Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 120 / Thursday, June 21, 2012 / Proposed Rules 37359 

environmental impact from this 

proposed rule. 

List of Subjects in 33 CFR Part 165 

Harbors, Marine safety, Navigation 

(water), Reporting and recordkeeping 

requirements, Security measures, and 

Waterways. 

For the reasons discussed in the 

preamble, the Coast Guard proposes to 

amend 33 CFR part 165 as follows: 

PART 165—REGULATED NAVIGATION 

AREAS AND LIMITED ACCESS AREAS 

1. The authority citation for part 165 

continues to read as follows: 

Authority: 33 U.S.C. 1231; 46 U.S.C. 

Chapter 701, 3306, 3703; 50 U.S.C. 191, 195; 

33 CFR 1.05–1, 6.04–1, 6.04–6, 160.5; Pub. L. 

107–295, 116 Stat. 2064; Department of 

Homeland Security Delegation No. 0170.1. 

2. Add § 165.T05–0494 to read as 

follows: 

§ 165.T05–0494 Safety Zone For Fireworks 

Display, Pamlico River; Washington, NC 

(a) Definitions. For the purposes of 

this section, Captain of the Port means 

the Commander, Sector North Carolina. 

Representative means any Coast Guard 

commissioned, warrant, or petty officer 

who has been authorized to act on the 

behalf of the Captain of the Port. 

(b) Location. The following area is a 

safety zone: This safety zone will 

encompass all waters on the Pamlico 

and Tar Rivers within a 300 yard radius 

of the launch site on land at position 

latitude 35°32′25′′ N, longitude 

077°03′42′′ W. All geographic 

coordinates are North American Datum 

1983 (NAD 83). 

(c) Regulations. (1) The general 

regulations contained in § 165.23 of this 

part apply to the area described in 

paragraph (b) of this section. 

(2) Persons or vessels requiring entry 

into or passage through any portion of 

the safety zone must first request 

authorization from the Captain of the 

Port, or a designated representative, 

unless the Captain of the Port 

previously announced via Marine Safety 

Radio Broadcast on VHF Marine Band 

Radio channel 22 (157.1 MHz) that this 

regulation will not be enforced in that 

portion of the safety zone. The Captain 

of the Port can be contacted at telephone 

number (910) 343–3882 or by radio on 

VHF Marine Band Radio, channels 13 

and 16. 

(d) Enforcement. The U.S. Coast 

Guard may be assisted in the patrol and 

enforcement of the zone by Federal, 

State, and local agencies. 

(e) Enforcement period. This section 

will be enforced from 8 p.m. to 10 p.m. 

on September 22, 2012 unless cancelled 

earlier by the Captain of the Port. 

Dated: June 8, 2012. 

A. Popiel, 

Captain, U.S. Coast Guard, Captain of the 

Port North Carolina. 

[FR Doc. 2012–15112 Filed 6–20–12; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 9110–04–P 

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION 

AGENCY 

40 CFR Part 52 

[EPA–R09–OAR–2012–0252; FRL–9687–4] 

Revisions to the California State 

Implementation Plan, South Coast Air 

Quality Management District; San 

Joaquin Valley Unified Air Pollution 

Control District 

AGENCY: Environmental Protection 

Agency (EPA). 

ACTION: Proposed rule. 

SUMMARY: EPA is proposing to approve 

revisions to the South Coast Air Quality 

Management District (SCAQMD) and 

the San Joaquin Valley Unified Air 

Pollution Control District (SJVUAPCD) 

portions of the California State 

Implementation Plan (SIP). These 

revisions concern volatile organic 

compound (VOC) emissions from 

chipping and grinding activities, and 

composting operations. We are 

approving local rules that regulate these 

emission sources under the Clean Air 

Act as amended in 1990 (CAA or the 

Act). We are taking comments on this 

proposal and plan to follow with a final 

action. 

DATE: Any comments must arrive by 

July 23, 2012. 

ADDRESSES: Submit comments, 

identified by docket number EPA–R09– 

OAR–2012–0252, 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, 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: 

Nancy Levin, EPA Region IX, (415) 942– 

3848, levin.nancy@epa.gov. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

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

and ‘‘our’’ refer to EPA. 

Table of Contents 

I. The State’s Submittal 

A. What rules did the State submit? 

B. Are there other versions of these rules? 

C. What is the purpose of the submitted 

rules and rule revision? 

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 the local air agencies 

and submitted by the California Air 

Resources Board. 


TKELLEY on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
37360 Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 120 / Thursday, June 21, 2012 / Proposed Rules 

1Compost VOC Emission Factors, September 15, 

2010. http://valleyair.org/Workshops/postings/ 

2010/9-22-10-rule4566/SJVAPCD

%20Compost%20VOC%20EF%20Report%209-15- 

10.pdf (SJVUACPD Workshop September 22, 2010). 

TABLE 1—SUBMITTED RULES

Local agency Rule No. Rule title Adopted or 

amended Submitted 

SCAQMD .......... 1133 .1 Chipping and Grinding Activities ................................................................ 7–8–11 11–18–11 

SCAQMD .......... 1133 .3 Emission Reductions from Greenwaste Composting Operations .............. 7–8–11 11–18–11 

SJVUAPCD ....... 4566 Organic Material Composting Operations .................................................. 8–18–11 11–18–11 

On December 22, 2011, EPA 

determined that the submittal for 

SCAQMD and SJVUAPCD met the 

completeness criteria in 40 CFR part 51 

Appendix V, which must be met before 

formal EPA review. On January 10, 

2012, EPA partially approved and 

partially disapproved the RACT SIP 

submitted by California on June 18, 

2009, for the SJV extreme ozone 

nonattainment area (2009 RACT SIP), 

based in part on our conclusion that the 

State had not fully satisfied CAA section 

182 RACT requirements for certain 

source categories, including organic 

material composting operations. See 77 

FR 1417 (January 10, 2012). At that 

time, EPA had not yet made a RACT 

determination for this source category. 

Final approval of Rule 4566 would 

satisfy California’s obligation to 

implement RACT under CAA section 

182 for this source category for the 

1-hour ozone and 1997 8-hour ozone 

NAAQS. 

B. Are there other versions of these 

rules? 

There are no previous versions of 

SCAQMD Rule 1133.3 and SJVUAPCD 

Rule 4456 in the SIP. We approved an 

earlier version of SCAQMD Rule 1133.1 

into the SIP on July 21, 2004 (69 FR 

43518). 

C. What is the purpose of the submitted 

rules and rule revisions? 

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. The purpose of SCAQMD 

Rule 1133.1 is to prevent inadvertent 

decomposition associated with chipping 

and grinding activities, including 

stockpile operations. This rule applies 

to operators of chipping and grinding 

activities that produce materials other 

than active or finished compost, unless 

otherwise exempted. The purpose of 

SCAQMD Rule 1133.3 is to reduce 

fugitive emissions of VOCs and 

ammonia occurring during greenwaste 

composting operations. This rule 

applies to the operators of all new and 

existing greenwaste composting 

operations that produce active or 

finished compost from greenwaste by 

itself or greenwaste in combination with 

manure or foodwaste, unless otherwise 

exempted. The purpose of SJVUAPCD 

Rule 4566 is to limit emissions of VOC 

from composting operations, and it 

applies to composting facilities that 

compost and/or stockpile organic 

material. 

EPA’s technical support documents 

(TSD) 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 sections 

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

existing requirements (see sections 

110(l) and 193). The SCAQMD and 

SJVUAPCD regulate ozone 

nonattainment areas (see 40 CFR part 

81) and the proposed regulations should 

be sufficiently stringent to implement 

RACT-level controls. 

Guidance and policy documents that 

we use to evaluate enforceability and 

RACT requirements consistently 

include the following: 

1. ‘‘Issues Relating to VOC Regulation 

Cutpoints, Deficiencies, and 

Deviations,’’ EPA, May 25, 1988 (the 

Bluebook). 

2. ‘‘Guidance Document for Correcting 

Common VOC & Other Rule 

Deficiencies,’’ EPA Region 9, August 21, 

2001 (the Little Bluebook). 

3. Portions of the proposed post-1987 

ozone and carbon monoxide policy that 

concern RACT, 52 FR 45044, November 

24, 1987. 

4. ‘‘State Implementation Plans, 

General Preamble for the 

Implementation of Title I of the Clean 

Air Amendments of 1990,’’ 57 FR 

13498, April 16, 1992. 

5. ‘‘Preamble, Final Rule To 

Implement the 8-Hour Ozone National 

Ambient Air Quality Standard,’’ 70 FR 

71612, November 29, 2005. 

6. ‘‘Reasonably Available Control 

Technology (RACT) Demonstration for 

Ozone State Implementation Plans 

(SIP)’’ SJVUAPCD, April 16, 2009. 

7. Letter from William T. Hartnett to 

Regional Air Division Directors, ‘‘RACT 

Qs & As—Reasonable Available Control 

Technology (RACT): Questions and 

Answers,’’ EPA, May 18, 2006. 

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 rules’ applicability and 

requirements are clearly stated. They 

contain test methods to demonstrate 

compliance. Alternative methods to 

meet compliance must be approved by 

EPA. Based on our analysis, EPA 

believes the proposed regulations are 

sufficiently stringent to implement 

RACT-level controls. Given the lack of 

regulatory history regarding greenwaste 

composting, there is not sufficient 

precedent to clearly define additional 

RACT compost controls at this time. 

There are no prior versions of SCAQMD 

Rule 1133.3 and SJVUAPCD Rule 4566 

in the SIP. Their inclusion would 

strengthen the SIP. There is a prior 

version of SCAQMD Rule 1133.1 in the 

SIP (69 FR 43518) July 21, 2004. 

Overall, the amended rule appears to be 

more stringent than the prior version. 

The TSDs have more information on our 

evaluation. 

C. EPA Recommendations to Further 

Improve the Rules 

We recommend that the compost 

emission factors be reviewed and 

adjusted as more data become available. 

The estimated greenwaste compost 

emission factors used for SCAQMD Rule 

1133.3 and SJVUAPCD Rule 4566 rule 

are based on the average VOC/ton of 

between four and six facilities in 

California that had a relatively wide 

range of results (0.85–10.03 lbs-VOC/ 

ton).1 We further recommend that the 

local agencies develop and incorporate 

food waste emission factors to more 

accurately characterize the VOC 

emissions from greenwaste composting 

that contains food material. SJVUAPCD 

Rule 4566 sections 5.2.1.2, 5.2.2.2, and 


TKELLEY on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 120 / Thursday, June 21, 2012 / Proposed Rules 37361 

5.2.3 allow APCO- and EPA-approved 

alternative mitigation measures that 

demonstrate at least 19%, 60%, or 80% 

reduction in VOC. However, these 

sections do not specify the test methods 

that will be used to demonstrate these 

VOC control efficiencies. EPA 

recommends that the next revision to 

SJVUAPCD Rule 4566 include the 

appropriate test methods and test 

protocol guidelines to determine 

percent VOC reduction (See, for 

example, South Coast Rule 1133.3). 

Finally, we recommend that, in order to 

determine compliance with the 5,000 

tons per year foodwaste threshold and 

other percentage requirements, the 

SCAQMD add daily recordkeeping 

requirements for each type of raw 

material received, including the dates 

and amounts of the following: 

Foodwaste received, greenwaste 

received, manure received, and their 

monthly totals. 

The TSDs describe additional rule 

revisions that we recommend for the 

next time the local agencies modify the 

rules but are not currently the basis for 

rule disapproval. 

D. Public Comment and Final Action 

Because EPA believes the submitted 

rules fulfill all relevant requirements, 

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 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 EPA with the 

discretionary authority to address 

disproportionate human health or 

environmental effects with practical, 

appropriate, and legally permissible 

methods under Executive Order 12898 

(59 FR 7629, February 16, 1994). 

In addition, this proposed action does 

not have tribal implications as specified 

by Executive Order 13175 (65 FR 67249, 

November 9, 2000), because the SIP is 

not approved to apply in Indian country 

located in the State, and EPA notes that 

it will not impose substantial direct 

costs on tribal governments or preempt 

tribal law. 

List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52 

Environmental protection, Air 

pollution control, Intergovernmental 

relations, Ozone, Reporting and 

recordkeeping requirements, Volatile 

organic compounds. 

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

Dated: May 25, 2012. 

Jared Blumenfeld, 

Regional Administrator, Region IX. 

[FR Doc. 2012–15196 Filed 6–20–12; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 6560–50–P 

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION 

AGENCY 

40 CFR Part 63 

[EPA–HQ–OAR–2008–0708; FRL–9690–8] 

RIN 2060–AQ58 

National Emission Standards for 

Hazardous Air Pollutants for 

Reciprocating Internal Combustion 

Engines; New Source Performance 

Standards for Stationary Internal 

Combustion Engines 

AGENCY: Environmental Protection 

Agency (EPA). 

ACTION: Proposed rule; Notice of public 

hearing; Extension of public comment 

period. 

SUMMARY: The EPA published in the 

Federal Register on June 7, 2012, the 

proposed rule, ‘‘National Emission 

Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutants 

for Reciprocating Internal Combustion 

Engines; New Source Performance 

Standards for Stationary Internal 

Combustion Engines.’’ The EPA was 

asked to hold a public hearing. 

Therefore, the EPA is making two 

announcements: First, a public hearing 

for the proposed, ‘‘National Emission 

Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutants 

for Reciprocating Internal Combustion 

Engines; New Source Performance 

Standards for Stationary Internal 

Combustion Engines’’ will be held on 

July 10, 2012, and second, the comment 

period for the proposed rule will be 

extended until August 9, 2012. 

DATES: The public hearing will be held 

on July 10, 2012. Comments must be 

received by August 9, 2012. 

ADDRESSES: The public hearing will be 

held in Room 1152 EPA East, 1201 

Constitution Avenue NW., Washington, 

DC 20460, (202) 564–1657. 

The public hearing will convene at 

10:00 a.m. and will continue until 4:00 

p.m. A lunch break is scheduled from 

12:00 p.m. until 1:00 p.m. The EPA’s 

Web site for the rulemaking, which 

includes the proposal and information 

about the hearing, can be found at: 

http://www.epa.gov/ttn/atw/rice/ricepg.

html. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: If 

you would like to present oral testimony 

at the public hearing, please contact Ms. 

Pamela Garrett, U.S. Environmental 

Protection Agency, Office of Air Quality 

Planning and Standards, Sector Policies 

and Programs Division (D243–01), 

Research Triangle Park, North Carolina 

27711; telephone: (919) 541–7966; fax 

number: (919) 541–5450; email address: 

garrett.pamela@epa.gov (preferred 


TKELLEY on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS