90754 Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 241 / Thursday, December 15, 2016 / Proposed Rules 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Robert J. Kasunic, Associate Register of 

Copyrights and Director of Registration 

Policy and Practice, or Erik Bertin, 

Deputy Director of Registration Policy 

and Practice. Each can be reached by 

telephone at 202–707–8040. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The 

United States Copyright Office is 

proposing to update the regulation 

governing supplementary registration to 

reflect certain technical upgrades that 

will soon be made to the electronic 

registration system. On December 1, 

2016, the Office issued a Notice of 

Proposed Rulemaking seeking public 

input on that topic. See 81 FR 86656 

(Dec. 1, 2016). To ensure that 

commenters have sufficient time to 

respond, the Office is extending the 

deadline for the submission of 

comments in response to the Notice to 

January 30, 2017, at 11:59 p.m. Eastern 

Time. 

Dated: December 9, 2016. 

Sarang V. Damle, 

General Counsel and Associate Register of 

Copyrights. 

[FR Doc. 2016–30076 Filed 12–14–16; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 1410–30–P 

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION 

AGENCY 

40 CFR Part 52 

[EPA–R09–OAR–2016–0524; FRL–9956–68– 

Region 9] 

Partial Approval, Partial Disapproval of 

California Air Plan Revisions, Antelope 

Valley 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 Antelope Valley Air 

Quality Management District (AVAQMD 

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 and 2008 8- 

hour ozone National Ambient Air 

Quality Standards (NAAQS). We are 

proposing action on local SIP revisions 

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 

January 17, 2017. 

ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, 

identified by Docket ID No. EPA–R09– 

OAR–2016–0524 at http://

www.regulations.gov, or via email to 

Andrew Steckel, Rulemaking Office 

Chief at Steckel.Andrew@epa.gov. For 

comments submitted at Regulations.gov, 

follow the online instructions for 

submitting comments. Once submitted, 

comments cannot be removed or edited 

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 SIPs 

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 by the California Air 

Resources Board (CARB). 

TABLE 1—SUBMITTED DOCUMENTS

Local agency Document Adopted Submitted 

AVAQMD ........................... AVAQMD 8-Hour Reasonably Available Control Technology—State Implementation Plan Analysis (RACT SIP Analysis)—1997 8-hour Ozone NAAQS ‘‘2006 

RACT SIP’’.

09/19/06 01/31/07 

AVAQMD ........................... AVAQMD 8-Hour Reasonably Available Control Technology—State Implementation Plan Analysis (2015 RACT SIP Analysis)—2008 8-hour Ozone NAAQS 

‘‘2015 RACT SIP’’.

07/21/15 10/23/15 

On July 31, 2007, the submittal for 

AVAQMD’s 2006 RACT SIP Analysis for 

the 1997 8-hour ozone NAAQS was 

deemed by operation of law to meet the 

completeness criteria in Title 40 of the 

Code of Federal Regulations (CFR) part 

51 Appendix V, which must be met 

before formal EPA review. 

On March 9, 2016, the submittal for 

AVAQMD’s 2015 RACT SIP Analysis for 

the 2008 8-hour ozone NAAQS was 

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 

documents? 

There are no previous versions of 

these documents in the AVAQMD 

portion of the California SIP for the 

1997 or 2008 8-hour ozone standard. 

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 


rmajette on DSK2TPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 241 / Thursday, December 15, 2016 / Proposed Rules 90755 

1 40 CFR 81.305; 69 FR 23858 at 23884 (April 30, 

2004) (final rule designating and classifying 

Antelope Valley as a Subpart 2/moderate 

nonattainment for the 1997 8-hour ozone NAAQS); 

77 FR 26950 (May 8, 2012) (final rule reclassifying 

Antelope Valley as severe-15 nonattainment for the 

1997 8-hour ozone NAAQS); and 77 FR 30088 at 

30100 (May 21, 2012) (final rule designating and 

classifying Antelope Valley as severe-15 

nonattainment for the 2008 8-hour ozone NAAQS). 

Antelope Valley AQMD is listed in the final 

rulemaking under ‘‘Los Angeles-San Bernardino 

Cos (W Mojave Desert), CA: Los Angeles County 

(part)’’. 

2AVAQMD separately provided a supplemental 

analysis titled, ‘‘8-Hour Ozone Reasonably 

Available Control Technology (RACT) State 

Implementation Plan (SIP) Analysis—Supplemental 

Analysis’’, dated March 13, 2014, to address the 

EPA’s September 11, 2006 comments on the 2006 

RACT SIP [hereinafter ‘‘2014 Supplemental 

Analysis’’]. 

3See AVAQMD 2014 Supplemental Analysis. 

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 for any 

major source of VOCs or NOX. The 

AVAQMD is subject to this requirement 

as it is designated and classified as a 

severe-15 ozone nonattainment area for 

the 1997 8-hour ozone NAAQS.1

Therefore, the AVAQMD 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 

nonattainment area. Any stationary 

source that emits or has the potential to 

emit at least 100 tons per year of VOCs 

or NOX is a major stationary source in 

a moderate ozone nonattainment area 

(CAA section 182(b)(2), (f) and 302(j)), 

and any stationary source that emits or 

has the potential to emit at least 25 tons 

per year of VOCs or NOX is a major 

stationary source in a severe ozone 

nonattainment area (CAA sections 

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. Section III.D 

of the preamble to the EPA’s final rule 

to implement the 2008 ozone NAAQS 

(80 FR 12264, March 6, 2015) discusses 

similar requirements for RACT. The 

submitted documents provide 

AVAQMD’s analyses of its compliance 

with the CAA section 182 RACT 

requirements for the 1997 and 2008 8- 

hour ozone NAAQS. The EPA’s 

technical support documents (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 VOCs or NOX in 

ozone nonattainment areas classified as 

moderate or above (see CAA section 

182(b)(2)). The AVAQMD 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, rule 

stringency requirements and CAA 

section 182 RACT requirements for the 

applicable criteria pollutants 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); 57 FR 18070 

(April 28, 1992). 

3. ‘‘Issues Relating to VOC Regulation 

Cutpoints, Deficiencies, and Deviations,’’ 

EPA, May 25, 1988 (the Bluebook). 

4. ‘‘Guidance Document for Correcting 

Common VOC & Other Rule Deficiencies,’’ 

EPA Region 9, August 21, 2001 (the Little 

Bluebook). 

5. ‘‘State Implementation Plans; Nitrogen 

Oxides Supplement to the General Preamble; 

Clean Air Act Amendments of 1990 

Implementation of Title I; Proposed Rule,’’ 

(the NOX Supplement), 57 FR 55620, 

November 25, 1992. 

6. Memorandum from William T. Harnett 

to Regional Air Division Directors, (May 18, 

2006), ‘‘RACT Qs & As—Reasonably 

Available Control Technology (RACT) 

Questions and Answers’’. 

7. 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. 

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. 

9. ‘‘Implementation of the 2008 National 

Ambient Air Quality Standards for Ozone: 

State Implementation Plan Requirements’’ 

(80 FR 12264; March 6, 2015). 

With respect to major stationary 

sources, because the Antelope Valley 

ozone nonattainment area was classified 

as ‘‘moderate’’ 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 100 ton per year (tpy) threshold 

for ‘‘major stationary sources’’ of VOC or 

NOX emissions in moderate ozone 

nonattainment areas. (see CAA sections 

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

The AVAQMD’s 2015 RACT SIP 

submittal contains the District’s RACT 

evaluation for major stationary sources 

in accordance with the 25 tpy threshold 

for major stationary sources of VOC or 

NOX emissions in severe ozone 

nonattainment areas. (see CAA sections 

182(d) and (f)). The EPA also evaluated 

AVAQMD’s submittals for compliance 

with the additional RACT requirements 

that became applicable following the 

EPA’s reclassification of the Antelope 

Valley ozone nonattainment area from 

‘‘moderate’’ to ‘‘severe’’ nonattainment 

for the 1997 8-hour ozone NAAQS and 

classification as a severe ozone 

nonattainment area for the 2008 8-hour 

ozone NAAQS. 

B. Do the RACT SIP submissions meet 

the evaluation criteria? 

With respect to the 1997 8-hour ozone 

standard, AVAQMD’s 2006 RACT SIP 

and its 2014 Supplemental Analysis 2

provide the District’s conclusion that 

the applicable SIP generally satisfies 

CAA section 182 RACT requirements 

except for a limited number of rules that 

did not fully implement an applicable 

CTG or where rules covering major nonCTG sources must be updated to 

implement RACT. AVAQMD reviewed 

the list of CTGs and identified whether 

or not there was a stationary source 

located within its jurisdiction. For some 

categories, AVAQMD determined its 

rules met RACT, while in other cases it 

concluded that several rules must be 

updated to implement RACT.3 With 

respect to major non-CTG sources, the 

District identified all facilities that have 

submitted applications for a CAA title V 

Federal Operating Permit. Table 1 of the 

2006 RACT SIP lists four major sources, 

two of which are landfills (Antelope 

Valley Public Landfill and Lancaster 

Landfill), which the District states are 


rmajette on DSK2TPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
90756 Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 241 / Thursday, December 15, 2016 / Proposed Rules 

4Rule 1124, Aerospace Assembly and Component 

Manufacturing Operations, amended August 20, 

2013, was approved into the SIP as meeting RACT 

in 80 FR 60040 (October 5, 2015). 

5See AVAQMD 2015 RACT SIP, pg 1. 

not a major source of ozone precursors. 

The District also states that VOC 

emissions from the remaining two title 

V facilities (Northrup-Grumman and 

Lockheed Martin) are largely regulated 

by Rule 1124 Aerospace Operations, 

which was recently amended and 

approved into the SIP.4 Our review of 

CARB’s emissions inventory database 

for potential CTG sources did not 

uncover any CTG source categories or 

major sources missing from the 

District’s analysis. 

With respect to the 2008 8-hour ozone 

standard, AVAQMD’s 2015 RACT SIP 

staff report states that ‘‘[t]he original 

2006 RACT SIP Analysis (for the 1997 

8-hour ozone standard), together with 

the supplemental March 13, 2014 RACT 

SIP Analysis and this document, [the 

2015 RACT SIP Analysis] represent a 

current and complete RACT SIP 

Analysis document to satisfy the 

District’s RACT obligation for the 1997 

and 2008 8-hour ozone standards.’’ 5

For each CTG source category, 

AVAQMD’s 2015 RACT SIP identifies if 

it has a stationary source subject to the 

CTG. AVAQMD states that for some 

CTG source categories its rules meet 

RACT, while in other cases, the rules 

need to be updated to implement RACT. 

With respect to major non-CTG sources, 

the District identified five facilities that 

submitted applications for title V 

Federal Operating Permits. Four of these 

facilities were previously identified in 

the District’s 2006 RACT SIP. One new 

facility, Wm Bolthouse Farms, is a major 

source of NOX due to emissions from 

internal combustion engines used to 

support agricultural operations. 

We reviewed AVAQMD’s 2006 RACT 

SIP, its 2014 Supplemental Analysis, 

and its 2015 RACT SIPs to determine if 

the District’s rules implemented current 

RACT. We also reviewed CARB’s 

emissions inventory database and did 

not uncover any additional major 

stationary sources that were missing in 

the District’s analyses. The District’s 

efforts to identify CTG sources and 

major sources appears to be thorough. 

Based on the EPA’s review of the 

District’s evaluations, we propose to 

conclude that with the exception of the 

following rules, all of the identified SIP 

rules implement RACT for the 

applicable CTG categories and for the 

major non-CTG stationary sources of 

VOC and NOX for the 1997 and 2008 8- 

hour ozone NAAQS. We will discuss 

the rules’ deficiencies in the next 

section. The rules that are deficient are: 

1. Rule 462, Organic Liquid Loading 

(6/9/95). 

2. Rule 1110.2, Emissions from 

Stationary, Non-road & Portable Internal 

Combustion Engines (1/21/03). 

3. Rule 1151, Motor Vehicle and 

Mobile Equipment Coating Operations 

(6/19/12). 

4. Rule 1171, Solvent Cleaning 

Operations (11/17/98). 

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. Tables 2 of 

AVAQMD’s 2006 and 2015 RACT SIPs 

lists the District’s negative declarations 

where it had no sources subject to the 

applicable CTG for the 1997 and 2008 

8-hour ozone standards respectively. 

The District based its conclusion on a 

review of permit files, emissions 

inventory data, and a search of the 

internet and yellow pages. We 

summarized the District’s negative 

declarations in Table 2 below. 

TABLE 2—AVAQMD NEGATIVE DECLARATIONS FOR THE 1997 AND 2008 8-HOUR OZONE NAAQS 

CTG source category Negative declaration CTG reference document 2006 

RACT SIP * 

2015 

RACT SIP 

Coils .................................................... 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.

.................... X 

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

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

Manufacturing Materials.

.................... X 

Gasoline Bulk Plants .......................... EPA–450/2–77–035, Control of Volatile Organic Emissions from Bulk Gasoline Plants.X X 

Gasoline Loading Terminals >76,000 

L.

EPA–450/2–77–026, Control of Hydrocarbons from Tank Truck Gasoline 

Loading Terminals.

X ....................

Large Appliances, Surface Coatings .. EPA–450/2–77–034, Control of Volatile Organic Emissions from Existing 

Stationary Sources—Volume V: Surface Coating of Large Appliances.

X X 

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

Coatings.

.................... X 

Dry Cleaning ....................................... EPA–450/3–82–009, Control of Volatile Organic Compound Emissions 

from Large Petroleum Dry Cleaners.

.................... X 

Magnet Wire Coating ......................... EPA–450/2–77–033, Control of Volatile Organic Emissions from Existing 

Stationary Sources, Volume IV: Surface Coating of Insulation of Magnet 

Wire.

X X 

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

Coatings.

.................... X 

Natural Gas/Gasoline Processing 

Plants.

EPA–450/2–83–007, Control of Volatile Organic Compound Equipment 

Leaks from Natural Gas/Gasoline Processing Plants.

X X 

Petroleum Liquid Storage Tanks— 

Fixed Roof Tanks.

EPA–450/2–77–036, Control of Volatile Organic Emissions from Storage of 

Petroleum Liquids in Fixed-Roof Tanks.

X X 

Petroleum Liquid Storage Tanks—External Floating Roof Tanks.EPA–450/2–78–047, Control of Volatile Organic Emissions from Petroleum 

Liquid Storage in External Floating Roof Tanks.

X X 

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

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

Wastewater Separators, and Process Unit Turnarounds.

X X 


rmajette on DSK2TPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 241 / Thursday, December 15, 2016 / Proposed Rules 90757 

TABLE 2—AVAQMD NEGATIVE DECLARATIONS FOR THE 1997 AND 2008 8-HOUR OZONE NAAQS—Continued 

CTG source category Negative declaration CTG reference document 2006 

RACT SIP * 

2015 

RACT SIP 

Refineries ........................................... EPA–450/2–78–036, Control of Volatile Organic Compound Leaks from 

Petroleum Refinery Equipment.

X X 

Resin Manufacturing—High-Density 

Polyethylene, Polypropylene, and 

Polystyrene Resins.

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

from Manufacture of High-Density Polyethylene, Polypropylene, and Polystyrene Resins.

X X 

Resin Manufacturing—Synthetic Organic Chemical Polymers and 

Resin Manufacturing.

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

Synthetic Organic Chemical Polymer and Resin Manufacturing Equipment.

X X 

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

Ship Coatings ..................................... 61 FR 44050 and EPA–453/R–94–032, Control Techniques Guidelines for 

Shipbuilding and Ship Repair Operations (Surface Coating).

X X 

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

from Air Oxidation Process in Synthetic Organic Chemical Manufacturing 

Industry (SOCMI).

X X 

Synthetic Organic Chemical Manufacturing.EPA–450/4–91–031, Control of Volatile Organic Compound Emissions 

from Reactor Process and Distillation Operations in SOCMI.

X X 

Wood Furniture Surface Coating ....... EPA–453/R–96–007, Control of VOC Emissions from Wood Furniture Manufacturing Operations.X X 

*These Negative Declarations were approved on July 1, 2011 (76 FR 38572). 

Our review of AVAQMD’s negative 

declarations indicate some CTGs 

missing from the District’s analysis. The 

District should adopt negative 

declarations for the following CTGs for 

the 1997 8-hour ozone standard if it 

concludes it has no sources covered by 

the CTGs: 

1. EPA–450/2–78–032, Control of Volatile 

Organic Emissions from Existing Stationary 

Sources—Volume VII: Factory Surface 

Coating of Flat Wood Paneling. 

2. EPA–450/3–82–009, Control of Volatile 

Organic Compound Emissions from Large 

Petroleum Dry Cleaners. 

3. 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, can coating portion. 

The District should also adopt 

negative declarations for the following 

CTGs for the 2008 8-hour ozone 

standard if it concludes it has no 

sources covered by these documents: 

1. EPA–450/2–77–008, Can coating portion 

of Control of Volatile Organic Emissions from 

Existing Stationary Sources—Volume II: 

Surface Coating of Cans, Coils, Paper, 

Fabrics, Automobiles, and Light-Duty Trucks 

2. EPA–450/2–77–026, Control of 

Hydrocarbons from Tank Truck Gasoline 

Loading Terminals. 

3. EPA–450/7–77–032, Control of Volatile 

Organic Emissions from Existing Stationary 

Sources—Volume III: Surface Coating of 

Metal Furniture. 

4. EPA–450/2–78–032, Control of Volatile 

Organic Emissions from Existing Stationary 

Sources—Volume VII: Factory Surface 

Coating of Flat Wood Paneling. 

5. EPA–453/R–08–003, Drum coating 

portion of Control Techniques Guidelines for 

Miscellaneous Metal and Plastic Parts 

Coatings. 

6. EPA 453/R–08–003, Pleasure craft 

coating portion of Control Techniques 

Guidelines for Miscellaneous Metal and 

Plastic Parts Coatings. 

Our 2006 and 2015 RACT SIP TSDs 

provide 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. 

C. What are the RACT deficiencies? 

Rule 462, Organic Liquid Loading, 

(amended 6/9/95) defines ‘‘facility 

vapor leak’’ as ‘‘measured at a distance 

of 2 centimeters from the source 

according to EPA Method 21.’’ This 

should be corrected to remove the 2 

centimeter criteria to be consistent with 

EPA Method 21. 

Rule 1110.2, Emissions from 

Stationary, Non-road & Portable Internal 

Combustion Engines, (amended 1/21/ 

03) exempts engines ‘‘used directly and 

exclusively by the owner/operator for 

agricultural operations necessary for the 

growing of crops or raising of fowl or 

animals.’’ The District should update 

this rule to eliminate the exemption for 

agricultural engines or adopt a separate 

rule for agricultural engines. 

Rule 1151, Motor Vehicle and Mobile 

Equipment Coating Operations 

(amended 6/19/12) does not cover the 

coating of new heavier duty vehicles. 

The District’s RACT SIP states it has a 

new heavier duty vehicle manufacturing 

facility whose permitted coating 

operation exceeds the applicability 

threshold for the 2008 CTG for 

Automobile and Light Duty Truck 

Assembly Coatings. 

Rule 1171, Solvent Cleaning 

Operations (amended 11/17/98) needs 

to incorporate work practices from the 

2006 CTG for Industrial Cleaning 

Solvents. 

D. EPA Recommendations To Further 

Improve the RACT SIPs 

The 2015 TSD describes 

recommendations if additional emission 

reductions are needed for the next time 

the local agency modifies its rules. The 

2006 and 2015 TSDs also recommend 

adopting additional negative 

declarations if the District concludes it 

has no sources covered by those CTG 

categories. 

E. Proposed Action and Public 

Comment 

As authorized in sections 110(k)(3) 

and 301(a) of the Act, and explained 

more fully in our TSDs, the EPA 

proposes to partially approve and 

partially disapprove the 2006 and 2015 

RACT SIP submittals. We will accept 

comments from the public on this 

proposal until January 17, 2017. 

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. 

III. Statutory and Executive Order 

Reviews 

Additional information about these 

statutes and Executive Orders can be 


rmajette on DSK2TPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
90758 Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 241 / Thursday, December 15, 2016 / Proposed Rules 

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. 

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 2, 2016. 

Deborah Jordan, 

Acting Regional Administrator, Region IX. 

[FR Doc. 2016–30179 Filed 12–14–16; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 6560–50–P 

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION 

AGENCY 

40 CFR Part 52 

[EPA–R01–OAR–2016–0552; FRL–9956–50– 

Region 1] 

Approval and Promulgation of Air 

Quality Implementation Plans; Maine, 

New Hampshire, Rhode Island and 

Vermont; Interstate Transport of Fine 

Particle and Ozone Air Pollution 

AGENCY: Environmental Protection 

Agency (EPA). 

ACTION: Proposed rule. 

SUMMARY: EPA is proposing to approve 

State Implementation Plan (SIP) 

submissions from the Maine Department 

of Environmental Protection (ME DEP), 

the New Hampshire Department of 

Environmental Services (NH DES), the 

Rhode Island Department of 

Environmental Management (RI DEM) 

and the Vermont Department of 

Environmental Conservation (VT DEC). 

These SIP submissions address 

provisions of the Clean Air Act that 

require each state to submit a SIP to 

address emissions that may adversely 

affect another state’s air quality through 

interstate transport. The EPA is 

proposing that all four States have 

adequate provisions to prohibit in-state 

emissions activities from significantly 

contributing to nonattainment, or 

interfering with the maintenance, of the 

1997 ozone National Ambient Air 

Quality Standards (NAAQS) in other 

states, and that Rhode Island and 

Vermont have adequate provisions to 

prohibit in-state emissions activities 

from significantly contributing to 

nonattainment, or interfering with 

maintenance, of the 1997 fine 

particulate matter (PM2.5) and 2006 

PM2.5 NAAQS in other states. The 

intended effect of this action is to 

propose approval of the SIP revisions 

submitted by Maine, New Hampshire, 

Rhode Island, and Vermont. This action 

is being taken under the Clean Air Act. 

DATES: Comments must be received on 

or before January 17, 2017. 

ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, 

identified by docket identification 

number EPA–R01–OAR–2016–0552, at 

http://www.regulations.gov, or via email 

to Arnold.Anne@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 


rmajette on DSK2TPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS