2136 Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 10 / Friday, January 15, 2016 / Proposed Rules 

(ii) Within 50 hours TIS since April 17, 

1992 (the effective date retained from AD 92– 

06–10). 

(5) After the effective date of this AD, a 

used nose landing gear or a used nose 

landing gear wheel axle may be installed 

provided it has been inspected and found 

free of cracks and/or damage and the nose 

landing gear wheel axle attachment screws 

have been replaced with new screws as 

specified in paragraphs (f)(1), (f)(2), and (f)(4) 

of this AD. 

(g) Credit for Actions Accomplished in 

Accordance With Previous Service 

Information 

This AD allows credit for the inspections 

required in paragraph (f)(1) and (f)(2) of this 

AD, if done before the effective date of this 

AD, following Daher-Socata Mandatory 

Service Bulletin SB 150–32, Revision 2, 

dated January 1994. 

(h) Other FAA AD Provisions 

The following provisions also apply to this 

AD: 

(1) Alternative Methods of Compliance 

(AMOCs): The Manager, Standards Office, 

FAA, has the authority to approve AMOCs 

for this AD, if requested using the procedures 

found in 14 CFR 39.19. Send information to 

ATTN: Albert Mercado, Aerospace Engineer, 

FAA, Small Airplane Directorate, 901 Locust, 

Room 301, Kansas City, Missouri 64106; 

telephone: (816) 329–4119; fax: (816) 329– 

4090; email: albert.mercado@faa.gov. Before 

using any approved AMOC on any airplane 

to which the AMOC applies, notify your 

appropriate principal inspector (PI) in the 

FAA Flight Standards District Office (FSDO), 

or lacking a PI, your local FSDO. 

(2) Airworthy Product: For any 

requirement in this AD to obtain corrective 

actions from a manufacturer or other source, 

use these actions if they are FAA-approved. 

Corrective actions are considered FAAapproved if they are approved by the State 

of Design Authority (or their delegated 

agent). You are required to assure the product 

is airworthy before it is returned to service. 

(i) Related Information 

Refer to MCAI European Aviation Safety 

Agency (EASA) AD 2015–0203, dated 

October 7, 2015; and Daher-Socata 

Mandatory Service Bulletin SB 150–32, 

Revision 2, dated January 1994, for related 

information. You may examine the MCAI on 

the Internet at http://www.regulations.gov by 

searching for and locating Docket No. FAA– 

2016–0068. For service information related to 

this AD, contact SOCATA, Direction des 

services, 65921 Tarbes Cedex 9, France; 

phone: +33 (0) 5 62 41 73 00; fax: +33 (0) 5 

62 41 76 54; email: info@socata.daher.com; 

Internet: http://www.tbm.aero/. For the 

United States, contact SOCATA NORTH 

AMERICA, North Perry Airport, 601 NE 10 

Street, Pompano Beach, Florida 33060; 

phone: (954) 366–3331; Internet: http://

www.socatanorthamerica.com/default.htm. 

You may review copies of the referenced 

service information at the FAA, Small 

Airplane Directorate, 901 Locust, Kansas 

City, Missouri 64106. For information on the 

availability of this material at the FAA, call 

(816) 329–4148. 

Issued in Kansas City, Missouri, on January 

5, 2016. 

Kelly Broadway, 

Acting Manager, Small Airplane Directorate, 

Aircraft Certification Service. 

[FR Doc. 2016–00320 Filed 1–14–16; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 4910–13–P 

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION 

AGENCY 

40 CFR Part 52 

[EPA–R09–OAR–2012–959; FRL–9941–14– 

Region 9] 

Revisions to the California State 

Implementation Plan, Sacramento 

Metropolitan Air Quality Management 

District 

AGENCY: Environmental Protection 

Agency (EPA). 

ACTION: Proposed rule. 

SUMMARY: The Environmental Protection 

Agency (EPA) is proposing a partial 

approval and partial disapproval of 

revisions to the Sacramento 

Metropolitan (Metro) Air Quality 

Management District (SMAQMD or 

District) portion of the California State 

Implementation Plan (SIP). These 

revisions concern the District’s 

demonstration regarding Reasonably 

Available Control Technology (RACT) 

requirements for the 1997 8-hour ozone 

National Ambient Air Quality Standard 

(NAAQS). We are proposing action on a 

local 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 

February 16, 2016. 

ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, 

identified by Docket ID No. EPA–R09– 

OAR–2012–959 at http://

www.regulations.gov, or via email to 

Steckel.Andrew@epa.gov. For comments 

submitted at Regulations.gov, follow the 

online instructions for submitting 

comments. Once submitted, comments 

cannot be edited or removed from 

Regulations.gov. For either manner of 

submission, the EPA may publish any 

comment received to its public docket. 

Do not submit electronically any 

information you consider to be 

Confidential Business Information (CBI) 

or other information whose disclosure is 

restricted by statute. Multimedia 

submissions (audio, video, etc.) must be 

accompanied by a written comment. 

The written comment is considered the 

official comment and should include 

discussion of all points you wish to 

make. The EPA will generally not 

consider comments or comment 

contents located outside of the primary 

submission (i.e., on the web, cloud, or 

other file sharing system). For 

additional submission methods, please 

contact the person identified in the FOR

FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section. 

For the full EPA public comment policy, 

information about CBI or multimedia 

submissions, and general guidance on 

making effective comments, please visit 

http://www2.epa.gov/dockets/

commenting-epa-dockets. 

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 the EPA. 

Table of Contents 

I. The State’s Submittal 

A. What documents did the State submit? 

B. Are there other versions of these 

documents? 

C. What is the purpose of the RACT SIP 

submissions? 

II. The EPA’s Evaluation and Proposed 

Action 

A. How is the EPA evaluating the RACT 

SIP submissions? 

B. Do the RACT SIP submissions meet the 

evaluation criteria? 

C. What are the RACT deficiencies? 

D. EPA Recommendations To Further 

Improve the RACT SIP. 

E. Proposed Action and Public Comment 

III. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews 

I. The State’s Submittal 

A. What documents did the State 

submit? 

Table 1 lists the documents addressed 

by this proposal with the dates that they 

were adopted by the local air agency 

and submitted to the EPA by the 

California Air Resources Board (CARB). 

TABLE 1—SUBMITTED DOCUMENTS

Local agency Document Adopted Submitted 

SMAQMD ......... Reasonably Available Control Technology (RACT) as Applicable to the 8-Hour Ozone 

Standard, dated October 26, 2006 (‘‘2006 RACT SIP’’).

10/26/06 07/11/07 


tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 10 / Friday, January 15, 2016 / Proposed Rules 2137 

TABLE 1—SUBMITTED DOCUMENTS—Continued 

Local agency Document Adopted Submitted 

SMAQMD ......... Reasonably Available Control Technology (RACT) Update as Applicable to the 8-Hour 

Ozone Standard, dated October 23, 2008 (‘‘Updated RACT SIP’’).

10/23/08 1/21/09 

The 2006 RACT SIP and Updated 

RACT SIP became complete by 

operation of law under CAA section 

110(k)(1)(B) on January 11, 2008 and 

July 21, 2009, respectively. 

B. Are there other versions of these 

documents? 

There are no previous versions of 

these documents in the SMAQMD 

portion of the California SIP. 

C. What is the purpose of the RACT SIP 

submissions? 

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 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 

implement RACT for any source 

covered by a Control Techniques 

Guidelines (CTG) document and any 

major stationary source of VOCs or NOX. 

The Sacramento Metro area is subject to 

this requirement as it is designated and 

classified as a severe ozone 

nonattainment area for the 1997 8-hour 

ozone NAAQS. 40 CFR 81.305; 69 FR 

23858 at 23887 (April 30, 2004) (final 

rule designating and classifying 

Sacramento Metro area as serious 

nonattainment for the 1997 8-hour 

ozone NAAQS); 75 FR 24409 (May 5, 

2010) (final rule reclassifying the 

Sacramento Metro area as severe-15 

nonattainment for the 1997 8-hour 

ozone NAAQS). Therefore, the 

SMAQMD must, at a minimum, adopt 

RACT-level controls for all sources 

covered by a CTG document and for all 

major non-CTG sources of VOCs or NOX

within the Sacramento Metro 

nonattainment area. Any stationary 

source that emits or has a potential to 

emit at least 25 tons per year (tpy) of 

VOCs or NOX is a major stationary 

source in a severe ozone nonattainment 

area (CAA section 182(d) and (f)). 

Section IV.G. of the preamble to the 

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 documents provide 

SMAQMD’s analyses of its compliance 

with the CAA section 182 RACT 

requirements for the 1997 8-hour ozone 

NAAQS. The EPA’s technical support 

documents (TSDs)(‘‘2006 RACT SIP 

TSD’’ and ‘‘RACT SIP Update TSD’’) 

have more information about the 

District’s submissions and the EPA’s 

evaluations thereof. 

II. The EPA’s Evaluation and Proposed 

Action 

A. How is the EPA evaluating the RACT 

SIP submissions? 

SIP rules must be enforceable (see 

CAA section 110(a)(2)), must not 

interfere with applicable requirements 

concerning attainment and reasonable 

further progress or other CAA 

requirements (see CAA section 110(l)), 

and must not modify certain SIP control 

requirements in nonattainment areas 

without ensuring equivalent or greater 

emissions reductions (see CAA section 

193). Generally, SIP rules must require 

RACT for each category of sources 

covered by a CTG document as well as 

each major source of NOX or VOCs in 

ozone nonattainment areas classified as 

moderate or above (see CAA section 

182(b)(2)). The SMAQMD regulates a 

severe ozone nonattainment area (see 40 

CFR 81.305), so the District’s rules must 

implement RACT. 

Guidance and policy documents that 

we use to evaluate enforceability and 

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, Revised 

January 11, 1990, 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. RACT SIPs, Letter dated April 4, 2006 

from EPA Region IX (Andrew Steckel) to 

CARB (Kurt Karperos) listing EPA’s current 

CTGs, ACTs, and other documents which 

may help to establish RACT. 

With respect to major stationary 

sources, because the Sacramento Metro 

nonattainment area was classified as 

‘‘serious’’ nonattainment for the 1997 8- 

hour ozone NAAQS at the time that 

California submitted the 2006 RACT SIP 

to the EPA, the EPA evaluated this 

submission in accordance with the 50 

ton per year (tpy) threshold for ‘‘major 

stationary sources’’ of VOC or NOX

emissions in serious ozone 

nonattainment areas. CAA section 

182(c) and (f). The SMAQMD’s Updated 

RACT SIP contains the District’s RACT 

evaluation for additional major 

stationary sources based upon the 25 

tpy major source threshold in severe 

ozone nonattainment areas (see CAA 

section 182(d) and (f)), which the EPA 

evaluated for compliance with the 

additional RACT requirements that 

became applicable following the EPA’s 

reclassification of the Sacramento Metro 

area from ‘‘serious’’ to ‘‘severe’’ 

nonattainment for the 1997 8-hour 

ozone NAAQS. See 69 FR 23858 at 

23887 (April 30, 2004) (final rule 

designating and classifying the 

Sacramento Metro area as serious 

nonattainment for the 1997 8-hour 

ozone NAAQS) and 75 FR 24409 (May 

5, 2010) (final rule reclassifying the 

Sacramento Metro area as severe-15 

nonattainment for the 1997 8-hour 

ozone NAAQS). 

B. Do the RACT SIP submissions meet 

the evaluation criteria? 

The 2006 RACT SIP and Updated 

RACT SIP provide the District’s 


tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
2138 Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 10 / Friday, January 15, 2016 / Proposed Rules 

conclusion that the applicable SIP for 

the Sacramento Metro area satisfies 

CAA section 182 RACT requirements for 

the 1997 8-hour ozone NAAQS. This 

conclusion is based on the District’s 

analyses of SIP-approved requirements 

that apply to: (1) CTG source categories; 

(2) certain non-CTG source categories or 

emission units located at major 

stationary sources; and (3) all major 

stationary sources of VOC or NOX

emissions. See 2006 RACT SIP Staff 

Report at Appendices A–D and Updated 

RACT SIP Staff Report at Appendices 

A–B. SMAQMD’s 2006 RACT SIP Staff 

Report and Updated RACT SIP Staff 

Report include detailed analyses of its 

SIP rules including discussions of how 

those rules continue to implement 

RACT for the 1997 8-hour ozone 

NAAQS. 

First, with respect to CTG source 

categories, Table 1 of the 2006 RACT 

SIP Staff Report and Table 1 of the 

Updated RACT SIP Staff Report lists all 

CTG source categories and match those 

CTG categories with corresponding 

District rules which implement RACT. 

SMAQMD also searched its database of 

permitted sources and telephone 

directories for potential sources 

belonging to those CTG categories for 

which the District did not have rules. 

Based on these evaluations, the District 

concluded that there were no CTG 

source categories for which the District 

had sources but no applicable RACT 

requirement. See 2006 RACT SIP Staff 

Report at 2 and Updated RACT SIP Staff 

Report at 3. Our review of CARB’s 

emissions inventory database for 

potential CTG sources did not uncover 

any CTG source categories missing from 

the District’s analyses. 

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 

SMAQMD’s 2006 RACT SIP and 

Updated RACT SIP provide negative 

declarations. 

TABLE 2—SMAQMD NEGATIVE DECLARATIONS

CTG Source category CTG Document title 

Aerospace Coating ................................................................................... EPA–453/R–97–004 and 59 FR 29216 (6/06/94)—Control of Volatile 

Organic Compound Emissions from Coating Operations at Aerospace Manufacturing and Rework Operations. 

Automobile Coating .................................................................................. 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. 

Dry Cleaning (Petroleum Solvent) ............................................................ EPA–450/3–82–009—Control of Volatile Organic Compound Emissions 

from Large Petroleum Dry Cleaners. 

Graphic Arts (Rotogravure) ...................................................................... EPA–450/2–78–033—Control of Volatile Organic Emissions from Existing Stationary Sources, Volume VIII: Graphic Arts—Rotogravure and 

Flexography. 

Large Appliance Coating .......................................................................... 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. 

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

Magnetic Wire. 

Metal Coil Coating .................................................................................... 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. 

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

Paper and Fabric Coating ........................................................................ 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. 

Resin Manufacturing (High-Density Polyethylene, Polypropylene, and 

Polystyrene).

EPA–450/3–83–008—Control of Volatile Organic Compound Emissions 

from Manufacture of High-Density Polyethylene, Polypropylene, and 

Polystyrene Resins. 

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. 

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

Ship Coating ............................................................................................. 61 FR 44050—Control Techniques Guidelines for Shipbuilding and 

Ship Repair Operations (Surface Coating). 

Wood Coating (Flat Wood Paneling) ....................................................... 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/R06–004—Control Techniques Guidelines for Flat Wood 

Paneling Coatings. 

Paper, Film and Foil ................................................................................. EPA–453/R–07–004—Control Techniques Guidelines for Paper, Film, 

and Foil Coatings. 

Source: 2006 RACT SIP at 1–2 and Updated RACT SIP at 2–3. 


tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 10 / Friday, January 15, 2016 / Proposed Rules 2139 

Subsequent to submitting its 2006 

RACT SIP and Updated RACT SIP, 

SMAQMD submitted, and the EPA 

approved, negative declarations for the 

following CTG source categories: 

Coating Operations at Aerospace 

Manufacturing and Rework Operations 

(77 FR 23130, April 18, 2012), 

Fiberglass Boat Manufacturing Materials 

(77 FR 63743, October 17, 2012), and 

Automobile and Light-Duty Truck 

Assembly Coatings (77 FR 63743, 

October 17, 2012). 

With the exception of the 

Pharmaceuticals Manufacturing CTG 

and the municipal landfill category, we 

are proposing to find that SMAQMD’s 

2006 RACT SIP and Updated RACT SIP, 

including the above negative 

declarations, largely demonstrate that 

the applicable SIP rules for the CTG 

source categories operating within the 

Sacramento Metro area satisfy RACT for 

the 1997 8-hour ozone NAAQS. We will 

discuss the deficiencies with Rule 455, 

Pharmaceuticals Manufacturing and the 

municipal landfill category, in the next 

section. 

Our 2006 RACT SIP TSD provides a 

more detailed discussion of the EPA’s 

rationale, including an overview of the 

District’s analyses which were made 

available for public comment during the 

District’s rulemaking process, together 

with recommendations for rule 

improvements. 

Second, with respect to certain nonCTG source categories located at 

facilities that are major stationary 

sources of VOC or NOX emissions, the 

2006 RACT SIP Staff Report contains: 

(1) A summary of recommendations or 

requirements contained in applicable 

Alternative Control Technique (ACT) 

documents, federal and state RACT 

guidance documents, and/or 

regulations; (2) a summary of the 

applicable District rules; and (3) an 

evaluation of the District’s rules in light 

of the applicable RACT guidance 

documents and/or regulations. See 2006 

RACT SIP Staff Report at Appendix B. 

Based on these evaluations, SMAQMD 

concludes that non-CTG emission 

sources located within these VOC or 

NOX major stationary sources are 

generally covered by SIP-approved rules 

that satisfy RACT for the 1997 8-hour 

ozone NAAQS. We are proposing to find 

that the SMAQMD’s 2006 RACT SIP and 

Updated RACT SIP submissions 

adequately demonstrate that the 

applicable SIP rules for these non-CTG 

sources located at major stationary 

sources satisfy RACT for the 1997 8- 

hour ozone NAAQS. 

Our 2006 RACT SIP TSD provides a 

more detailed discussion of the EPA’s 

rationale for these proposals, including 

an overview of the District’s analyses 

which were made available for public 

comment during the District’s 

rulemaking process. 

Finally, with respect to all other major 

stationary sources of VOC or NOX

emissions, the 2006 RACT SIP and 

Updated RACT SIP identify the 

applicable SIP rules or SIP-approved 

permit provisions that the EPA has 

previously approved as satisfying 

RACT. Our review of CARB’s emissions 

inventory database did not uncover any 

additional major stationary sources that 

were missed in the District’s analyses. 

Based on the EPA’s review of the 

District’s evaluations, we propose to 

conclude that with the exception of the 

Pharmaceuticals Manufacturing rule 

and municipal waste landfill category, 

all of the identified SIP rules and permit 

conditions satisfy RACT for the 1997 8- 

hour ozone NAAQS. 

C. What are the RACT deficiencies? 

Rule 455, Pharmaceuticals 

Manufacturing, (amended 11/29/83 and 

9/5/96) lacks test methods, 

recordkeeping, and monitoring 

requirements which are necessary to 

support enforcement of the rule. See 

CAA section 110(a). These are 

deficiencies listed in the EPA’s ‘‘Blue 

Book’’ (Issues Relating to VOC 

Regulation Cutpoints, Deficiencies, and 

Deviations, May 25, 1988, revised 

January 11, 1990) and should be 

corrected. 

The Kiefer landfill is a major source 

of VOCs located within the Sacramento 

Metro area. SMAQMD Rule 485, 

Municipal Landfill Gas, exempts 

landfills covered under the NSPS, 40 

CFR part 60 Subpart WWW, including 

Kiefer Landfill. Although the District 

has been delegated authority to 

implement and enforce the NSPS, as 

well as the relevant NESHAP (40 CFR 

part 63 Subpart AAAA), those 

requirements have not been 

incorporated into the SIP. The District 

should amend the rule or submit 

relevant portions of the facility’s permit 

for SIP approval. 

D. EPA Recommendations To Further 

Improve the RACT SIP 

Our TSDs for the 2006 RACT SIP and 

Updated RACT SIP provide additional 

recommendations for future rule 

improvements. 

E. Proposed Action and Public 

Comment 

For the reasons discussed above and 

explained more fully in our 2006 RACT 

SIP TSD and Updated RACT SIP TSD, 

the EPA proposes to partially approve 

and partially disapprove SMAQMD’s 

2006 RACT SIP and Updated RACT SIP. 

Under CAA section 110(k)(3), we 

propose to approve the 2006 RACT SIP 

and Updated RACT SIP, with the 

exception of Rule 455, Pharmaceutical 

Manufacturing and the municipal waste 

landfill category, as satisfying the RACT 

requirements of CAA section 182(b)(2) 

and (f). 

Also under CAA section 110(k)(3), we 

propose to disapprove those elements of 

the 2006 RACT SIP and Updated RACT 

SIP that pertain to Rule 455 and the 

municipal waste landfill category, 

which the EPA has determined do not 

meet all of the applicable CAA 

requirements. We will not finalize this 

partial disapproval, however, if we fully 

approve revisions to Rule 455 and the 

municipal waste landfill category as 

satisfying RACT before finalizing action 

on the 2006 RACT SIP and Updated 

RACT SIP. 

The EPA is committed to working 

with CARB and the District to resolve 

the Rule 455 and municipal waste 

landfill RACT deficiencies identified in 

this proposed action. 

If finalized, this partial disapproval 

would trigger the 2-year clock for the 

federal implementation plan (FIP) 

requirement under section 110(c). 

In addition, final disapproval would 

trigger sanctions under CAA section 179 

and 40 CFR 52.31 unless the EPA 

approves subsequent SIP revisions that 

correct the RACT SIP deficiencies 

within 18 months of the effective date 

of the final action. 

We will accept comments from the 

public on the proposed partial approval 

and partial disapproval for the next 30 

days. 

III. Statutory and Executive Order 

Reviews 

Additional information about these 

statutes and Executive Orders can be 

found at http://www2.epa.gov/lawsregulations/laws-and-executive-orders. 

A. Executive Order 12866: Regulatory 

Planning and Review and Executive 

Order 13563: Improving Regulation and 

Regulatory Review 

This action is not a significant 

regulatory action and was therefore not 

submitted to the Office of Management 

and Budget (OMB) for review. 

B. Paperwork Reduction Act (PRA) 

This action does not impose an 

information collection burden under the 

PRA because this action does not 

impose additional requirements beyond 

those imposed by state law. 


tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
2140 Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 10 / Friday, January 15, 2016 / Proposed Rules 

C. Regulatory Flexibility Act (RFA) 

I certify that this action will not have 

a significant economic impact on a 

substantial number of small entities 

under the RFA. This action will not 

impose any requirements on small 

entities beyond those imposed by state 

law. 

D. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act 

(UMRA) 

This action does not contain any 

unfunded mandate as described in 

UMRA, 2 U.S.C. 1531–1538, and does 

not significantly or uniquely affect small 

governments. This action does not 

impose additional requirements beyond 

those imposed by state law. 

Accordingly, no additional costs to 

State, local, or tribal governments, or to 

the private sector, will result from this 

action. 

E. Executive Order 13132: Federalism 

This action does not have federalism 

implications. It will not have substantial 

direct effects on the states, on the 

relationship between the national 

government and the states, or on the 

distribution of power and 

responsibilities among the various 

levels of government. 

F. Executive Order 13175: Coordination 

With Indian Tribal Governments 

This action does not have tribal 

implications, as specified in Executive 

Order 13175, because the SIP is not 

approved to 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, and will not impose 

substantial direct costs on tribal 

governments or preempt tribal law. 

Thus, Executive Order 13175 does not 

apply to this action. 

G. Executive Order 13045: Protection of 

Children From Environmental Health 

Risks and Safety Risks 

The EPA interprets Executive Order 

13045 as applying only to those 

regulatory actions that concern 

environmental health or safety risks that 

the EPA has reason to believe may 

disproportionately affect children, per 

the definition of ‘‘covered regulatory 

action’’ in section 2–202 of the 

Executive Order. This action is not 

subject to Executive Order 13045 

because it does not impose additional 

requirements beyond those imposed by 

state law. 

H. Executive Order 13211: Actions That 

Significantly Affect Energy Supply, 

Distribution, or Use 

This action is not subject to Executive 

Order 13211, because it is not a 

significant regulatory action under 

Executive Order 12866. 

I. National Technology Transfer and 

Advancement Act (NTTAA) 

Section 12(d) of the NTTAA directs 

the EPA to use voluntary consensus 

standards in its regulatory activities 

unless to do so would be inconsistent 

with applicable law or otherwise 

impractical. The EPA believes that this 

action is not subject to the requirements 

of section 12(d) of the NTTAA because 

application of those requirements would 

be inconsistent with the CAA. 

J. Executive Order 12898: Federal 

Actions To Address Environmental 

Justice in Minority Populations and 

Low-Income Population 

The EPA lacks the discretionary 

authority to address environmental 

justice in this rulemaking. 

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: December 11, 2015. 

Jared Blumenfeld, 

Regional Administrator, Region IX. 

[FR Doc. 2016–00571 Filed 1–14–16; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 6560–50–P 

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION 

AGENCY 

40 CFR Part 52 

[EPA–R09–OAR–2015–0048; FRL–9940–95– 

Region 9] 

Clean Air Plans; 1-Hour and 1997 8- 

Hour Ozone Nonattainment Area 

Requirements; San Joaquin Valley, 

California 

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 California to 

provide for attainment of the 1-hour 

ozone national ambient air quality 

standard in the San Joaquin Valley, 

California ozone nonattainment area 

and to meet other Clean Air Act 

requirements. Specifically, with respect 

to the 1-hour ozone standard, the EPA 

is proposing to find the emissions 

inventories to be acceptable and to 

approve the reasonably available control 

measures demonstration, the rate of 

progress demonstrations, the attainment 

demonstration, contingency measures 

for failure to meet rate of progress 

milestones, the provisions for advanced 

technology/clean fuels for boilers, and 

the demonstration that the plan 

provides sufficient transportation 

control strategies and measures to offset 

emissions increases due to increases in 

motor vehicle activity. For the 1997 8- 

hour ozone standard, the EPA is 

proposing to approve the demonstration 

that the plan provides sufficient 

transportation control strategies and 

measures to offset emissions increases 

due to increases in motor vehicle 

activity. 

DATES: Any comments must arrive by 

February 16, 2016. 

ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, 

identified by Docket ID Number EPA– 

R09–OAR–2015–0048, by one of the 

following methods: 

1. http://www.regulations.gov: Follow 

the on-line instructions for submitting 

comments. 

2. Email: ungvarsky.john@epa.gov. 

3. Mail or deliver: John Ungvarsky 

(AIR–2), U.S. Environmental Protection 

Agency, Region IX, 75 Hawthorne 

Street, San Francisco, CA 94105–3901. 

Deliveries are only accepted during the 

Regional Office’s normal hours of 

operation. 

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 email. 

http://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 an 

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. 


tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS