, Yolo-Solano Air Quality Management District
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY Federal Register Volume 83, Issue 86 (May 3, 2018)
Federal Register Volume 83, Issue 86 (May 3, 2018)
| Page Range | 19495-19497 | |
| FR Document | 2018-09213 |
[Federal Register Volume 83, Number 86 (Thursday, May 3, 2018)] [Proposed Rules] [Pages 19495-19497] From the Federal Register Online [www.thefederalregister.org] [FR Doc No: 2018-09213] ----------------------------------------------------------------------- ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY 40 CFR Part 52 [EPA-R09-OAR-2018-0104; FRL-9977-33-Region 9] Approval of California Air Plan Revisions, Yolo-Solano Air Quality Management District AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). ACTION: Proposed rule. ----------------------------------------------------------------------- SUMMARY: The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is proposing to approve a revision to the Yolo-Solano Air Quality Management District (YSAQMD or ``District'') portion of the California State Implementation Plan (SIP). This revision concerns emissions of volatile organic compounds (VOCs) from architectural coatings. We are proposing to approve a local rule to regulate these emission sources under the Clean Air Act (CAA or the Act). We are taking comments on this proposal and plan to follow with a final action. DATES: Any comments must arrive by June 4, 2018. ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, identified by Docket ID No. EPA-R09- OAR-2018-0104 at http://www.regulations.gov, or via email to Arnold Lazarus, at lazarus.arnold@epa.gov. 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 http://www2.epa.gov/dockets/commenting-epa-dockets. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Arnold Lazarus, EPA Region IX, (415) 972 3024, Lazarus.Arnold@epa.gov. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Throughout this document, ``we,'' ``us'' and ``our'' refer to the EPA. Table of Contents I. The State's Submittal A. What rule did the State submit? B. Are there other versions of this rule? C. What is the purpose of the submitted rule revision? II. The EPA's Evaluation and Action A. How is the EPA evaluating the rule? B. Does the rule meet the evaluation criteria? C. EPA Recommendations To Further Improve the Rule D. Public Comment and Proposed Action III. Incorporation by Reference IV. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews I. The State's Submittal A. What rule did the State submit? Table 1 lists the rule addressed by this proposal with the date that the revision was adopted by the YSAQMD and the date that it was submitted by the California Air Resources Board (CARB) to the EPA. [[Page 19496]] Table 1--Submitted Rule ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Local agency Rule No. Rule title Revised Submitted ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- YSAQMD................................ 2.14 Architectural Coatings.. 10/12/2016 01/24/2017 ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- On April 17, 2017, the EPA determined that the submittal for YSAQMD Rule 2.14 met the completeness criteria in 40 CFR part 51 Appendix V, which must be met before formal EPA review. B. Are there other versions of this rule? On January 2, 2004 (69 FR 34), the EPA finalized a limited approval and limited disapproval of a previous submission of Rule 2.14 with no sanctions because the part of the rule that was disapproved, ``Appendix A,'' expired by its own terms on January 1, 2005. For additional information, please see the technical support document (TSD) for today's rulemaking. C. What is the purpose of the submitted rule revisions? VOCs contribute to the production of ground-level ozone, smog and particulate matter, which harm human health and the environment. Section 110(a) of the CAA requires states to submit regulations that control VOC emissions. Architectural coatings are coatings that are applied to stationary structures and their accessories. They include house paints, stains, industrial maintenance coatings, traffic coatings, and many other products. VOCs are emitted from the coatings during application and curing, and from the associated solvents used for thinning and clean-up. YSAQMD Rule 2.14 controls VOC emissions from architectural coatings by establishing VOC limits on architectural coatings supplied, sold, offered for sale, manufactured, blended, or repackaged for use within the YSAQMD, as well as architectural coatings applied or solicited for application within the District. The revisions to Rule 2.14 include the elimination of the averaging provision, which was the basis for the EPA's 2004 limited disapproval of a prior version of this rule, and the tightening of many of the Rule's VOC limits. The TSD has more information about this rule. II. The EPA's Evaluation and Action A. How is the EPA evaluating the rule? SIP rules must be enforceable (see CAA section 110(a)(2)), must not interfere with applicable requirements concerning attainment and reasonable further progress or other CAA requirements (see CAA section 110(l)), and must not modify certain SIP control requirements in nonattainment areas without ensuring equivalent or greater emissions reductions (see CAA section 193). Generally, SIP rules must require Reasonably Available Control Technology (RACT) for each category of sources covered by a Control Techniques Guidelines (CTG) document, and each major source of VOCs in ozone nonattainment areas classified as moderate or above (see CAA section 182(b)(2)). The YSAQMD regulates an ozone nonattainment area classified as severe nonattainment for the 2008 and the 1997 8-hour ozone National Ambient Air Quality Standards (40 CFR 81.305). Because there is no relevant EPA CTG document and because there are no major architectural coating sources within the District, architectural coatings are not subject to RACT requirements. However, architectural coatings are subject to other VOC content limits and control measures described in the TSD. Guidance and policy documents that we used to evaluate the enforceability, revision/relaxation, and stringency requirements for this rule include the following: 1. ``State Implementation Plans; General Preamble for the Implementation of Title I of the Clean Air Act Amendments of 1990,'' (57 FR 13498, April 16, 1992 and 57 FR 18070, April 28, 1992). 2. ``Issues Relating to VOC Regulation Cutpoints, Deficiencies, and Deviations'' (``the Bluebook,'' U.S. EPA, May 25, 1988; revised January 11, 1990). 3. ``Guidance Document for Correcting Common VOC & Other Rule Deficiencies'' (``the Little Bluebook,'' EPA Region 9, August 21, 2001). 4. National Volatile Organic Compound Emission Standards for Architectural Coatings, 40 CFR 59, Subpart D. 5. CARB ``Suggested Control Measure for Architectural Coatings,'' Approved 2007. 6. YSAQMD Rule 2.14, ``Architectural Coatings,'' EPA Limited Approval and Limited Disapproval on January 2, 2004 (69 FR 34). B. Does the rule meet the evaluation criteria? This rule is consistent with CAA requirements and relevant guidance regarding enforceability, stringency, and SIP revisions. The TSD has more information on our evaluation. C. EPA Recommendations To Further Improve the Rule The TSD describes additional rule revisions that we recommend for the next time the local agency modifies the rule. D. Public Comment and Proposed Action As authorized in section 110(k)(3) of the Act, the EPA proposes to fully approve the submitted rule because it fulfills all relevant requirements. We will accept comments from the public on this proposal until June 4, 2018. If we take final action to approve the submitted rule, our final action will incorporate this rule into the federally enforceable SIP. III. Incorporation by Reference In this rule, the EPA is proposing to include in a final EPA rule regulatory text that includes incorporation by reference. In accordance with requirements of 1 CFR 51.5, the EPA is proposing to incorporate by reference the YSAQMD rule described in Table 1 of this preamble. The EPA has made, and will continue to make, these materials available through www.regulations.gov and at the EPA Region IX Office (please contact the person identified in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section of this preamble for more information). IV. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews 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: [[Page 19497]]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 13563 (76 FR 3821, January 21, 2011); Is not an Executive Order 13771 (82 FR 9339, February 2, 2017) regulatory action because SIP approvals are exempted under Executive Order 12866; 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 an economically significant regulatory action based on health or safety risks subject to Executive Order 13045 (62 FR 19885, April 23, 1997); Is not a significant regulatory action subject to Executive Order 13211 (66 FR 28355, May 22, 2001); 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; and Does not provide the EPA with the discretionary authority to address disproportionate human health or environmental effects with practical, appropriate, and legally permissible methods under Executive Order 12898 (59 FR 7629, February 16, 1994). 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 rule 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). List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52 Environmental protection, Air pollution control, Incorporation by reference Intergovernmental relations, Ozone, Particulate matter, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements, Volatile organic compounds. Authority: 42 U.S.C. 7401 et seq. Dated: April 18, 2018. Alexis Strauss, Acting Regional Administrator, Region IX. [FR Doc. 2018-09213 Filed 5-2-18; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6560-50-P
![Federal Register / Vol. 83, No. 86 / Thursday, May 3, 2018 / Proposed Rules 19495
Emissions Budgets (MVEBs) for 2017. • Does not provide EPA with the OAR–2018–0104 at http://
Finally, we are proposing approval of discretionary authority to address, as www.regulations.gov, or via email to
the use of TATU’s tool and its appropriate, disproportionate human Arnold Lazarus, at lazarus.arnold@
Unmonitored Area analysis as health or environmental effects, using epa.gov. For comments submitted at
acceptable for meeting the practicable and legally permissible Regulations.gov, follow the online
recommended evaluation of ozone methods, under Executive Order 12898 instructions for submitting comments.
levels in the Unmonitored Area analysis (59 FR 7629, February 16, 1994). Once submitted, comments cannot be
for this SIP proposed approval action. In addition, the SIP is not approved removed or edited from Regulations.gov.
to apply on any Indian reservation land For either manner of submission, the
IV. Statutory and Executive Order
or in any other area where EPA or an EPA may publish any comment received
Reviews
Indian tribe has demonstrated that a to its public docket. Do not submit
Under the CAA, the Administrator is tribe has jurisdiction. In those areas of electronically any information you
required to approve a SIP submission Indian country, the proposed rule does consider to be Confidential Business
that complies with the provisions of the not have tribal implications and will not Information (CBI) or other information
Act and applicable Federal regulations. impose substantial direct costs on tribal whose disclosure is restricted by statute.
42 U.S.C. 7410(k); 40 CFR 52.02(a). governments or preempt tribal law as Multimedia submissions (audio, video,
Thus, in reviewing SIP submissions, the specified by Executive Order 13175 (65 etc.) must be accompanied by a written
EPA’s role is to approve state choices, FR 67249, November 9, 2000). comment. The written comment is
provided that they meet the criteria of considered the official comment and
the CAA. Accordingly, this action List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52
should include discussion of all points
merely proposes to approve state law as Environmental protection, Air you wish to make. The EPA will
meeting Federal requirements and does pollution control, Incorporation by generally not consider comments or
not impose additional requirements reference, Nitrogen dioxide, Ozone, comment contents located outside of the
beyond those imposed by state law. For Volatile organic compounds. primary submission (i.e., on the web,
that reason, this action: Authority: 42 U.S.C. 7401 et seq. cloud, or other file sharing system). For
• Is not a ‘‘significant regulatory additional submission methods, please
action’’ subject to review by the Office Dated: April 25, 2018.
contact the person identified in the FOR
of Management and Budget under Anne Idsal,
FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section.
Executive Orders 12866 (58 FR 51735, Regional Administrator, Region 6. For the full EPA public comment policy,
October 4, 1993) and 13563 (76 FR 3821, [FR Doc. 2018–09313 Filed 5–2–18; 8:45 am] information about CBI or multimedia
January 21, 2011); BILLING CODE 6560–50–P submissions, and general guidance on
• Is not an Executive Order 13771 (82 making effective comments, please visit
FR 9339, February 2, 2017) regulatory http://www2.epa.gov/dockets/
action because SIP approvals are ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION commenting-epa-dockets.
exempted under Executive Order 12866; AGENCY
• Does not impose an information FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
collection burden under the provisions 40 CFR Part 52 Arnold Lazarus, EPA Region IX, (415)
of the Paperwork Reduction Act (44 [EPA–R09–OAR–2018–0104; FRL–9977–33– 972 3024, Lazarus.Arnold@epa.gov.
U.S.C. 3501 et seq.); Region 9] SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
• Is certified as not having a Throughout this document, ‘‘we,’’ ‘‘us’’
significant economic impact on a Approval of California Air Plan and ‘‘our’’ refer to the EPA.
substantial number of small entities Revisions, Yolo-Solano Air Quality
under the Regulatory Flexibility Act (5 Management District Table of Contents
U.S.C. 601 et seq.); I. The State’s Submittal
• Does not contain any unfunded AGENCY: Environmental Protection
Agency (EPA). A. What rule did the State submit?
mandate or significantly or uniquely B. Are there other versions of this rule?
affect small governments, as described ACTION: Proposed rule. C. What is the purpose of the submitted
in the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act rule revision?
SUMMARY: The Environmental Protection II. The EPA’s Evaluation and Action
of 1995 (Pub. L. 104–4);
Agency (EPA) is proposing to approve a
• Does not have Federalism A. How is the EPA evaluating the rule?
revision to the Yolo-Solano Air Quality B. Does the rule meet the evaluation
implications as specified in Executive
Management District (YSAQMD or criteria?
Order 13132 (64 FR 43255, August 10,
‘‘District’’) portion of the California C. EPA Recommendations To Further
1999);
• Is not an economically significant State Implementation Plan (SIP). This Improve the Rule
revision concerns emissions of volatile D. Public Comment and Proposed Action
regulatory action based on health or III. Incorporation by Reference
safety risks subject to Executive Order organic compounds (VOCs) from
architectural coatings. We are proposing IV. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews
13045 (62 FR 19885, April 23, 1997);
• Is not a significant regulatory action to approve a local rule to regulate these I. The State’s Submittal
subject to Executive Order 13211 (66 FR emission sources under the Clean Air
Act (CAA or the Act). We are taking A. What rule did the State submit?
28355, May 22, 2001);
• Is not subject to requirements of comments on this proposal and plan to Table 1 lists the rule addressed by this
sradovich on DSK3GMQ082PROD with PROPOSALS
section 12(d) of the National follow with a final action. proposal with the date that the revision
Technology Transfer and Advancement DATES: Any comments must arrive by was adopted by the YSAQMD and the
Act of 1995 (15 U.S.C. 272 note) because June 4, 2018. date that it was submitted by the
application of those requirements would ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, California Air Resources Board (CARB)
be inconsistent with the CAA; and identified by Docket ID No. EPA–R09– to the EPA.
VerDate Sep<11>2014 16:35 May 02, 2018 Jkt 244001 PO 00000 Frm 00032 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\03MYP1.SGM 03MYP1](https://thefederalregister.org/doc/83_FR_19581/page/1.svg)
![Federal Register / Vol. 83, No. 86 / Thursday, May 3, 2018 / Proposed Rules 19497
• Is not a ‘‘significant regulatory Dated: April 18, 2018. on the web, cloud, or other file sharing
action’’ subject to review by the Office Alexis Strauss, system). For additional submission
of Management and Budget under Acting Regional Administrator, Region IX. methods, please contact the person
Executive Orders 12866 (58 FR 51735, [FR Doc. 2018–09213 Filed 5–2–18; 8:45 am] identified in the FOR FURTHER
October 4, 1993) and 13563 (76 FR 3821, BILLING CODE 6560–50–P INFORMATION CONTACT section. For the
January 21, 2011); full EPA public comment policy,
• Is not an Executive Order 13771 (82 information about CBI or multimedia
FR 9339, February 2, 2017) regulatory ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION submissions, and general guidance on
action because SIP approvals are AGENCY making effective comments, please visit
exempted under Executive Order 12866; http://www2.epa.gov/dockets/
• Does not impose an information 40 CFR Part 52 commenting-epa-dockets.
collection burden under the provisions
[EPA–R05–OAR–2017–0100; FRL–9977–53– FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
of the Paperwork Reduction Act (44 Region 5] Charles Hatten, Environmental
U.S.C. 3501 et seq.);
• Is certified as not having a Engineer, Control Strategies Section, Air
Air Plan Approval; Michigan; Revisions Programs Branch (AR–18J),
significant economic impact on a to Part 9 Miscellaneous Rules
substantial number of small entities Environmental Protection Agency,
under the Regulatory Flexibility Act (5 AGENCY: Environmental Protection Region 5, 77 West Jackson Boulevard,
U.S.C. 601 et seq.); Agency (EPA). Chicago, Illinois 60604, (312) 886–3031,
• Does not contain any unfunded ACTION: Proposed rule. hatten.charles@epa.gov.
mandate or significantly or uniquely SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
affect small governments, as described SUMMARY: The Environmental Protection Throughout this document whenever
in the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act Agency (EPA) is proposing to approve a ‘‘we,’’ ‘‘us,’’ or ‘‘our’’ is used, we mean
of 1995 (Pub. L. 104–4); request submitted by the Michigan EPA. This supplementary information
• Does not have Federalism Department of Environmental Quality
section is arranged as follows:
implications as specified in Executive (MDEQ) on February 2, 2017, and
supplemented on November 8, 2017, to I. What are the State rule revisions?
Order 13132 (64 FR 43255, August 10, II. Did the State hold public hearings for the
1999); revise the Michigan state
submittal?
• Is not an economically significant implementation plan (SIP) for carbon
III. What is EPA’s analysis of the State’s
regulatory action based on health or monoxide (CO). The revision submittal?
safety risks subject to Executive Order incorporates changes to Michigan’s Air IV. What action is EPA taking?
13045 (62 FR 19885, April 23, 1997); Pollution Control Rules entitled V. Incorporation by Reference
• Is not a significant regulatory action ‘‘Emissions Limitations and VI. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews
subject to Executive Order 13211 (66 FR Prohibitions—Miscellaneous.’’ The
revision updates existing source-specific I. What are the State rule revisions?
28355, May 22, 2001);
• Is not subject to requirements of rule requirements for ferrous cupola On February 2, 2017, MDEQ
Section 12(d) of the National operations by removing obsolete rule submitted a request to incorporate
Technology Transfer and Advancement language and makes a minor change to revisions to Michigan’s Air Pollution
Act of 1995 (15 U.S.C. 272 note) because correct the citation to a Federal test Control Rules in Chapter 336, Part 9—
application of those requirements would method. The revision continues to result Emissions Limitations and
be inconsistent with the Clean Air Act; in attainment of the CO national Prohibitions—Miscellaneous (Part 9) in
and ambient air quality standard (NAAQS). the Michigan SIP. Michigan’s submittal
• Does not provide the EPA with the DATES: Comments must be received on included revisions to three separate
discretionary authority to address or before June 4, 2018. rules in Part 9: R 336.1902—‘‘Adoption
disproportionate human health or ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, of standards by reference’’ (rule 902); R
environmental effects with practical, identified by Docket ID No. EPA–R05– 336.1916—‘‘Affirmative defense for
appropriate, and legally permissible OAR–2017–0100 at http:// excess emissions during start-up or
methods under Executive Order 12898 www.regulations.gov or via email to shutdown’’ (rule 916); and R 336.1930—
(59 FR 7629, February 16, 1994). blakley.pamela@epa.gov. For comments ‘‘Emission of carbon monoxide from
In addition, the SIP is not approved submitted at Regulations.gov, follow the ferrous cupola operations’’ (rule 930).
to apply on any Indian reservation land online instructions for submitting This rule will only take action on rule
or in any other area where the EPA or comments. Once submitted, comments 930, while the revisions to rule 902 and
an Indian tribe has demonstrated that a cannot be edited or removed from 916 will be addressed separately.
tribe has jurisdiction. In those areas of Regulations.gov. For either manner of Michigan’s rule 930 specifies CO
Indian country, the rule does not have submission, EPA may publish any emission limits for large ferrous cupola
tribal implications and will not impose comment received to its public docket. operations with a melting capacity of 20
substantial direct costs on tribal Do not submit electronically any tons or more per hour. The version of
governments or preempt tribal law as information you consider to be rule 930 currently approved into the
specified by Executive Order 13175 (65 Confidential Business Information (CBI) Michigan SIP only applies to ferrous
FR 67249, November 9, 2000). or other information whose disclosure is cupola operations in Saginaw, Macomb,
restricted by statute. Multimedia Oakland, and Wayne Counties in
sradovich on DSK3GMQ082PROD with PROPOSALS
List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52
submissions (audio, video, etc.) must be Michigan.1 The rule is designed to
Environmental protection, Air accompanied by a written comment. require installation of afterburner
pollution control, Incorporation by The written comment is considered the control system, or equivalent, which
reference Intergovernmental relations, official comment and should include reduces the CO emissions from the
Ozone, Particulate matter, Reporting discussion of all points you wish to ferrous cupola by 90 percent.
and recordkeeping requirements, make. EPA will generally not consider
Volatile organic compounds. comments or comment contents located 1 EPA approved rule 930 on May 6, 1980 (45 FR
Authority: 42 U.S.C. 7401 et seq. outside of the primary submission (i.e. 29790).
VerDate Sep<11>2014 16:35 May 02, 2018 Jkt 244001 PO 00000 Frm 00034 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\03MYP1.SGM 03MYP1](https://thefederalregister.org/doc/83_FR_19581/page/3.svg)
Document Created: 2018-05-02 23:48:39
Document Modified: 2018-05-02 23:48:39
| 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 June 4, 2018. | |
| Contact | Arnold Lazarus, EPA Region IX, (415) 972 3024, [email protected] | |
| FR Citation | 83 FR 19495 | |
| CFR Associated | Environmental Protection; Air Pollution Control; Incorporation by Reference Intergovernmental Relations; Ozone; Particulate Matter; Reporting and Recordkeeping Requirements and Volatile Organic Compounds |
2024 Federal Register | Disclaimer | Privacy Policy
USC | CFR | eCFR