Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 107 / Friday, June 3, 2011 / Proposed Rules 32113 

addition, based on EPA’s review of the 

data for 2007–2009, and in accordance 

with section 179(c)(1) of the CAA and 

EPA’s regulations, EPA proposes to 

determine that the Area attained the 

1997 annual PM2.5 NAAQS by its 

applicable attainment date of April 5, 

2010. 

IV. What is the effect of these actions? 

If this proposed determination of 

attainment is made final, the 

requirements for the Cincinnati Area to 

submit an attainment demonstration 

and associated RACM, a RFP plan, 

contingency measures, and any other 

planning SIPs related to attainment of 

the 1997 annual PM2.5 NAAQS would 

be suspended for so long as the Area 

continues to attain the PM2.5 NAAQS. 

See 40 CFR 51.1004(c). 

If this proposed rulemaking is 

finalized and EPA subsequently 

determines, after notice-and-comment 

rulemaking in the Federal Register, that 

the Area has violated the annual PM2.5

NAAQS, the basis for the suspension of 

the specific requirements would no 

longer exist for the Cincinnati Area, and 

the Area would thereafter have to 

address the applicable requirements. 

See 40 CFR 51.1004(c). 

Finalizing this proposed action would 

not constitute a redesignation of the 

Area to attainment of the annual PM2.5

NAAQS under section 107(d)(3) of the 

Clean Air Act (CAA). Further, finalizing 

this proposed action does not involve 

approving maintenance plans for the 

Area as required under section 175A of 

the CAA, nor would it find that the Area 

has met all other requirements for 

redesignation. Even if EPA finalizes the 

proposed action, the designation status 

of the Cincinnati Area would remain 

nonattainment for the 1997 annual 

PM2.5 NAAQS until such time as EPA 

determines that the Area meets the CAA 

requirements for redesignation to 

attainment and takes action to 

redesignate the Area. 

This action is only a proposed 

determination of attainment that the 

Cincinnati Area has attained the 1997 

annual PM2.5 NAAQS. This action does 

not address the 24-hour PM2.5 NAAQS. 

If the Cincinnati Area continues to 

monitor attainment of the annual PM2.5

NAAQS, the requirements for the 

Cincinnati Area to submit an attainment 

demonstration and associated RACM, a 

RFP plan, contingency measures, and 

any other planning SIPs related to 

attainment of the annual PM2.5 NAAQS 

will remain suspended. 

In addition, if EPA’s separate and 

independent proposed determination 

that the Area has attained the 1997 

annual PM2.5 standard by its applicable 

attainment date (April 5, 2010) is 

finalized, EPA will have met its 

requirement pursuant to section 

179(c)(1) of the CAA to make a 

determination based on the Area’s air 

quality data as of the attainment date 

whether the Area attained the standard 

by that date. 

These two actions described above are 

proposed determinations regarding the 

Cincinnati Area’s attainment status only 

with respect to the 1997 annual PM2.5

NAAQS. Today’s actions do not address 

the 24-hour PM2.5 NAAQS. 

V. Statutory and Executive Order 

Reviews 

These actions propose to make a 

determination of attainment based on 

air quality, and would, if finalized, 

result in the suspension of certain 

federal requirements, and it would not 

impose additional requirements beyond 

those imposed by state law. For that 

reason, these proposed actions: 

• Are not ‘‘significant regulatory 

actions’’ subject to review by the Office 

of Management and Budget under 

Executive Order 12866 (58 FR 51735, 

October 4, 1993); 

• Do not impose an information 

collection burden under the provisions 

of the Paperwork Reduction Act (44 

U.S.C. 3501 et seq.); 

• Are 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.); 

• Do 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); 

• Do not have Federalism 

implications as specified in Executive 

Order 13132 (64 FR 43255, August 10, 

1999); 

• Are not economically significant 

regulatory actions based on health or 

safety risks subject to Executive Order 

13045 (62 FR 19885, April 23, 1997); 

• Are not significant regulatory 

actions subject to Executive Order 

13211 (66 FR 28355, May 22, 2001); 

• Are 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 CAA; and 

• Do 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). In 

addition, these proposed 1997 annual 

PM2.5 NAAQS determinations for the 

Cincinnati Area do 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, Particulate matter, 

Intergovernmental relations, Reporting 

and recordkeeping requirements. 

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

Dated: April 18, 2011. 

A. Stanley Meiburg, 

Acting Regional Administrator, Region 4. 

Dated: May 23, 2011. 

Susan Hedman, 

Regional Administrator, Region 5. 

[FR Doc. 2011–13831 Filed 6–2–11; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 6560–50–P 

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION 

AGENCY 

40 CFR Part 52 

EPA–R09–OAR–2011–0356; FRL–9314–8] 

Revisions to the California State 

Implementation Plan 

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) and Imperial County Air 

Pollution Control District (ICAPCD) 

portions of the California State 

Implementation Plan (SIP). These 

revisions concern volatile organic 

compound (VOC) emissions from Motor 

Vehicle Assembly Coatings, Surface 

Coatings of Metal Parts and Products, 

Plastic Parts and Products and Pleasure 

Crafts, Aerospace Coating Operations 

and Automotive Refinishing Operations. 

We are proposing to approve local rules 

to 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. 

DATES: Any comments must arrive by 

July 5, 2011. 

ADDRESSES: Submit comments, 

identified by docket number EPA–R09– 

OAR–2011–0356, by one of the 

following methods: 

1. Federal eRulemaking Portal: http:// 

www.regulations.gov. Follow the on-line 

instructions. 


wwoods2 on DSK1DXX6B1PROD with PROPOSALS_PART 1
32114 Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 107 / Friday, June 3, 2011 / Proposed Rules 

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 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 at 

http://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: 

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? 

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 adopted by local air agencies and 

submitted by the California Air 

Resources Board (CARB). 

TABLE 1—SUBMITTED RULES

Local agency Rule No. Rule title Amended Submitted 

SJVUAPCD ....... 4602 Motor Vehicle Assembly Coatings ........................................................................... 9/17/09 5/17/10 

SJVUAPCD ....... 4603 Surface Coating of Metal Parts and Products, Plastic Parts and Products and 

Pleasure Crafts.

9/17/10 5/17/10 

ICAPCD ............ 425 Aerospace Coating Operations ................................................................................ 2/23/10 7/20/10 

ICAPCD ............ 427 Automotive Refinishing Operations .......................................................................... 2/23/10 7/20/10 

On 7/8/2010 for the SJUAPCD rules 

and 8/25/2010 for the ICAPCD rules, 

these rule submittals were found 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 these 

rules? 

We approved a version of SJVUAPCD 

Rule 4602 into the SIP on 6/26/2002. 

We approved a version of SJVUAPCD 

Rule 4603 into the SIP on 1/19/2010. 

We approved a version of ICAPCD Rule 

425 into the SIP on 5/19/2005. We 

approved a version of ICAPCD Rule 427 

into the SIP on 10/3/2001. 

C. What is the purpose of the submitted 

rules? 

VOCs 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 

emissions. In general, these rules 

control the VOC emissions by limiting 

the VOC of commercial coatings and 

solvents. 

Originally SJVUAPCD Rule 4602 was 

Motor Vehicle and Mobile Equipment 

Coating Operations but was retired on 

January 1, 2009 when Rule 4612, Motor 

Vehicle and Mobile Equipment Coating 

Operations—Phase II became effective. 

SJVUAPCD Rule 4602 is revised to 

implement RACT requirements as 

recommended in the CTG for 

Automobile and the CTG for Light-Duty 

Truck Assembly Coatings, EPA–453/R– 

08–006 and Miscellaneous Metal and 

Plastic Parts Coatings, EPA–453/R–08– 

003. The rule was also revised to reduce 

solvent VOC emissions to 25 grams/ 

liter. 

SJVUAPCD Rule 4603 is revised to 

implement RACT requirements as 

recommended in the CTG for 

Miscellaneous Metal and Plastic Parts 

Coatings, EPA–453/R–08–003, for Large 

Appliance Coatings, EPA–453/R–07– 

004, and for Metal Furniture Coatings, 

EPA–453/R–07–005. Rule 4603 now 

includes plastic parts and products and 

also includes pleasure crafts. Rule 4603 

establishes work practices for large 

appliance parts and products and metal 

furniture coating operations. This rule 

also establishes a 25 gram/liter VOC 

limit for all cleaning solvents. 

ICAPCD Rule 425 is revised to 

implement the new recordkeeping 

requirements consistent with other air 

districts and to comply with the 

National Emissions Standards for 

Aerospace Manufacturing and Rework 

Facilities: Summary of Requirements for 

Implementing NESHAP, EPA–456/R– 

97–006. 

ICAPCD Rule 427 is revised to 

implement the California Air Resources 

Board (CARB) Automotive Coatings 

Suggested Control Methods (SCM), to 

add prohibitions regarding sale and 

ownership of specific coatings and to 

add requirements for manufacturers and 

providers of automotive coatings and 

related materials to provide all 

necessary information to their clients. 

EPA’s technical support documents 

(TSDs) have more information about 

these rules. 

II. EPA’s Evaluation and Action 

A. How is EPA evaluating the rules? 

Generally, SIP rules must be 

enforceable (see section 110(a) of the 

Act), must require Reasonably Available 

Control Technology (RACT) for each 

category of sources covered by a Control 

Techniques Guidelines (CTG) document 

as well as each major source in 

nonattainment areas (see section 

182(a)(2)), and must not relax existing 

requirements (see sections 110(l) and 


wwoods2 on DSK1DXX6B1PROD with PROPOSALS_PART 1
Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 107 / Friday, June 3, 2011 / Proposed Rules 32115 

193). The SJVUAPCD regulates an ozone 

nonattainment area (see 40 CFR part 81), 

so Rules 4602 and 4603 must fulfill 

RACT. The ICAPCD regulates an ozone 

nonattainment area (see 40 CFR part 81), 

so Rules 425 and 427 must fulfill RACT. 

Guidance and policy documents that 

we used to help evaluate enforceability 

and RACT requirements consistently 

include the following: 

1. Portions of the proposed post-1987 

ozone and carbon monoxide policy that 

concern RACT, 52 FR 45044, November 

24, 1987. 

2. Issues Relating to ‘‘VOC Regulation 

Cutpoints, Deficiencies, and 

Deviations,’’ EPA, May 25, 1988 (the 

Bluebook). 

3. ‘‘A Guidance Document for 

Correcting Common VOC & Other Rule 

Deficiencies,’’ EPA Region 9, August 21, 

2001 (the Little Bluebook). 

4. CTG for Automobile and the CTG 

for Light-Duty Truck Assembly 

Coatings, EPA–453/R–08–006, 

Miscellaneous Metal and Plastic Parts 

Coatings, EPA–453/R–08–003, 

5. CTG for Fiberglass Boat 

Manufacturing Materials, EPA–453/R– 

08–004, 

6. National Emissions Standards for 

Aerospace Manufacturing and Rework 

Facilities: Summary of Requirements for 

Implementing NESHAP, EPA–456/R– 

97–006 and CARB Automotive Coatings 

SCM. 

B. Do the rules meet the evaluation 

criteria? 

We believe these rules are consistent 

with the relevant policy and guidance 

regarding enforceability, RACT, and SIP 

relaxations. The TSDs have more 

information on our evaluation. 

C. EPA Recommendations to Further 

Improve the Rules 

The TSDs describe additional rule 

revisions that do not affect EPA’s 

current action but are recommended for 

the next time the local agency modifies 

the rules. 

D. Public Comment and Final Action 

Because EPA believes the submitted 

rules fulfill all relevant requirements, 

we are proposing to fully approve them 

as described in 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. 

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 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 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 

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, these rules do 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 compound. 

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

Dated: May 19, 2011. 

Jared Blumenfeld, 

Regional Administrator, Region IX. 

[FR Doc. 2011–13830 Filed 6–2–11; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 6560–50–P 

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION 

AGENCY 

40 CFR Part 300 

[EPA–HQ–SFUND–1987–0002; FRL–9315–7] 

National Oil and Hazardous 

Substances Pollution Contingency 

Plan; National Priorities List: Intent To 

Delete the Coker’s Sanitation Service 

Landfills Superfund Site 

AGENCY: Environmental Protection 

Agency. 

ACTION: Proposed rule. 

SUMMARY: The Environmental Protection 

Agency (EPA) Region III is issuing an 

Intent To Delete the Coker’s Sanitation 

Service Landfills Superfund Site (Site) 

located in Cheswold, Kent County, 

Delaware, from the National Priorities 

List (NPL) and requests public 

comments on this proposed action. The 

NPL, promulgated pursuant to section 

105 of the Comprehensive 

Environmental Response, 

Compensation, and Liability Act 

(CERCLA) of 1980, as amended, is an 

appendix of the National Oil and 

Hazardous Substances Pollution 

Contingency Plan (NCP). The EPA and 

the State of Delaware, through the 

Delaware Department of Natural 

Resources and Environmental Control 

(DNREC), have determined that all 

appropriate response actions under 

CERCLA, other than operation, 

maintenance, and five-year reviews, 

have been completed. However, this 

deletion does not preclude future 

actions under Superfund. 

DATES: Comments must be received by 

July 5, 2011. 

ADDRESSES: 

Submit your comments, identified by 

Docket ID no. EPA–HQ–SFUND–1987– 

0002, by one of the following methods: 

• http://www.regulations.gov. Follow 

on-line instructions for submitting 

comments. 

• E-mail: ostrauskas.darius@epa.gov. 

• Fax: (215) 814–3002, Attn: Darius 

Ostrauskas. 


wwoods2 on DSK1DXX6B1PROD with PROPOSALS_PART 1