65042 Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 235 / Wednesday, December 9, 2009 / Proposed Rules 

proposes to amend 14 CFR part 71 as 

follows: 

PART 71—DESIGNATION OF CLASS A, 

B, C, D, AND E AIRSPACE AREAS; AIR 

TRAFFIC SERVICE ROUTES; AND 

REPORTING POINTS 

1. The authority citation for part 71 

continues to read as follows: 

Authority: 49 U.S.C. 106(g), 40103, 40113, 

40120; E.O. 10854, 24 FR 9565, 3 CFR, 1959– 

1963 Comp., p. 389. 

§ 71.1 [Amended] 

2. The incorporation by reference in 

14 CFR 71.1 of FAA Order 7400.9T, 

Airspace Designations and Reporting 

Points, Dated August 27, 2009 and 

effective September 15, 2009, is 

amended as follows: 

Paragraph 2004 Jet Routes. 

* * * * * 

J–32 [Modified] 

From Oakland, CA, via Sacramento, CA; 

Mustang, NV; Lovelock, NV; Battle 

Mountain, NV; Malad City, ID; Boysen 

Reservoir, WY; Crazy Woman, WY; Dupree, 

SD; Aberdeen, SD; to Duluth, MN. 

* * * * * 

J–38 [Modified] 

From Duluth, MN; Green Bay, WI; to Peck, 

MI. 

* * * * * 

J–538 [Modified] 

From Sioux Narrows, ON; Duluth, MN; 

Dells, WI; to Badger, WI. The airspace within 

Canada is excluded. 

* * * * * 

Issued in Washington, DC, on December 2, 

2009. 

Kenneth L. McElroy, 

Acting Manager, Airspace & Rules Group. 

[FR Doc. E9–29365 Filed 12–8–09; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 4910–13–P 

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION 

AGENCY 

40 CFR Part 52 

[EPA–R09–OAR–2009–0711; FRL–9090–3] 

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 a limited 

approval and limited disapproval of 

revisions to the San Joaquin Valley 

Unified Air Pollution Control District 

(SJVAPCD) portion of the California 

State Implementation Plan (SIP). These 

revisions concern oxides of nitrogen 

(NOX) emissions from solid fuel fired 

boilers, steam generators and process 

heaters. We are proposing action on a 

local rule that regulates 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. 

DATES: Any comments must arrive by 

January 8, 2010. 

ADDRESSES: Submit comments, 

identified by docket number [EPA–R09– 

OAR–2009–0711], 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: The index to the docket for 

this action is 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 in 

the index, some information may be 

publicly available only at the hard copy 

location (e.g., copyrighted material), 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: 

Idalia Perez, EPA Region IX, (415) 972– 

3248, perez.idalia@epa.gov. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

Throughout this document, ‘‘we,’’ ‘‘us’’ 

and ‘‘our’’ refer to 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. EPA’s Evaluation and Action 

A. How is EPA evaluating the rule? 

B. Does the rule meet the evaluation 

criteria? 

C. What is the rule deficiency? 

D. EPA Recommendations To Further 

Improve the Rule 

E. Proposed Action and Public Comment 

III. 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 dates that it was 

adopted by the local air agency and 

submitted by the California Air 

Resources Board. 

TABLE 1—SUBMITTED RULE

Local agency Rule No. Rule title Adopted Submitted 

SJVAPCD ..................................... 4352 Solid Fuel Fired Boilers, Steam Generators and Process Heaters .. 05/18/06 10/05/06 

On 10/24/06, EPA determined that the 

submittal for SJVAPCD Rule 4352 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? 

We approved an earlier version of 

Rule 4352 into the SIP on February 11, 

WReier-Aviles on DSKGBLS3C1PROD with PROPOSALS

Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 235 / Wednesday, December 9, 2009 / Proposed Rules 65043 

1999 (64 FR 6803). We published a 

direct final approval of revisions to this 

rule, along with a parallel proposal, on 

May 30, 2007 (72 FR 29886). We 

received adverse comments and 

withdrew the direct final approval of 

Rule 4352 on July 30, 2007 (72 FR 

41450). Because we are reproposing 

today an alternative action on Rule 

4352, we are not addressing comments 

or taking further action on the parallel 

proposal published on May 30, 2007 (72 

FR 29901). 

C. What is the purpose of the submitted 

rule revision? 

NOX emissions help produce groundlevel 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 NOX emissions. 

Rule 4352 limits NOX and carbon 

monoxide (CO) emissions from solid 

fuel fired boilers, steam generators and 

process heaters. SJVAPCD amended the 

rule to broaden its applicability and to 

strengthen the emission limits for NOX. 

EPA’s technical support document 

(TSD) has more information about this 

rule. 

II. EPA’s Evaluation and Action 

A. How is EPA evaluating the rule? 

Generally, NOX SIP rules must be 

enforceable (see section 110(a) of the 

Act), must require Reasonably Available 

Control Technology (RACT) for each 

major source of NOX emissions in 

nonattainment areas classified as 

moderate or above (see sections 

182(b)(2) and 182(f)), and must not relax 

existing requirements (see sections 

110(l) and 193). The SJVAPCD regulates 

an ozone nonattainment area classified 

as extreme (1-hour standard) and 

serious (8-hour standard) (see 40 CFR 

part 81), so Rule 4352 must satisfy 

RACT requirements. Rule 4352 must 

also require the use of advanced control 

technologies to control NOX emission 

from this source category (see section 

182(e)(3)). 

Guidance and policy documents that 

we use to evaluate enforceability and 

RACT requirements consistently 

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 (the General 

Preamble); 57 FR 18070, April 28, 1992 

(Appendices). 

2. ‘‘State Implementation Plans; 

Nitrogen Oxides Supplement to the 

General Preamble; Clean Air Act 

Amendments of 1990 Implementation of 

Title I; Proposed Rule,’’ 57 FR 55620, 

November 25, 1992 (the NOX

Supplement). 

3. ‘‘Issues Relating to VOC Regulation 

Cutpoints, Deficiencies, and 

Deviations,’’ EPA, May 25, 1988 (the 

Bluebook). 

4. ‘‘Guidance Document for Correcting 

Common VOC & Other Rule 

Deficiencies,’’ EPA Region 9, August 21, 

2001 (the Little Bluebook). 

5. ‘‘Determination of Reasonably 

Available Control Technology and Best 

Available Retrofit Control Technology 

for Industrial, Institutional, and 

Commercial Boilers, Steam Generators, 

and Process Heaters,’’ CARB, July 18, 

1991. 

6. ‘‘Alternative Control Techniques 

Document—NOX Emissions from 

Industrial/Commercial/Institutional 

(ICI) Boilers,’’ US EPA, 453/R–94–022, 

March 1994. 

7. ‘‘Alternative Control Techniques 

Document—NOX Emissions from Utility 

Boilers,’’ U.S. EPA, 453/R–94–023, 

March 1994. 

B. Does the rule meet the evaluation 

criteria? 

SJVAPCD’s revisions to Rule 4352 

improve the SIP by expanding the rule’s 

applicability provisions and 

establishing more stringent NOX

emission limits. The rule is largely 

consistent with CAA requirements and 

EPA policy regarding enforceability and 

SIP relaxations. Rule 4352 also requires 

the use of advanced control 

technologies to control NOX emissions 

from this source category. Rule 

provisions which do not meet the 

evaluation criteria are summarized 

below and discussed further in the TSD. 

C. What is the rule deficiency? 

The following provision does not 

satisfy the requirements of section 110 

and part D of the Act and prevents full 

approval of the SIP revision. 

1. Section 5.1 of the Rule establishes 

the emission limits. With the exception 

of the NOX emission limit for biomass 

fuel-fired units, SJVAPCD has not 

adequately demonstrated that the NOX

emission limits (i.e., NOX limits for 

units burning municipal solid waste or 

other solid fuels, such as coal) satisfy 

RACT requirements. As explained 

further in the TSD for this proposed 

action, EPA’s 1994 Alternative Control 

Techniques Document for NOX

emissions from ICI Boilers contains 

lower emission ranges for such boilers. 

Source-specific information from the 

SJVAPCD also indicate that emission 

limits lower than those in Rule 4352 are 

reasonably achievable. 

D. 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. 

E. Proposed Action and Public 

Comment 

As authorized in sections 110(k)(3) 

and 301(a) of the Act, EPA is proposing 

a limited approval of the submitted rule 

to improve the SIP. If finalized, this 

action would incorporate the submitted 

rule into the SIP, including those 

provisions identified as deficient. This 

approval is limited because EPA is 

simultaneously proposing a limited 

disapproval of the rule under section 

110(k)(3). If this disapproval is 

finalized, sanctions will be imposed 

under section 179 of the Act unless EPA 

approves subsequent SIP revisions that 

correct the rule deficiencies within 18 

months of the disapproval. These 

sanctions would be imposed according 

to 40 CFR 52.31. A final disapproval 

would also trigger the 2-year clock for 

the federal implementation plan (FIP) 

requirement under section 110(c). Note 

that the submitted rule has been 

adopted by the SJVAPCD, and EPA’s 

final limited disapproval would not 

prevent the local agency from enforcing 

it. 

We will accept comments from the 

public on the proposed limited approval 

and limited disapproval for the next 30 

days. 

III. Statutory and Executive Order 

Reviews 

A. Executive Order 12866, Regulatory 

Planning and Review 

The Office of Management and Budget 

(OMB) has exempted this regulatory 

action from Executive Order 12866, 

entitled ‘‘Regulatory Planning and 

Review.’’ 

B. Paperwork Reduction Act 

This action does not impose an 

information collection burden under the 

provisions of the Paperwork Reduction 

Act, 44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq. Burden is 

defined at 5 CFR 1320.3(b). 

C. Regulatory Flexibility Act 

The Regulatory Flexibility Act (RFA) 

generally requires an agency to conduct 

a regulatory flexibility analysis of any 

rule subject to notice and comment 

rulemaking requirements unless the 

agency certifies that the rule will not 

have a significant economic impact on 

a substantial number of small entities. 

Small entities include small businesses, 

WReier-Aviles on DSKGBLS3C1PROD with PROPOSALS

65044 Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 235 / Wednesday, December 9, 2009 / Proposed Rules 

small not-for-profit enterprises, and 

small governmental jurisdictions. 

This rule will not have a significant 

impact on a substantial number of small 

entities because SIP approvals under 

section 110 and subchapter I, part D of 

the Clean Air Act do not create any new 

requirements but simply approve 

requirements that the State is already 

imposing. Therefore, because the 

Federal SIP approval does not create 

any new requirements, I certify that this 

action will not have a significant 

economic impact on a substantial 

number of small entities. 

Moreover, due to the nature of the 

Federal-State relationship under the 

Clean Air Act, preparation of flexibility 

analysis would constitute Federal 

inquiry into the economic 

reasonableness of State action. The 

Clean Air Act forbids EPA to base its 

actions concerning SIPs on such 

grounds. Union Electric Co., v. U.S. 

EPA, 427 U.S. 246, 255–66 (1976); 42 

U.S.C. 7410(a)(2). 

D. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act 

Under sections 202 of the Unfunded 

Mandates Reform Act of 1995 

(‘‘Unfunded Mandates Act’’), signed 

into law on March 22, 1995, EPA must 

prepare a budgetary impact statement to 

accompany any proposed or final rule 

that includes a Federal mandate that 

may result in estimated costs to State, 

local, or tribal governments in the 

aggregate; or to the private sector, of 

$100 million or more. Under section 

205, EPA must select the most costeffective and least burdensome 

alternative that achieves the objectives 

of the rule and is consistent with 

statutory requirements. Section 203 

requires EPA to establish a plan for 

informing and advising any small 

governments that may be significantly 

or uniquely impacted by the rule. 

EPA has determined that the approval 

action proposed does not include a 

Federal mandate that may result in 

estimated costs of $100 million or more 

to either State, local, or tribal 

governments in the aggregate, or to the 

private sector. This Federal action 

proposes to approve pre-existing 

requirements under State or local law, 

and imposes no new requirements. 

Accordingly, no additional costs to 

State, local, or tribal governments, or to 

the private sector, result from this 

action. 

E. Executive Order 13132, Federalism 

Federalism (64 FR 43255, August 10, 

1999) revokes and replaces Executive 

Orders 12612 (Federalism) and 12875 

(Enhancing the Intergovernmental 

Partnership). Executive Order 13132 

requires EPA to develop an accountable 

process to ensure ‘‘meaningful and 

timely input by State and local officials 

in the development of regulatory 

policies that have federalism 

implications.’’ ‘‘Policies that have 

federalism implications’’ is defined in 

the Executive Order to include 

regulations that 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.’’ Under 

Executive Order 13132, EPA may not 

issue a regulation that has federalism 

implications, that imposes substantial 

direct compliance costs, and that is not 

required by statute, unless the Federal 

government provides the funds 

necessary to pay the direct compliance 

costs incurred by State and local 

governments, or EPA consults with 

State and local officials early in the 

process of developing the proposed 

regulation. EPA also may not issue a 

regulation that has federalism 

implications and that preempts State 

law unless the Agency consults with 

State and local officials early in the 

process of developing the proposed 

regulation. 

This rule 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, as specified in 

Executive Order 13132, because it 

merely approves a State rule 

implementing a Federal standard, and 

does not alter the relationship or the 

distribution of power and 

responsibilities established in the Clean 

Air Act. Thus, the requirements of 

section 6 of the Executive Order do not 

apply to this rule. 

F. Executive Order 13175, Coordination 

With Indian Tribal Governments 

Executive Order 13175, entitled 

‘‘Consultation and Coordination with 

Indian Tribal Governments’’ (65 FR 

67249, November 9, 2000), requires EPA 

to develop an accountable process to 

ensure ‘‘meaningful and timely input by 

tribal officials in the development of 

regulatory policies that have tribal 

implications.’’ This proposed rule does 

not have tribal implications, as specified 

in Executive Order 13175. It will not 

have substantial direct effects on tribal 

governments, on the relationship 

between the Federal government and 

Indian tribes, or on the distribution of 

power and responsibilities between the 

Federal government and Indian tribes. 

Thus, Executive Order 13175 does not 

apply to this rule. 

EPA specifically solicits additional 

comment on this proposed rule from 

tribal officials. 

G. Executive Order 13045, Protection of 

Children From Environmental Health 

Risks and Safety Risks 

EPA interprets Executive Order 13045 

(62 FR 19885, April 23, 1997) as 

applying only to those regulatory 

actions that concern health or safety 

risks, such that the analysis required 

under section 5–501 of the Executive 

Order has the potential to influence the 

regulation. This rule is not subject to 

Executive Order 13045, because it 

approves a State rule implementing a 

Federal standard. 

H. Executive Order 13211, Actions That 

Significantly Affect Energy Supply, 

Distribution, or Use 

This rule is not subject to Executive 

Order 13211, ‘‘Actions Concerning 

Regulations That Significantly Affect 

Energy Supply, Distribution, or Use’’ (66 

FR 28355, May 22, 2001) because it is 

not a significant regulatory action under 

Executive Order 12866. 

I. National Technology Transfer and 

Advancement Act 

Section 12 of the National Technology 

Transfer and Advancement Act 

(NTTAA) of 1995 requires Federal 

agencies to evaluate existing technical 

standards when developing a new 

regulation. To comply with NTTAA, 

EPA must consider and use ‘‘voluntary 

consensus standards’’ (VCS) if available 

and applicable when developing 

programs and policies unless doing so 

would be inconsistent with applicable 

law or otherwise impractical. 

The EPA believes that VCS are 

inapplicable to this action. Today’s 

action does not require the public to 

perform activities conducive to the use 

of VCS. 

List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52 

Environmental protection, Air 

pollution control, Intergovernmental 

relations, Nitrogen dioxide, Ozone, 

Reporting and recordkeeping 

requirements. 

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

Dated: November 19, 2009. 

Laura Yoshii, 

Acting Regional Administrator, Region IX. 

[FR Doc. E9–29351 Filed 12–8–09; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 6560–50–P 

WReier-Aviles on DSKGBLS3C1PROD with PROPOSALS