```

[Federal Register Volume 76, Number 176 (Monday, September 12, 2011)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 56134-56136]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2011-23142]

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

40 CFR Part 52

[EPA-R09-OAR-2011-0701; FRL-9462-4]

Revisions to the California State Implementation Plan, San 
Joaquin Valley Unified Air Pollution Control District

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Proposed rule.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

SUMMARY: EPA is proposing to approve revisions to the San Joaquin 
Valley Unified Air Pollution Control District (SJVUAPCD) portion of the 
California State Implementation Plan (SIP). These revisions concern: 
volatile organic compound (VOC) emissions from steam enhanced crude oil 
production and aerospace coating operations. We are approving local 
rules that regulate these emission sources under the Clean Air Act as 
amended in 1990 (CAA or the Act). We are taking comments on this 
proposal and plan to follow with a final action. In a separate interim 
final action published in the Rules section in today's Federal 
Register, we are deferring sanctions that would otherwise apply to the 
SJVUAPCD.

DATES: Any comments must arrive by October 12, 2011.

ADDRESSES: Submit comments, identified by docket number EPA-R09-OAR-
2011-0701, by one of the following methods:
    1. Federal eRulemaking Portal: http://www.regulations.gov. Follow 
the on-line instructions.
    2. E-mail: steckel.andrew@epa.gov.
    3. Mail or deliver: Andrew Steckel (Air-4), U.S. Environmental 
Protection Agency Region IX, 75 Hawthorne Street, San Francisco, CA 
94105-3901.
    Instructions: All comments will be included in the public docket 
without change and may be made available online at http://www.regulations.gov, including any personal information provided, 
unless the comment includes Confidential Business Information (CBI) or 
other information whose disclosure is restricted by statute. 
Information that you consider CBI or otherwise protected should be 
clearly identified as such and should not be submitted through http://www.regulations.gov or e-mail. http://www.regulations.gov is an 
``anonymous access'' system, and EPA will not know your identity or 
contact information unless you provide it in the body of your comment. 
If you send e-mail directly to EPA, your e-mail address will be 
automatically captured and included as part of the public comment. If 
EPA cannot read your comment due to technical difficulties and cannot 
contact you for clarification, EPA may not be able to consider your 
comment.
    Docket: Generally, documents in the docket for this action are 
available electronically at http://www.regulations.gov and in hard copy 
at EPA Region IX, 75 Hawthorne Street, San Francisco, California. While 
all documents in the docket are listed at http://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., 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.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Adrianne Borgia, EPA Region IX, (415) 
972-3576, borgia.adrianne@epa.gov.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Throughout this document, ``we,'' ``us'' and 
``our'' refer to EPA.

Table of Contents

I. The State's Submittal
    A. What rules did the State submit?
    B. Are there other versions of these rules?
    C. What is the purpose of the submitted rules and rule 
revisions?
II. EPA's Evaluation and Action
    A. How is EPA evaluating the rules?
    B. Do the rules meet the evaluation criteria?
    C. EPA Recommendations to Further Improve the Rules
    D. Public Comment and Final Action
III. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews

I. The State's Submittal

A. What rules did the State submit?

    Table 1 lists the rules addressed by this proposal with the dates 
that they were amended by the local air agency and submitted by the 
California Air Resources Board.

                                            Table 1--Submitted Rules
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
           Local Agency                Rule No.              Rule title               Amended        Submitted
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
SJVUAPCD..........................            4401  Steam-Enhanced Crude Oil            06/16/11        07/28/11
                                                     Production Wells.
SJVUAPCD..........................            4605  Aerospace Assembly and              06/16/11        07/28/11
                                                     Component Coating
                                                     Operations.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    On August 3, 2011, EPA determined that the submittal for SJVUAPCD 
Rules 4401 and 4605 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 these rules?

    On January 26, 2010 (75 FR 3996) we finalized a limited approval of 
versions of Rules 4401 and 4605 that were adopted locally on December 
14, 2006 and September 20, 2007 respectively, thereby incorporating 
those versions of the two rules into the SIP. We simultaneously 
finalized a limited disapproval of the same two rules based on our 
identification of deficiencies in each of these rules. SJVUAPCD adopted 
revisions to the SIP-approved versions on June 16, 2011 that were 
intended to address the deficiencies identified in our January 2010 
action, and CARB submitted these revisions to us on July 28, 2011.

[[Page 56135]]

C. What is the purpose of the submitted rules and rule revisions?

    SJVUAPCD Rules 4401 and 4605 are both intended to limit emissions 
of VOCs, which help produce ground-level ozone and smog that are 
harmful to human health and the environment. Section 110(a) of the CAA 
requires States to submit regulations that control VOC emissions.
    SJVUAPCD Rule 4401, Steam-Enhanced Crude Oil Production Wells, is 
designed to limit VOC emissions at steam-enhanced crude oil production 
wells. The rule establishes requirements for inspection, maintenance 
and replacement/retrofit of leaking components. It includes 
administrative and recordkeeping requirements, such as inspection logs. 
The purpose of this rule amendment is to correct the rule deficiency in 
Section 6.2.4 as identified by EPA and to clarify existing rule 
provisions by removing expired language throughout the rule.
    SJVUAPCD Rule 4605, Aerospace Assembly and Component Coating 
Operations, is designed to limit VOC emissions at these operations. The 
rule establishes limits for coatings used in the aerospace industry and 
defines alternative emission control system requirements. It also 
includes recordkeeping, reporting, and monitoring requirements. The 
primary purpose of the June 2011 rule amendment is to correct 
deficiencies identified by EPA in the January 26, 2010 (75 FR 3996) 
final rulemaking on the previous version of this rule.
    EPA's technical support documents (TSDs) for Rules 4401 and 4605 
have more information about these rules.

II. EPA's Evaluation and Action

A. How is EPA evaluating the rules?

    Several statutory provisions apply to EPA's evaluation of the 
rules. CAA section 110(a)(2)(A) requires that regulations submitted to 
EPA for approval into a SIP must be clear and legally enforceable. CAA 
section 110(l) prohibits EPA from approving any SIP revision that would 
interfere with any applicable requirement concerning attainment and 
reasonable further progress (RFP) or any other applicable requirement 
of the CAA, and CAA section 193 prohibits the modification of any SIP-
approved control requirement in effect before November 15, 1990, in a 
nonattainment area. CAA section 172(c)(1) requires nonattainment areas 
to implement all reasonably available control measures (RACM), 
including such reductions in emissions from existing sources in the 
area as may be obtained through the adoption, at a minimum, of 
reasonably available control technology (RACT), as expeditiously as 
practicable. In addition, under CAA section 182(b)(2), ozone 
nonattainment areas classified as moderate or above must implement RACT 
for all VOC sources covered by a Control Technique Guideline (CTG) 
document and for all other major sources of VOCs. The SJVUAPCD 
regulates an ozone nonattainment area that is classified as Extreme 
under both the one-hour ozone and eight-hour ozone standards (40 CFR 
81.305 (2011)) and Rules 4401 and 4605 apply to sources covered by a 
CTG document. Therefore, Rules 4401 and 4605 must fulfill RACT 
requirements for VOCs.
    Guidance and policy documents that we use to evaluate 
enforceability and RACT requirements consistently include the 
following:
    1. ``Issues Relating to VOC Regulation Cutpoints, Deficiencies, and 
Deviations,'' EPA, May 25, 1988 (the Bluebook).
    2. ``Guidance Document for Correcting Common VOC & Other Rule 
Deficiencies,'' EPA Region 9, August 21, 2001 (the Little Bluebook).
    3. EPA's CTG titled, ``Surface Coating Operations at Aerospace 
Manufacturing & Rework Operations'' (EPA-453/R-97-004, December 1997).
    4. EPA's CTG titled, ``Control of VOC Emissions from Solvent Metal 
Cleaning'' (EPA-450/2-77-022, November 1977) SJVAPCD's 2009 RACT SIP 
Demonstration (April 16, 2009).

B. Do the rules meet the evaluation criteria?

    We believe these rules are consistent with the relevant statutory 
criteria and guidance regarding enforceability, RACT and SIP 
relaxations. We also believe these rules have adequately addressed the 
deficiencies identified in our January 26, 2010 action by removing 
inappropriate director's discretion in Rule 4401, and adding and 
lowering emission limits consistent with the relevant national guidance 
in Rule 4605.
    The TSD for each rule has more information on our evaluation.

C. EPA Recommendations To Further Improve The Rules

    The TSDs describe additional rule revisions that we recommend for 
the next time the local agency modifies these rules but are not 
currently the basis for rule disapproval.

D. Public Comment and Final Action

    Because EPA believes the submitted rules fulfill all relevant 
requirements and incorporate revisions that correct the deficiencies 
identified for both Rule 4401 and 4605 in the limited disapproval on 
January 26, 2010 (75 FR 3996), we are proposing to fully approve them 
under section 110(k)(3) of the Act. We will accept comments from the 
public on this proposal for the next 30 days. Unless we receive 
convincing new information during the comment period, we intend to 
publish a final approval action that will incorporate these rules into 
the Federally enforceable SIP. Our final action will permanently 
terminate the sanctions clocks associated with our January 26, 2010 
action on the effective date of the final approval.

III. 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, EPA's role is to approve State 
choices, provided that they meet the criteria of the Clean Air Act. 
Accordingly, this proposed action merely proposes to approve State law 
as meeting Federal requirements and does not impose additional 
requirements beyond those imposed by State law. For that reason, this 
proposed action:
     Is not a ``significant regulatory action'' subject to 
review by the Office of Management and Budget under Executive Order 
12866 (58 FR 51735, October 4, 1993);
     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) because application of those requirements would

[[Page 56136]]

be inconsistent with the Clean Air Act; and
     Does not provide 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, this proposed action does not have Tribal implications 
as specified by Executive Order 13175 (65 FR 67249, November 9, 2000), 
because the SIP is not approved to apply in Indian country located in 
the State, and EPA notes that it will not impose substantial direct 
costs on Tribal governments or preempt Tribal law.

List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52

    Environmental protection, Air pollution control, Intergovernmental 
relations, Ozone, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements, Volatile 
organic compounds.

    Authority:  42 U.S.C. 7401 et seq.

    Dated: August 31, 2011.
Jared Blumenfeld,
Regional Administrator, Region IX.
[FR Doc. 2011-23142 Filed 9-9-11; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P
```