[Federal Register Volume 88, Number 247 (Wednesday, December 27, 2023)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 89351-89355]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2023-28525]


=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

40 CFR Part 52

[EPA-R09-OAR-2023-0590; FRL-11615-01-R9]


Air Plan Approval; California; Yolo-Solano Air Quality Management 
District

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Proposed rule.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

SUMMARY: The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is proposing to 
approve, through parallel processing, state implementation plan (SIP) 
revisions from the Yolo-Solano Air Quality Management District (YSAQMD 
or ``District'') to address Clean Air Act (CAA or ``Act'') requirements 
related to the 2008 8-hour ozone national ambient air quality standards 
(NAAQS or ``standards''). These revisions concern emissions of oxides 
of nitrogen (NO<INF>X</INF>) from biomass boilers, and also address 
reasonably available control technology (RACT) requirements for major 
sources of NO<INF>X</INF> in the portion of the Sacramento Metro, CA, 
nonattainment area that is subject to YSAQMD jurisdiction. We are 
taking comments on this proposal and plan to follow with a final 
action.

DATES: Comments must be received on or before January 26, 2024.

ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, identified by Docket ID No. EPA-R09-
OAR-2023-0590 at https://www.regulations.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. 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

[[Page 89352]]

https://www.epa.gov/dockets/commenting-epa-dockets. If you need 
assistance in a language other than English or if you are a person with 
a disability who needs a reasonable accommodation at no cost to you, 
please contact the person identified in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION 
CONTACT section.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Eugene Chen, EPA Region IX, 75 
Hawthorne Street (AIR-3-3), San Francisco, CA 94105. By phone: (415) 
947-4304 or by email at <a href="/cdn-cgi/l/email-protection#03606b666d2d667664666d66436673622d646c75"><span class="__cf_email__" data-cfemail="117279747f3f746476747f74517461703f767e67">[email protected]</span></a>.

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 the submitted documents?
    C. What is the purpose of the submitted documents?
II. The EPA's Evaluation and Action
    A. How is the EPA evaluating the submitted documents?
    B. Do the submitted documents meet the evaluation criteria?
    C. Public Comment and Proposed Action
III. Incorporation by Reference
IV. 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
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                       Document/
            Local agency                rule No.              Document title              Revised     Submitted
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
YSAQMD..............................  ...........  Reasonably Available Control          09/13/2017   11/13/2017
                                                    Technology (RACT) State
                                                    Implementation Plan (SIP) Analysis
                                                    for the 2008 Federal Ozone
                                                    Standard (``2017 RACT SIP'').
YSAQMD..............................         2.43  Biomass Boilers (public draft        ...........   11/27/2023
                                                    version submitted for parallel
                                                    processing).
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    On September 13, 2017, the YSAQMD adopted the ``Reasonably 
Available Control Technology (RACT) State Implementation Plan (SIP) 
Analysis for the 2008 Federal Ozone Standard'' (``2017 RACT SIP'') to 
demonstrate that its stationary sources are subject to RACT rules for 
the 2008 8-hour ozone NAAQS. On November 13, 2017, the California Air 
Resources Board (CARB) submitted the 2017 RACT SIP to the EPA for 
approval as a revision to the California SIP. The EPA determined that 
the negative declarations portion of the 2017 RACT SIP met the SIP 
submittal completeness criteria in 40 CFR part 51, Appendix V on April 
11, 2018.\1\ The EPA determined that the remaining elements of the 2017 
RACT SIP met the SIP completeness criteria on August 23, 2018.\2\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ Letter dated April 11, 2018, from Elizabeth J. Adams, Acting 
Director, Air Division, EPA Region IX, to Richard Corey, Executive 
Officer, CARB. A ``negative declaration'' is an assertion by a state 
or district that a nonattainment area contains no sources covered by 
a particular control techniques guidelines (CTG) document.
    \2\ Letter dated August 23, 2018, from Elizabeth J. Adams, 
Acting Director, Air Division, EPA Region IX, to Richard Corey, 
Executive Officer, CARB.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    On November 27, 2023, CARB submitted a public draft version of 
amendments to Rule 2.43, ``Biomass Boilers,'' along with a request for 
parallel processing.\3\ The EPA has reviewed the submitted public draft 
version of Rule 2.43 and finds that it fulfills the completeness 
criteria of appendix V, with the exception of the requirements of 
paragraphs 2.1(e)-2.1(h), which do not apply to rules submitted for 
parallel processing. CARB's November 27, 2023 letter states that the 
YSAQMD Governing Board was scheduled to consider adoption of the 
amended rule on December 13, 2023, and that if it was approved, CARB 
would submit the final package to the EPA as a revision to the SIP. 
While our evaluation of Rule 2.43 herein is based on the public draft 
of the rule submitted by CARB on November 27, 2023, the YSAQMD 
Governing Board has since approved the rule amendments from this draft, 
and the EPA is now awaiting the final rule submittal from CARB.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \3\ ``Parallel processing'' refers to a process established 
under section 2.3 of Appendix V to 40 CFR part 51 that utilizes 
concurrent state and federal proposed rulemaking actions. Generally, 
the state submits a copy of the proposed regulation or other 
revisions to the EPA before conducting its public hearing and 
completing its public comment process under state law. The EPA 
reviews this proposed state or district action and prepares a notice 
of proposed rulemaking under federal law. In some cases, the EPA 
publishes its notice of proposed rulemaking in the Federal Register 
during the same timeframe that the state or District is holding its 
own public hearing and public comment process. If, after completing 
its public comment process and after the EPA's public comment 
process has run, the state materially changes its final SIP 
submission to the EPA from the initial proposed submission, the EPA 
evaluates those changes and decides whether to publish another 
notice of proposed rulemaking in light of those changes or to 
proceed to taking final action on its proposed action with a 
description of the state's changes. Any final rulemaking action by 
the EPA will occur only after the state formally adopts and submits 
its final submission to the EPA.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

B. Are there other versions of the submitted documents?

    On June 30, 2023, we took final action to partially approve and 
partially disapprove the 2017 RACT SIP.\4\ Our partial disapproval 
related solely to the RACT element for major sources of NO<INF>X</INF> 
that we are now proposing to approve in this action.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \4\ 88 FR 42252.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    We approved an earlier version of Rule 2.43 into the SIP on July 2, 
2012.\5\ The District adopted amendments to the SIP-approved version of 
Rule 2.43 on April 12, 2023, and CARB submitted these amendments to the 
EPA on June 8, 2023. We will consider this earlier submittal to be 
superseded, by the time of our final action, by the version of Rule 
2.43 that has been submitted for parallel processing once it is 
submitted to the EPA as a SIP revision. Therefore, we are proposing to 
act only on the version of the rule submitted on November 27, 2023, 
which includes all revisions made in the June 8, 2023 submittal. 
However, we have reviewed materials provided with the June 8, 2023 
submittal, and our evaluation below considers the amendments made in 
that version of the rule.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \5\ 77 FR 39181. The EPA published a correcting amendment on 
March 28, 2018 (83 FR 13190) that corrected an error in the 
regulatory text of the July 2, 2012 final action.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

C. What is the purpose of the submitted documents?

    Emissions of NO<INF>X</INF> contribute to the production of ground-
level ozone, smog and particulate matter (PM), which harm human health 
and the environment. Section 110(a) of the CAA requires states to 
submit plans that provide for implementation, maintenance, and 
enforcement of the NAAQS. In addition, CAA sections 182(b)(2) and (f) 
require that SIPs for ozone nonattainment areas classified as 
``Moderate'' or higher implement RACT for any category of sources 
covered by a control techniques guidelines (CTG)

[[Page 89353]]

document and for any major source of volatile organic compounds (VOCs) 
or NO<INF>X</INF>. The YSAQMD regulates the Yolo and Solano County 
portions of the Sacramento Metro, CA, ozone nonattainment area, which 
is classified as ``Severe'' nonattainment for the 2008 ozone NAAQS.\6\ 
Therefore, the YSAQMD must, at a minimum, ensure that all categories of 
sources covered by a CTG document and all major sources of VOCs or 
NO<INF>X</INF> within the District implement RACT-level controls. Any 
stationary source that emits or has the potential to emit at least 25 
tons per year (tpy) of VOCs or NO<INF>X</INF> in a Severe ozone 
nonattainment area is considered a major stationary source.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \6\ May 21, 2012 (77 FR 30088).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The YSAQMD relies upon Rule 2.43 to implement RACT for major 
sources of NO<INF>X</INF>.\7\ As we explained in our June 30, 2023 
final action on the 2017 RACT SIP, the current SIP-approved version of 
Rule 2.43 contains a provision that explicitly exempts affected units 
from complying with rule standards during periods of startup and 
shutdown and does not provide for an alternative emission limitation 
during such periods. This provision is inconsistent with the EPA's 
Startup, Shutdown, and Malfunction (SSM) Policy as established in the 
EPA's 2015 SSM SIP Action.\8\ This deficiency was the basis for our 
disapproval of the major source NO<INF>X</INF> element of the 2017 RACT 
SIP. The Rule 2.43 amendments adopted on April 12, 2023, are intended 
to address this by establishing numeric NO<INF>X</INF> and carbon 
monoxide (CO) limits that apply during periods of startup and shutdown. 
The Rule 2.43 amendments that YSAQMD has proposed, will also establish 
additional recordkeeping and periodic reporting requirements. Our 
technical support document (TSD) has more detailed information about 
these rule revisions.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \7\ 2017 RACT SIP, pages 5 and 45.
    \8\ ``State Implementation Plans: Response to Petition for 
Rulemaking; Restatement and Update of EPA's SSM Policy Applicable to 
SIPs; Findings of Substantial Inadequacy; and SIP Calls To Amend 
Provisions Applying to Excess Emissions During Periods of Startup, 
Shutdown and Malfunction,'' 80 FR 33840 (June 12, 2015).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

II. The EPA's Evaluation and Proposed Action

A. How is the EPA evaluating the submitted documents?

    Rules in the SIP 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 the implementation of RACT for 
each category of sources covered by a CTG, as well as each major source 
of NO<INF>X</INF> or VOC in ozone nonattainment areas classified as 
Moderate or higher (see CAA section 182(b)(2)). The YSAQMD regulates a 
portion of an ozone nonattainment area classified as ``Severe'' for the 
2008 ozone NAAQS and is therefore responsible for ensuring the 
applicable sources implement RACT-level controls for that ozone 
standard. The YSAQMD relies upon Rule 2.43 to require the applicable 
sources to implement RACT-level controls to fulfill the requirements 
associated with the major source NO<INF>X</INF> element for the 2008 
ozone NAAQS.
    We note that the April 12, 2023 amendments to Rule 2.43 also 
establish emission standards for CO, which is not an ozone precursor, 
and therefore we are not assessing in this action whether the CO 
standard implements RACT-level controls. As a result, we have not 
evaluated CO emission standards in Rule 2.43 for stringency, but we 
have evaluated them under the enforceability and SIP relaxation 
criteria.

B. Do the submitted documents meet the evaluation criteria?

    In our June 30, 2023 final action on the 2017 RACT SIP, we 
evaluated the stringency of the 90 parts per million (ppm) (24-hour 
block average) NO<INF>X</INF> emissions limit established by the SIP-
approved version of Rule 2.43.\9\ However, the 90 ppm limit did not 
apply during periods of startup and shutdown. As a result, we 
determined that the emission limits in SIP-approved Rule 2.43 achieve 
RACT-level stringency but found that the lack of a continuous emissions 
limit that applies at all times (including periods of startup and 
shutdown) precluded us from determining that Rule 2.43 implemented 
RACT. We have not identified any information since our June 30, 2023 
approval to alter our evaluation of the stringency of the SIP-approved 
NO<INF>X</INF> emission limits.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \9\ 88 FR 42252. See also TSD for that action, which is 
available in the docket for this rulemaking.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The April 12, 2023 amendments to Rule 2.43 established a 
NO<INF>X</INF> limit of 215 ppm on a 24-hour block average that applies 
during periods of startup and shutdown. We consider this emission limit 
to be consistent with the use of either combustion controls or good 
combustion practices that are the most stringent control measures that 
can be feasibly utilized during periods of startup and shutdown. In 
addition, the YSAQMD identified other California air district rules for 
biomass boilers and indicated that these rules either exempted periods 
of startup and shutdown or had startup/shutdown limits that are less 
stringent than those in Rule 2.43. This supports an EPA determination 
that the amended rule establishes a RACT-level of control. Finally, we 
determined that the amended Rule 2.43 is consistent with each of the 
seven specific criteria recommended in the EPA's SSM Policy as 
appropriate considerations for developing emission limitations in SIP 
provisions applicable during startup and shutdown. Additional 
information regarding our evaluation of Rule 2.43 with the seven 
criteria is discussed in greater detail in our TSD for this action.
    The Rule 2.43 amendments adopted by YSAQMD on December 13, 2023, 
explicitly require that the results of any relative accuracy test audit 
(RATA) performed be maintained by the source as required records, and 
will also establish a requirement for the owner/operator of an affected 
source to submit all records required by the recordkeeping provisions 
of the rule to the EPA at least once every six months.\10\ These 
reporting provision amendments will assist in ensuring compliance with 
emission standards and other rule requirements, and will also ensure 
that Rule 2.43 is enforceable by the District and the EPA as well as by 
members of the public.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \10\ The amendments require that these records be submitted to 
the EPA via the Compliance and Emissions Data Reporting Interface 
(CEDRI) or an analogous EPA electronic submission system. CEDRI is 
an internet-based service maintained by the EPA that allows 
regulated sources to submit various reports for purposes of 
demonstrating compliance with federal requirements. In addition to 
regulated sources, state and local agency personnel may create user 
accounts on CEDRI and access the information submitted by sources 
located within their agency's jurisdiction. Additional information 
can be found at https://www.epa.gov/electronic-reporting-air-emissions/cedri.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Based on the stringency of the existing SIP-approved NO<INF>X</INF> 
limits, combined with the NO<INF>X</INF> limits established for periods 
of startup and shutdown, we propose to approve Rule 2.43 as complying 
with EPA's SSM policy and as implementing RACT for this source 
category. As discussed previously, the absence of an emission limit 
during startup and shutdown was the basis for our disapproval of the 
major source NO<INF>X</INF> element of the 2017 RACT SIP. Since we are 
proposing to determine that Rule 2.43 satisfies the requirement to 
implement RACT, we are

[[Page 89354]]

also proposing to determine that the District implements RACT for major 
sources of NO<INF>X</INF> associated with the area's Severe 
classification for the 2008 ozone NAAQS.
    The existing SIP-approved version of the rule contains several 
monitoring, recordkeeping, and reporting provisions, including a 
requirement to operate continuous emission monitoring systems (CEMS) 
for NO<INF>X</INF> and CO; performance specification and calibration 
requirements for the CEMS; and requirements to maintain daily logs of 
emissions, fuel usage, and startup/shutdown durations. The amendments 
adopted on December 13, 2023 establish a new requirement for all 
records required by this rule to be submitted to the EPA at least once 
every six months. We consider these provisions adequate to ensure that 
compliance with rule requirements can be clearly determined, and that 
the rule is enforceable by the District and the EPA, as well as by 
members of the public. We are also proposing to determine that our 
approval of these amendments would comply with CAA section 110(l) 
because the proposed SIP revision would not interfere with any 
applicable CAA requirements. In addition, CAA section 193 does not 
apply to this action because Rule 2.43 is not a SIP-approved control 
requirement that was in effect before November 15, 1990. Additional 
information regarding our evaluation is discussed in greater detail in 
our TSD for this action.

C. Public Comment and Proposed Action

    As authorized in section 110(k)(3) of the Act, the EPA proposes to 
approve Rule 2.43, as amended on April 12, 2023, and as further amended 
on December 13, 2023, into the California SIP. Based on our discussion 
in Section II.B of this document, we propose to determine that Rule 
2.43 as amended will comply with the EPA's SSM policy and other 
applicable CAA requirements and will implement RACT for this source 
category. In addition, we propose to approve the major source 
NO<INF>X</INF> RACT element of the 2017 RACT SIP. Because our proposed 
approval relies upon our evaluation of the public draft version of the 
Rule 2.43 amendments, subsequently adopted on December 13, 2023, but 
not yet formally submitted by CARB, we will not take final action until 
these amendments are submitted to us as a revision to the California 
SIP. If Rule 2.43 is not submitted in the form adopted on December 13, 
2023, we will reconsider our proposed action accordingly. We will 
accept comments from the public on this proposal until January 26, 
2024. If we take final action to approve the submitted documents, our 
final action will incorporate this rule into the federally enforceable 
SIP.

III. Incorporation by Reference

    In this rule, the EPA is proposing to include in a final EPA rule 
regulatory text that includes incorporation by reference. In accordance 
with requirements of 1 CFR 51.5, the EPA is proposing to incorporate by 
reference YSAQMD Rule 2.43, ``Biomass Boilers,'' amended on December 
13, 2023, which regulates NO<INF>X</INF> and CO emissions from biomass-
fueled boilers. The EPA has made, and will continue to make, these 
materials available through https://www.regulations.gov and at the EPA 
Region IX Office (please contact the person identified in the FOR 
FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section of this preamble for more 
information).

IV. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews

    Under the CAA, the Administrator is required to approve a SIP 
submission that complies with the provision of the Act and applicable 
federal regulations. 42 U.S.C. 740(k); 40 CFR 52.02(a). Thus, in 
reviewing SIP submissions, the EPA's role is to review state choices, 
and approve those choices if they meet the minimum criteria of the 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:
    <bullet> Is not a significant regulatory action subject to review 
by the Office of Management and Budget under Executive Orders 12866 (58 
FR 51735, October 4, 1993) and 14094 (88 FR 21879, April 11, 2023);
    <bullet> Does not impose an information collection burden under the 
provisions of the Paperwork Reduction Act (44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.);
    <bullet> 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.);
    <bullet> 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);
    <bullet> Does not have federalism implications as specified in 
Executive Order 13132 (64 FR 43255, August 10, 1999);
    <bullet> Is not subject to Executive Order 13045 (62 FR 19885, 
April 23, 1997) because it proposes to approve a state program;
    <bullet> Is not a significant regulatory action subject to 
Executive Order 13211 (66 FR 28355, May 22, 2001); and
    <bullet> 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.
    In addition, 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. In those areas of 
Indian country, the rule does not have tribal implications and will not 
impose substantial direct costs on tribal governments or preempt tribal 
law as specified by Executive Order 13175 (65 FR 67249, November 9, 
2000).
    Executive Order 12898 (Federal Actions To Address Environmental 
Justice in Minority Populations and Low-Income Populations, 59 FR 7629, 
Feb. 16, 1994) directs Federal agencies to identify and address 
``disproportionately high and adverse human health or environmental 
effects'' of their actions on minority populations and low-income 
populations to the greatest extent practicable and permitted by law. 
The EPA defines environmental justice (EJ) as ``the fair treatment and 
meaningful involvement of all people regardless of race, color, 
national origin, or income with respect to the development, 
implementation, and enforcement of environmental laws, regulations, and 
policies.'' The EPA further defines the term fair treatment to mean 
that ``no group of people should bear a disproportionate burden of 
environmental harms and risks, including those resulting from the 
negative environmental consequences of industrial, governmental, and 
commercial operations or programs and policies.''
    The State did not evaluate environmental justice considerations as 
part of its SIP submittal; the CAA and applicable implementing 
regulations neither prohibit nor require such an evaluation. The EPA 
did not perform an EJ analysis and did not consider EJ in this action. 
Consideration of EJ is not required as part of this action, and there 
is no information in the record inconsistent with the stated goal of 
E.O. 12898 of achieving environmental justice for people of color, low-
income populations, and Indigenous peoples.

List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52

    Environmental protection, Air pollution control, Incorporation by 
reference, Intergovernmental relations, Nitrogen oxides, Ozone, 
Reporting and recordkeeping requirements.


[[Page 89355]]


    Dated: December 20, 2023.
Martha Guzman Aceves,
Regional Administrator, Region IX.
[FR Doc. 2023-28525 Filed 12-26-23; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P


</pre><script data-cfasync="false" src="/cdn-cgi/scripts/5c5dd728/cloudflare-static/email-decode.min.js"></script></body>
</html>