13266 Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 46 / Monday, March 10, 2014 / Proposed Rules 

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION 

AGENCY 

40 CFR Part 52 

[EPA–R09–OAR–2014–0172; FRL–9907–53– 

Region–9] 

Approval of Air Quality Implementation 

Plans; California; Ventura County Air 

Pollution Control District; Reasonably 

Available Control Technology for 

Ozone 

AGENCY: Environmental Protection 

Agency (EPA). 

ACTION: Proposed rule. 

SUMMARY: The Environmental Protection 

Agency (EPA) is proposing to approve a 

State Implementation Plan (SIP) 

revision submitted by California for the 

Ventura County Air Pollution Control 

District (VCAPCD) portion of the 

California SIP. The submitted SIP 

revision contains the District’s 

demonstration regarding Reasonably 

Available Control Technology (RACT) 

requirements for the 1997 8-hour ozone 

National Ambient Air Quality Standards 

(NAAQS). We are proposing to approve 

the submitted SIP revision under 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 

April 9, 2014. 

ADDRESSES: Submit comments, 

identified by docket number EPA–R09– 

OAR–2014–0172, by one of the 

following methods: 

1. Federal eRulemaking Portal: 

www.regulations.gov. Follow the on-line 

instructions. 

2. Email: 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 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 

www.regulations.gov or email. 

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 email 

directly to EPA, your email 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 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 

www.regulations.gov, 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: 

Stanley Tong, EPA Region IX, (415) 

947–4122, tong.stanley@epa.gov. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

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

and ‘‘our’’ refer to EPA. 

Table of Contents 

I. The State’s Submittal. 

A. What document did the State submit? 

B. Are there other versions of this 

document? 

C. What is the purpose of the RACT SIP 

submission? 

II. EPA’s Evaluation and Proposed Action. 

A. How is EPA evaluating the RACT SIP 

submission? 

B. Does the RACT SIP submission meet the 

evaluation criteria? 

C. EPA recommendations to strengthen the 

RACT SIP. 

D. Proposed action and public comment. 

III. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews. 

I. The State’s Submittal. 

A. What document did the State submit? 

Table 1 lists the document addressed 

by this proposal with the date that it 

was adopted by the local air agency and 

submitted by the California Air 

Resources Board. 

TABLE 1—SUBMITTED DOCUMENT

Local agency Document Adopted Submitted 

VCAPCD ..... Reasonably Available Control Technology State Implementation Plan Revision (2009 RACT 

SIP Revision) as adopted September 15, 2009 (‘‘2009 RACT SIP’’).

9/15/09 11/17/09 

VCAPCD’s 2009 RACT SIP became 

complete by operation of law under 

CAA section 110(k)(1)(B) on May 17, 

2010. 

B. Are there other versions of this 

document? 

While there is no previous version of 

VCAPCD’s 2009 RACT SIP in the SIP, 

VCAPCD adopted and we approved 

VCAPCD’s 2006 RACT SIP analysis on 

April 21, 2009 (74 FR 18148). 

C. What is the purpose of the RACT SIP 

submission? 

Volatile organic compounds (VOCs) 

and nitrogen oxides (NOX) help produce 

ground-level ozone and smog, which 

harm human health and the 

environment. Section 110(a) of the CAA 

requires States to submit enforceable 

regulations that control VOC and NOX

emissions. Sections 182(b)(2) and (f) 

require that SIPs for ozone 

nonattainment areas classified as 

moderate or above require 

implementation of RACT for any source 

covered by a Control Techniques 

Guideline (CTG) document and any 

other major stationary source of VOCs or 

NOX. The VCAPCD is subject to this 

requirement as it is designated and 

classified as a serious ozone 

nonattainment area for the 1997 8-hour 

ozone NAAQS. 40 C.F.R. 81.305; 73 FR 

29073 (May 20, 2008) (final rule 

designating and classifying Ventura 

County APCD as serious nonattainment 

for the 1997 8-hour ozone NAAQs). On 

December 3, 2012, (77 FR 71551) EPA 

published a final rule determining that 

Ventura County attained the 1997 8- 

hour ozone standard. EPA’s attainment 

determination suspended the 

requirements for Ventura to submit an 

attainment demonstration and 

associated planning SIPs related to 

attainment of the 1997 8-hour ozone 

NAAQS for so long as the area 

continues to attain the standards, but 

did not suspend Ventura’s obligation to 

meet the specific RACT control 

requirements under CAA 182(b)(2) and 

(f). 40 CFR 51.918. Therefore, VCAPCD 

must, at a minimum, adopt RACT-level 


sroberts on DSK5SPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 46 / Monday, March 10, 2014 / Proposed Rules 13267 

1 2009 RACT SIP Attachment III page 3. 

controls for all sources covered by a 

CTG document and for all major nonCTG sources of VOCs or NOX. Any 

stationary source that emits or has a 

potential to emit at least 50 tons per 

year (tpy) of VOCs or NOX is a major 

stationary source in a serious ozone 

nonattainment area. CAA 182(c), (f). 

Section IV.G. of EPA’s final rule to 

implement the 1997 8-hour ozone 

NAAQS (70 FR 71612, November 29, 

2005) discusses RACT requirements. It 

states in part that where a RACT SIP is 

required, States implementing the 8- 

hour standard generally must assure 

that RACT is met either through a 

certification that previously required 

RACT controls represent RACT for 8- 

hour implementation purposes or 

through a new RACT determination. 

The submitted document updates and 

supplements VCAPCD’s 2006 RACT SIP 

analyses and demonstrates its 

compliance with 11 new or revised 

CTGs EPA issued between 2006 and 

2008. EPA’s technical support 

document (TSD) ‘‘2009 RACT SIP TSD’’ 

has more information about the 

District’s submission and EPA’s 

evaluation thereof. 

II. EPA’s Evaluation and Proposed 

Action 

A. How is EPA evaluating the RACT SIP 

submission? 

Rules and guidance documents that 

we use to evaluate CAA section 182 

RACT SIPs include the following: 

1. ‘‘Final Rule to Implement the 8- 

Hour Ozone National Ambient Air 

Quality Standard—Phase 2’’ (70 FR 

71612; November 29, 2005). 

2. ‘‘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). 

3. Issues Relating to VOC Regulation 

Cutpoints, Deficiencies, and Deviations: 

Clarification to Appendix D of 

November 24, 1987 Federal Register, 

May 25, 1988, U.S. EPA, Air Quality 

Management Division, Office of Air 

Quality Planning and Standards (‘‘The 

Blue Book’’). 

4. Guidance Document for Correcting 

Common VOC and Other Rule 

Deficiencies, August 21, 2001, U.S. EPA 

Region IX (the ‘‘Little Bluebook’’). 

5. ‘‘State Implementation Plans; 

Nitrogen Oxides Supplement to the 

General Preamble for the 

Implementation of Title I of the Clean 

Air Act Amendments of 1990’’ (57 FR 

55620, November 25, 1992) (‘‘the NOX

Supplement’’). 

6. RACT SIPs, Letter dated March 9, 

2006 from EPA Region IX (Andrew 

Steckel) to CARB (Kurt Karperos) 

describing Region IX’s understanding of 

what constitutes a minimally acceptable 

RACT SIP. 

7. Memorandum from William T. 

Harnett to Regional Air Division 

Directors, (May 18, 2006), ‘‘RACT Qs & 

As—Reasonably Available Control 

Technology (RACT) Questions and 

Answers.’’ 

8. CTGs issued by EPA between 2006 

and 2008 http://www.epa.gov/glo/

SIPToolkit/ctgs.html. 

With respect to major stationary 

sources, the Ventura County APCD 

nonattainment area is classified as 

‘‘serious’’ nonattainment for the 1997 8- 

hour ozone NAAQS. While major 

sources in serious ozone nonattainment 

areas are defined as those emitting at 

least 50 tons per year (tpy) of VOC or 

NOX (CAA 182(c) and (f)), VCAPCD’s 

2009 RACT SIP analyzed major sources 

with at least 25 tpy of NOX or VOC. 

B. Does the RACT SIP submission meet 

the evaluation criteria? 

The 2009 RACT SIP updates and 

supplements the District’s 2006 RACT 

SIP and provides the District’s 

certification that the applicable SIP for 

the Ventura County APCD satisfies CAA 

section 182 RACT requirements for the 

1997 8-hour ozone NAAQS for the 11 

new or revised CTGs EPA issued 

between 2006 and 2008. This 

certification is based on the District’s 

analyses of SIP-approved requirements 

that apply to: (1) new or revised CTGs 

issued between 2006 and 2008; and (2) 

all other major stationary sources of 

NOx or VOC emissions. VCAPCD’s 2009 

RACT SIP includes a detailed analysis 

of specific SIP rules including 

discussions of how those rules meet the 

applicable CTG for the 1997 8-hour 

ozone NAAQS. 

Where there are no existing sources 

covered by a particular CTG document, 

states may, in lieu of adopting RACT 

requirements for those sources, adopt 

negative declarations certifying that 

there are no such sources in the relevant 

nonattainment area. Table 2 below lists 

all of the source categories for which 

VCAPCD’s 2009 RACT SIP provides 

negative declarations. 

TABLE 2—VCAPCD NEGATIVE DECLARATIONS

CTG Source Category CTG Document Title 

Flat Wood Paneling Coatings ...................................... EPA–453/R06–004 Control Techniques Guidelines for Flat Wood Paneling Coatings 

Large Appliance Coatings ........................................... EPA–453/R–07–004 Control Techniques Guidelines for Large Appliance Coatings 

Paper, Film and Foil Coatings ..................................... EPA–453/R–07–003 Control Techniques Guidelines for Paper, Film, and Foil Coatings 

Automobile and Light-Duty Truck Assembly Coatings EPA–452/R–08–006 Control Techniques Guidelines for Automobile and Light-Duty Truck 

Assembly Coatings 

Miscellaneous Industrial Adhesives ............................. EPA 453/R–08–005 Control Techniques Guidelines for Miscellaneous Industrial Adhesives 

Flexible Package Printing ............................................ EPA 453/R–06–003 Control Techniques Guidelines for Flexible Package Printing 

Metal Furniture Coatings ............................................. EPA 453/R–07–005 Control Techniques Guidelines for Metal Furniture Coatings 

Fiberglass Boat Manufacturing Materials .................... EPA 453/R–08–004 Control Techniques Guidelines for Fiberglass Boat Manufacturing 

Materials 

We are proposing to find that 

VCAPCD’s 2009 RACT SIP submission, 

including all of these negative 

declarations, adequately demonstrate 

that the 11 CTGs EPA issued between 

2006 and 2008 are either covered by SIP 

rules which satisfy RACT for the 1997 

8-hour ozone NAAQS or the District has 

adopted negative declarations certifying 

they have no sources subject to the 

specific CTG source category. 

With respect to certain non-CTG 

source categories that are major 

stationary sources of NOX or VOC 

emissions, VCAPCD’s 2009 RACT SIP 

states that ‘‘since the 2006 RACT SIP 

considered CTG sources and major nonCTG VOC and NOX sources down to 25 

tons per year, the 2006 RACT SIP is able 

to serve as the District’s serious area 

RACT certification.’’ 1

Our review of CARB’s 2006 and 2008 

emissions inventory database for 

VCAPCD sources identified two 

additional sources (oil production and 


sroberts on DSK5SPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
13268 Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 46 / Monday, March 10, 2014 / Proposed Rules 

electrical power generation) exceeding 

the District’s 25 tpy threshold for major 

sources but below the 50 tpy threshold 

for CAA serious ozone nonattainment 

areas. Both sources are covered by SIPapproved RACT rules. The electrical 

power generating station is covered by 

VCAPCD Rule 59 ‘‘Electric Power 

Generating Equipment’’ and operates 

two natural gas fired steam generators 

equipped with selective catalytic 

reduction and ammonia injection. The 

facility only operates when requested by 

the California Independent System 

Operator (CAISO). Since Rule 59 was 

last amended in 1997, it may be an area 

to investigate for potential emission 

reductions when the District next 

evaluates RACT for the 2008 8-hour 

ozone standard. Based on EPA’s review 

of the District’s evaluations, we propose 

to conclude that all of the 2006–2008 

CTGs are either covered by SIPapproved rules which satisfy RACT for 

the 1997 8-hour ozone NAAQS or the 

District has adopted negative 

declarations where they do not have 

sources subject to a CTG. The TSD has 

more information on our evaluation. 

C. EPA Recommendations To 

Strengthen the RACT SIP 

We recommend VCAPCD investigate 

Rule 59 for potential emissions 

reductions when the District next 

evaluates RACT for the 2008 8-hour 

ozone standard. We discuss this 

recommendation further in our TSD. 

D. Proposed Action and Public 

Comment 

Based on the evaluations discussed 

above and more fully in our TSD, we are 

proposing to conclude that VCAPCD’s 

2009 RACT SIP satisfies CAA section 

182 RACT requirements for the 1997 8- 

hour ozone NAAQS and to fully 

approve this submission into the 

California SIP pursuant to 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 this RACT submission 

into the federally enforceable SIP. 

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. This 

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 note) because 

application of those requirements would 

be inconsistent with the Clean Air Act; 

and 

• Does not provide EPA with the 

discretionary authority to address, as 

appropriate, 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, Incorporation by 

reference, Intergovernmental relations, 

Nitrogen dioxide, Ozone, Reporting and 

recordkeeping requirements, Volatile 

organic compounds. 

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

Dated: February 24, 2014. 

Jared Blumenfeld, 

Regional Administrator, Region IX. 

[FR Doc. 2014–05102 Filed 3–7–14; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 6560–50–P 

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION 

AGENCY 

40 CFR Part 52 

[EPA–R01–OAR–2013–0509; A–1–FRL– 

9906–95–Region 1] 

Approval and Promulgation of Air 

Quality Implementation Plans; New 

Hampshire; Decommissioning of Stage 

II Vapor Recovery Systems 

AGENCY: Environmental Protection 

Agency (EPA). 

ACTION: Proposed rule. 

SUMMARY: The Environmental Protection 

Agency (EPA) is proposing to approve a 

State Implementation Plan (SIP) 

revision submitted by the State of New 

Hampshire Department of 

Environmental Services. This revision 

includes regulatory amendments that 

require the decommissioning of Stage II 

vapor recovery systems at gasoline 

dispensing facilities by December 22, 

2015, and a demonstration that such 

removal is consistent with the Clean Air 

Act and EPA guidance. The intended 

effect of this action is to propose 

approval of New Hampshire’s revised 

vapor recovery regulation. 

DATES: Written comments must be 

received on or before April 9, 2014. 

ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, 

identified by Docket ID Number EPA– 

R01–OAR–2013–0509 by one of the 

following methods: 

1. www.regulations.gov: Follow the 

on-line instructions for submitting 

comments. 

2. Email: arnold.anne@epa.gov. 

3. Fax: (617) 918–0047. 

4. Mail: ‘‘Docket Identification 

Number EPA–R01–OAR–2013–0509,’’ 

Anne Arnold, U.S. Environmental 

Protection Agency, EPA New England 

Regional Office, Office of Ecosystem 

Protection, Air Quality Planning Unit, 5 

Post Office Square—Suite 100, (Mail 

code OEP05–2), Boston, MA 02109— 

3912. 

5. Hand Delivery or Courier. Deliver 

your comments to: Anne Arnold, 

Manager, Air Quality Planning Unit, 

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, 

EPA New England Regional Office, 

Office of Ecosystem Protection, Air 

Quality Planning Unit, 5 Post Office 

Square—Suite 100, (mail code OEP05– 

2), Boston, MA 02109–3912. Such 

deliveries are only accepted during the 


sroberts on DSK5SPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS