52710 Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 169 / Tuesday, September 1, 2015 / Proposed Rules 

associated Reconsideration Rule and 

Vacated Elements Rule), Phase 2 Rule, 

NSR PM2.5 Rule, PM2.5 PSD IncrementSILs-SMC Rule, and the Fugitive 

Emissions Interim Rule. The Agency has 

made the preliminary determination 

that the proposed changes to Alabama’s 

NNSR SIP are approvable because they 

are consistent with section 110 of the 

CAA and EPA regulations. 

VI. Statutory and Executive Order 

Reviews 

Under the CAA, 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 CAA. Accordingly, this proposed 

action merely approves 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 Orders 12866 (58 FR 51735, 

October 4, 1993) and 13563 (76 FR 3821, 

January 21, 2011); 

• 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, using 

practicable and legally permissible 

methods, under Executive Order 12898 

(59 FR 7629, February 16, 1994). 

The SIP is not approved to apply on 

any Indian reservation land or in any 

other area where 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 as specified by Executive 

Order 13175 (65 FR 67249, November 9, 

2000), nor will it impose substantial 

direct costs on tribal governments or 

preempt tribal law. 

List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52 

Environmental protection, Air 

pollution control, Carbon monoxide, 

Incorporation by reference, Ozone, 

Particulate matter, Nitrogen oxides, 

Reporting and recordkeeping 

requirements, Sulfur oxides, Volatile 

organic compounds. 

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

Dated: August 20, 2015. 

Heather McTeer Toney, 

Regional Administrator, Region 4. 

[FR Doc. 2015–21537 Filed 8–31–15; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 6560–50–P 

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION 

AGENCY 

40 CFR Part 52 

[EPA–R09–OAR–2015–0289; FRL 9933–19– 

Region 9] 

Revisions to the California State 

Implementation Plan, Imperial County 

Air Pollution Control District 

AGENCY: Environmental Protection 

Agency (EPA). 

ACTION: Proposed rule. 

SUMMARY: The Environmental Protection 

Agency (EPA) is proposing to approve a 

revision to the Imperial County Air 

Pollution Control District (ICAPCD or 

the District) portion of the California 

State Implementation Plan (SIP). We 

propose to approve the following SIP 

demonstration from ICAPCD: Final 2009 

Reasonably Available Control 

Technology State Implementation Plan, 

July 13, 2010. This demonstration 

addresses the 1997 8-hour National 

Ambient Air Quality Standards 

(NAAQS) for ozone. This submitted SIP 

revision contains ICAPCD’s negative 

declarations for volatile organic 

compound (VOC) source categories. We 

propose to approve the submitted 

reasonably available control technology 

(RACT) SIP revision 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 

October 1, 2015. 

ADDRESSES: Submit comments, 

identified by docket number EPA–R09– 

OAR–2015–0289, 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 the 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 the EPA, your email 

address will be automatically captured 

and included as part of the public 

comment. If the EPA cannot read your 

comment due to technical difficulties 

and cannot contact you for clarification, 

the EPA may not be able to consider 

your comment. Electronic files should 

avoid the use of special characters, any 

form of encryption, and be free of any 

defects or viruses. 

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 94105–3901. 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, 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: 

James Shears, EPA Region IX, (213) 

244–1810, shears.james@epa.gov. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

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

and ‘‘our’’ refer to the EPA. 

Table of Contents 

I. The State’s Submittal 

mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS

Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 169 / Tuesday, September 1, 2015 / Proposed Rules 52711 

1CAA section 182(b)(2) and (f). 

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. The EPA’s Evaluation and Action 

A. How is the EPA evaluating the RACT 

SIP submission? 

B. Does the RACT SIP submission meet the 

evaluation criteria? 

C. EPA recommendations to further 

improve the RACT SIP 

D. Public comment and final action 

III. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews 

I. The State’s Submittal 

A. What document did the State submit? 

Table 1 includes the document 

addressed by this action with the date 

that it was adopted by the local air 

agency and submitted by the California 

Air Resources Board (CARB). 

TABLE 1—SUBMITTED DOCUMENT

Local agency Document Adopted Submitted 

ICAPCD ........................................... Final 2009 Reasonably Available Control Technology State Implementation Plan (‘‘2009 RACT SIP’’).7/13/10 12/21/10 

On June 21, 2011, the RACT SIP 

submittal for ICAPCD was deemed by 

operation of law to meet 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 

document? 

There is no previous version of 

ICAPCD’s 2009 RACT SIP. 

C. What is the purpose of the RACT SIP 

submission? 

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 regulations 

that control VOC and NOX emissions. 

Sections 182(b)(2) and (f) require that 

SIPs for ozone areas classified as 

moderate or above require 

implementation of RACT for any source 

covered by an EPA Control Technique 

Guideline (CTG) document and any 

major stationary source of VOCs or NOX. 

ICAPCD is subject to this requirement as 

the District is designated and classified 

as a moderate nonattainment area for 

the 1997 8-hour NAAQS for ozone (see 

40 CFR 81.305). Therefore, ICAPCD 

must, at a minimum, adopt RACT-level 

controls for all sources covered by a 

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

The District adopted its 2009 RACT SIP 

revision on July 13, 2010. ICAPCD 

received no comments on its RACT SIP 

demonstration. 

II. The EPA’s Evaluation and Action 

A. How is the EPA evaluating the RACT 

SIP submission? 

With the implementation of the 1997 

8-hour NAAQS for ozone, ICAPCD was 

classified as a marginal nonattainment 

area (69 FR 23858, April 30, 2004). 

Subsequently, the EPA found that 

Imperial County did not meet 

attainment by the deadline of June 15, 

2007, and reclassified it as a moderate 

nonattainment area with an attainment 

deadline of June 15, 2010 (see 73 FR 

8209, February 13, 2008). On December 

3, 2009, the EPA issued a final ruling 

(74 FR 63309) determining that Imperial 

County attained the 1997 8-hour 

NAAQS based on ambient air 

monitoring data for the years 2006 

through 2008. Although the finding of 

attainment by the EPA suspended 

certain SIP related requirements, it did 

not suspend the RACT requirements for 

VOCs and NOX. Pursuant to 40 CFR 

51.912(a)(1), the State (or local air 

district) must submit a SIP revision that 

meets the VOC and NOX RACT 

requirements in CAA section 182(b)(2) 

and (f) for each area subject to subpart 

2 and classified moderate or higher. 

Therefore, ICAPCD must, at a minimum, 

adopt RACT-level controls for sources 

covered by a CTG document and for any 

major stationary source of VOCs or 

NOX.1 Any stationary source that emits 

or has a potential to emit at least 100 

tons per year (tpy) of VOCs or NOX in 

a moderate nonattainment area is 

considered a major stationary source 

(see CAA sections 182(b)(2) and (f) and 

302(j)). Where there are no existing 

sources covered by a particular CTG 

document or no major stationary 

sources of VOCs or NOX, states may, in 

lieu of adopting RACT requirements, 

adopt negative declarations certifying 

that there are no such sources in the 

relevant nonattainment area (see 

Memorandum from William T. Harnett 

to Regional Air Division Directors, (May 

18, 2006), ‘‘RACT Qs & As—Reasonably 

Available Control Technology (RACT) 

Questions and Answers’’, page 7). 

Guidance and policy documents that 

we use to evaluate CAA section 182 

RACT SIPs for ICAPCD 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. ‘‘Air Quality Designations and 

Classifications for the 8-Hour Ozone 

National Ambient Air Quality 

Standards; Early Action Compact Areas 

with Deferred Dates’’—Final Rule (69 

FR 23858; April 30, 2004). 

3. ‘‘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). 

4. Issues Relating to VOC Regulation 

Cutpoints, Deficiencies, and Deviations: 

Clarification to Appendix D of 

November 24, 1987 Federal Register, 

May 25, 1988, Revised January 11, 1990, 

U.S. EPA, Air Quality Management 

Division, Office of Air Quality Planning 

and Standards (‘‘The Blue Book’’). 

5. Guidance Document for Correcting 

Common VOC and Other Rule 

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

Region IX (the ‘‘Little Bluebook’’). 

6. ‘‘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’’). 

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. 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. 

9. ‘‘Final Rule to Implement the 1997 

8-Hour Ozone National Ambient Air 

Quality Standard: Classification of 

Areas That Were Initially Classified 

Under Subpart 1; Revision of the AntiBacksliding Provisions To Address 1- 

Hour Contingency Measure 

Requirements; Deletion of Obsolete 1- 

Hour Standard Provision’’—Final Rule 

(77 FR 28424; May 14, 2012). 

mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS

52712 Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 169 / Tuesday, September 1, 2015 / Proposed Rules 

2 ICAPCD—Supplemental to 2009 RACT SIP— 

Analysis of Control Technologies Guidance (CTG) 

Documents, July 31, 2015. 

10. ‘‘Model Volatile Organic 

Compound Rules for Reasonably 

Available Control Technology’’, EPA 

(June 1992). 

11. ‘‘Beyond VOC RACT 

Requirements’’, EPA–453/R–95–010, 

(April 1995). 

12. The EPA’s CTGs http://

www.epa.gov/glo/SIPToolkit/ctgs.html. 

13. CARB’s emissions inventory 

database http://www.arb.ca.gov/app/

emsinv/facinfo/facinfo.php 

14. CARB and EPA Region IX 

databases of ICAPCD rules—CARB: 

http://www.arb.ca.gov/ridb.htm EPA: 

http://epa.gov/region09/air/sips/

index.html 

15. ‘‘Implementation of the 2008 

National Ambient Air Quality Standards 

for Ozone: State Implementation Plan 

Requirements’’—Final Rule (80 FR 

12264; March 6, 2015). 

B. Does the RACT SIP submission meet 

the evaluation criteria? 

The 2009 RACT SIP includes three 

elements, as described further below: 

1. Evaluations of VOC and NOX rules 

for sources subject to a CTG. 

2. Negative declarations where there 

are no facilities subject to a CTG. 

3. Major Non-CTG sources of VOC or 

NOX. 

A summary of our evaluation of each 

element is provided below. For 

additional information concerning our 

evaluation, please refer to the Technical 

Support Document (TSD) for the 2009 

RACT SIP which is available in the 

docket for this action. 

1. Evaluations of VOC and NOX Rules 

for Sources Subject to a CTG 

ICAPCD identified 11 CTGs which 

apply to sources within Imperial County 

and are addressed in the RACT SIP. The 

District also compared its rules for these 

sources to similar rules in other air 

districts, and concluded their rules meet 

RACT requirements. We have reviewed 

ICAPCD’s analysis, including review of 

the referenced rules, and found no basis 

to disagree with ICAPCD’s conclusion 

that it has implemented RACT for all 

relevant CTG categories with three 

clarifications. Rule 413, Organic Solvent 

Degreasing Operations, and Rule 417, 

Organic Solvents, are not required to 

satisfy RACT. Subsequent to its 2009 

RACT submittal, the District found it 

had no sources of organic solvent 

cleaning within the District that would 

be subject to the 1977 Solvent Metal 

Cleaning CTG for Rule 413, nor any 

sources subject to the 2006 Industrial 

Cleaning Solvents CTG’s nine unit 

operations for Rule 417.2 Therefore, 

ICAPCD should formally adopt and 

submit to EPA as a SIP revision a 

negative declaration for each of these 

CTGs. Rule 427, Automotive Refinishing 

Operations, is not subject to RACT since 

it is not a CTG category and ICAPCD 

does not have any automobile 

refinishing operations that are major 

sources of VOC. 

2. Negative Declarations Where There 

Are No Facilities Subject to a CTG 

Negative declarations are only 

required for CTG source categories for 

which the District has no sources 

covered by the CTG. A negative 

declaration is not required for non-CTG 

source categories. Table 2 below lists 

the CTG source categories for the 2009 

RACT SIP. The District indicated it does 

not currently have, nor does it 

anticipate sources subject to the CTGs in 

these categories in the future. We 

searched CARB’s emissions inventory 

database to verify there are no facilities 

in ICAPCD that might be subject to the 

CTGs listed below. We concur with the 

District’s negative declarations. 

TABLE 2—ICAPCD NEGATIVE DECLARATIONS

CTG Source category CTG Reference document 

Aerospace ........................................................... EPA–453/R–97–004, Aerospace CTG and MACT. 

Automobile and Light-duty Trucks, Surface 

Coating of.

EPA–450/2–77–008, Control of Volatile Organic Emissions from Existing Stationary Sources— 

Volume II: Surface Coating of Cans, Coils, Paper, Fabrics, Automobiles, and Light-Duty 

Trucks. 

EPA–453/R–08–006, Control Techniques Guidelines for Automobile and Light-Duty Truck Assembly Coatings. 

Cans and Coils, Surface Coating of ................... EPA–450/2–77–008, Control of Volatile Organic Emissions from Existing Stationary Sources— 

Volume II: Surface Coating of Cans, Coils, Paper, Fabrics, Automobiles, and Light-Duty 

Trucks. 

Fiberglass Boat Manufacturing ........................... EPA–453/R–08–004, Controls Techniques Guidelines for Fiberglass Boat Manufacturing. 

Flat Wood Paneling, Surface Coating of ............ EPA–450/2–78–032, Control of Volatile Organic Emissions from Existing Stationary Sources— 

Volume VII: Factory Surface Coating of Flat Wood Paneling. 

EPA–453/R–06–004, Control Techniques Guidelines for Flat Wood Paneling Coatings. 

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

Graphic Arts—Rotogravure and Flexography ..... EPA–450/2–78–033, Control of Volatile Organic Emissions from Existing Stationary Sources, 

Volume III: Graphic Arts—Rotogravure and Flexography. 

Large Appliances, Surface Coating of ................ EPA–450/2–77–034, Control of Volatile Organic Emissions from Existing Stationary Sources— 

Volume V: Surface Coating of Large Appliances. 

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

Large Petroleum Dry Cleaners ........................... EPA–450/3–82–009, Control of Volatile Organic Compound Emissions from Large Petroleum 

Dry Cleaners. 

Offset Lithographic Printing and Letterpress 

Printing.

EPA–453/R–06–002, Control Techniques Guidelines for Offset Lithographic Printing and Letterpress Printing. 

Magnet Wire, Surface Coating for Insulation of .. EPA–450/2–77–033, Control of Volatile Organic Emissions from Existing Stationary Sources— 

Volume IV: Surface Coating of Insulation of Magnet Wire. 

Metal Furniture Coatings ..................................... EPA–450/2–77–032, Control of Volatile Organic Emissions from Existing Stationary Sources— 

Volume III: Surface Coating of Metal Furniture. 

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

Miscellaneous Metal and Plastic Parts Coatings EPA–453/R–08–003, Control Techniques Guidelines for Miscellaneous Metal and Plastic Parts 

Coatings. 

mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS

Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 169 / Tuesday, September 1, 2015 / Proposed Rules 52713 

3See 69 FR 23858 (April 30, 2004), and 77 FR 

28424 (May 14, 2012) (codified at 40 CFR 81.305 

(California—2008 8-Hour Ozone NAAQS)). 

4See CAA sections 182(b)(2) and (f) and 302(j). 

5 Imperial County Air Pollution Control District, 

Authority to Construct and Permit to Operate 

Review, Permit #2000H–9 (March 4, 2015) Table 8. 

6 Imperial County Air Pollution Control District, 

Synthetic Minor Permit Review, Permit 1641B–3 

(September 23, 2010) page 7. 

7 Imperial County Air Pollution Control District, 

Conditions for Authority to Construct and Permit to 

Operate #2002I–4 (April 7, 2014). 

TABLE 2—ICAPCD NEGATIVE DECLARATIONS—Continued 

CTG Source category CTG Reference document 

Miscellaneous Metal Parts and Products, Surface Coating of.EPA–450/2–78–015, Control of Volatile Organic Emissions from Existing Stationary Sources— 

Volume IV: Surface Coating of Miscellaneous Metal Parts and Products. 

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

Natural Gas/Gasoline Processing Plants Equipment Leaks.EPA–450/2–83–007, Control of Volatile Organic Compound Equipment Leaks from Natural 

Gas/Gasoline Processing Plants. 

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

Petroleum Refineries ........................................... EPA–450/2–77–025, Control of Refinery Vacuum Producing Systems, Wastewater Separators, 

and Process Unit Turnarounds. 

EPA–450/2–78–036, Control of Volatile Organic Compound Leaks from Petroleum Refinery 

Equipment. 

Pharmaceutical Products .................................... EPA–450/2–78–029, Control of Volatile Organic Emissions from Manufacture of Synthesized 

Pharmaceutical Products. 

Pneumatic Rubber Tires, Manufacture of ........... EPA–450/2–78–030, Control of Volatile Organic Emissions from Manufacture of Pneumatic 

Rubber Tires. 

Polyester Resin ................................................... EPA–450/3–83–008, Control of Volatile Organic Compound Emissions from Manufacture of 

High-Density Polyethylene, Polypropylene, and Polystyrene Resins. 

EPA–450/3–83–006, Control of Volatile Organic Compound Leaks from Synthetic Organic 

Chemical Polymer and Resin Manufacturing Equipment. 

Shipbuilding/Repair ............................................. EPA–453/R–94–032, Shipbuilding/Repair. 

Synthetic Organic Chemical ................................ EPA–450/3–84–015, Control of Volatile Organic Compound Emissions from Air Oxidation 

Processes in Synthetic Organic Chemical Manufacturing Industry. 

EPA–450/4–91–031, Control of Volatile Organic Compound Emissions from Reactor Processes and Distillation Operations in Synthetic Organic Chemical Manufacturing Industry. 

Wood Furniture ................................................... EPA–453/R–96–007, Wood Furniture. 

3. Major Non-CTG Sources of VOC or 

NOX

CAA section 182(b)(2) and (f) require 

RACT for stationary source categories 

covered by CTG documents and all 

major stationary sources of VOCs or 

NOX. ICAPCD was initially classified as 

subpart 1 marginal nonattainment for 

ozone, but was subsequently reclassified 

as subpart 2 moderate.3 A major source 

in a moderate ozone nonattainment area 

is defined as a stationary source that 

emits, or has the potential to emit, at 

least 100 tons per year of VOCs or NOX.4

ICAPCD’s 2009 RACT SIP, Table 3, 

lists nine facilities that were major 

sources of VOC or NOX at that time, 

along with the respective RACT rules 

for each facility. Three of the facilities 

listed did not have any VOC or NOX

RACT rules listed as applicable. We 

found that one of the facilities, 

CalEnergy, is currently permitted with a 

total annual potential to emit of 1.8 tons 

per year of benzene (VOC).5 Another 

facility, ORMAT Nevada, Inc., had a 

regenerative thermal oxidizer added to 

the facility subsequent to the 2009 

RACT SIP publication, and the potential 

to emit is now 19.6 tons per year of 

VOC.6 The third facility, GEM 

Resources (ORMESA, LLC), is subject to 

permit conditions which limits its 

potential to emit to 28.29 tons/year for 

VOCs and 9.94 tons/year for benzene.7

Therefore, all of these facilities are now 

well below the 100 tons/year threshold 

and are not major sources. 

ICAPCD adopted VOC and NOX rules 

which are applicable to the remaining 

six major source facilities. The EPA 

approved the following VOC rules into 

the California SIP: Rule 414, Storage of 

Reactive Organic Compounds, (73 FR 

70883, November 24, 2008), and Rule 

415, Transfer and Storage of Gasoline, 

(70 FR 8520, February 22, 2005). The 

following NOX rules were approved into 

the SIP by the EPA: Rule 400, Fuel 

Burning Equipment—Oxides of 

Nitrogen, (68 FR 14161, March 24, 

2003), Rule 400.1, Stationary Gas 

Turbines, (77 FR 2469, January 18, 

2012), and Rule 400.2, Boilers, Process 

Heaters and Steam Generators, (78 FR 

896, January 7, 2013). Our previous 

approvals of Rules 400.1 and 400.2 

found that they fulfilled RACT 

requirements. We are not aware of 

information suggesting that additional 

controls are needed to fulfill RACT 

since our approval of these rules. Our 

approval of Rule 400 did not include an 

evaluation of ozone RACT requirements. 

However, since each of the NOX sources 

subject to Rule 400 is also subject to at 

least one additional NOX rule that the 

EPA has found to fulfill RACT 

requirements, it is not necessary to 

determine whether Rule 400 fulfills 

RACT requirements at this time. 

Subsequent to the 2009 RACT SIP 

submittal, ICAPCD adopted Rule 400.4, 

Emissions of Oxides of Nitrogen from 

Wallboard Kilns, to address a major 

source of NOX emissions from one of 

their facilities (U.S. Gypsum). The EPA 

approved it into the California SIP (79 

FR 60070, October 6, 2014) as satisfying 

RACT requirements. 

We also reviewed CARB’s facilities 

inventory for the Imperial County, and 

are not aware of additional relevant 

major sources. 

4. Conclusion 

We find that ICAPCD’s 2009 RACT 

SIP, including the negative declarations, 

adequately addresses RACT for the 1997 

8-hour ozone NAAQS. Our TSD has 

more information on our evaluation of 

the RACT SIP submission. 

C. EPA Recommendations To Further 

Improve the RACT SIP 

The TSD describes additional 

revisions to the rules that we 

recommend for the next time the local 

agency modifies the rules, but are not 

currently the basis for rule disapproval. 

D. Public Comment and Final Action 

As authorized in section 110(k)(3) of 

the Act, the EPA is proposing to fully 

approve the submitted SIP revision 

because we believe it fulfills all relevant 

requirements. We will accept comments 

from the public on this proposal until 

October 1, 2015. Unless we receive 

mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS

52714 Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 169 / Tuesday, September 1, 2015 / Proposed Rules 

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, 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: 

• 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 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, this proposed action does 

not 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, 

Nitrogen dioxide, Ozone, Reporting and 

recordkeeping requirements, Volatile 

organic compounds. 

Dated: August 11, 2015. 

Jared Blumenfeld, 

Regional Administrator, Region IX. 

[FR Doc. 2015–21543 Filed 8–31–15; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 6560–50–P 

FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS 

COMMISSION 

47 CFR Parts 0, 1, 2, 15, and 18 

[ET Docket No. 15–170; RM–11673; DA 15– 

956] 

Extension of Time for Comments on 

Equipment Authorization 

AGENCY: Federal Communications 

Commission. 

ACTION: Proposed rule; extension of 

comment deadline. 

SUMMARY: In this document, the Federal 

Communications Commission’s 

(Commission’s) Office of Engineering 

and Technology Bureau (Bureau) 

extends the deadlines for interested 

parties to submit comments and reply 

comments in response to the Equipment 

Authorization and Electronic Labeling 

for Wireless Devices. 

DATES: The comment period for the 

proposed rules in FCC 15–92 published 

at 80 FR 46900, August 6, 2015, has 

been extended. Comments are due on or 

before October 9, 2015; reply comments 

are due on or before November 9, 2015. 

ADDRESSES: You may submit comments 

on the Equipment Authorization and 

Electronic Labeling for Wireless Devices, 

identified by ET Docket No. 15–170 by 

any of the following methods: 

• Electronic Filers: Federal 

Communication Commission’s 

Electronic Comments Filing System 

(ECFS): http://fjallfoss.fcc.gov/ecfs2/. 

Follow the instructions for submitting 

comments. 

• Paper Filers: All hand-delivered or 

messenger-delivered paper filings for 

the Commission’s Secretary must be 

delivered to FCC Headquarters at 445 

12th Street SW., Room TW–A325, 

Washington, DC 20554. The filing hours 

are 8:00 a.m. to 7:00 p.m. Eastern Time 

(ET). All hand deliveries must be held 

together with rubber bands or fasteners. 

Any envelopes and boxes must be 

disposed of before entering the building. 

Commercial overnight mail (other than 

U.S. Postal Service Express Mail and 

Priority Mail) must be sent to 9300 East 

Hampton Drive, Capitol Heights, MD 

20743. U.S. Postal Service first-class, 

Express, and Priority mail must be 

addressed to 445 12th Street SW., 

Washington, DC 20554. 

• People with Disabilities: To request 

materials in accessible formats for 

people with disabilities (braille, large 

print, electronic files, or audio format), 

send an email to fcc504@fcc.gov or call 

the Consumer & Governmental Affairs 

Bureau at 202–418–0530 (voice), 202– 

418–0432 (TTY). 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Brian Butler, Policy and Rules Division, 

Office of Engineering and Technology 

Bureau at (202) 418–2702. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: This is a 

summary of the Bureau’s Order in ET 

Docket No. 15–170, RM–11673; DA 15– 

956, adopted and released August 25, 

2015. The complete text of this 

document is available for public 

inspection and copying from 8:00 a.m. 

to 4:30 p.m. ET Monday through 

Thursday or from 8:00 a.m. to 11:30 a.m. 

ET on Fridays in the FCC Reference 

Information Center, 445 12th Street SW., 

Room CY–A257, Washington, DC 20554. 

The complete text may be purchased 

from the Commission’s duplicating 

contractor, Best Copy and Printing, Inc. 

(BCPI), telephone 202–488–5300, 

facsimile 202–488–5563, or by 

contacting BCPI on its Web site: http:// 

www.BCPIWEB.com. The complete text 

is also available on the Commission’s 

Web site at 

http://wireless.fcc.gov, or by using the 

search function on the ECFS Web page 

at http://www.fcc.gov/cgb/ecfs/. 

Synopsis 

On July 17, 2015, the Commission 

adopted a Notice of Proposed 

Rulemaking (‘‘NPRM’’) in the above 

captioned proceedings to update the 

rules that govern the evaluation and 

approval of RF devices. The NPRM 

established that comments in this 

proceeding are due on September 9, 

2015 and reply comments are due on 

September 22, 2015. 

Recently, the Telecommunications 

Industry Association (‘‘TIA’’) and the 

Information Technology Industry 

Council (‘‘ITI’’) jointly requested a 30- 

mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS