56134 Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 176 / Monday, September 12, 2011 / Proposed Rules 

environmental effects with practical, 

appropriate, and legally permissible 

methods under Executive Order 12898 

(59 FR 7629, February 16, 1994). 

In addition, this proposed action does 

not have Tribal implications as 

specified by Executive Order 13175 (65 

FR 67249, November 9, 2000), because 

the SIP is not approved to apply in 

Indian country located in the State, and 

EPA notes that it will not impose 

substantial direct costs on Tribal 

governments or preempt Tribal law. 

List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52 

Environmental protection, Air 

pollution control, Intergovernmental 

relations, Ozone, Reporting and 

recordkeeping requirements, Volatile 

organic compounds. 

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

Dated: August 31, 2011. 

Jared Blumenfeld, 

Regional Administrator, Region IX. 

[FR Doc. 2011–23136 Filed 9–9–11; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 6560–50–P 

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION 

AGENCY 

40 CFR Part 52 

[EPA–R09–OAR–2011–0701; FRL–9462–4] 

Revisions to the California State 

Implementation Plan, San Joaquin 

Valley Unified Air Pollution Control 

District 

AGENCY: Environmental Protection 

Agency (EPA). 

ACTION: Proposed rule. 

SUMMARY: EPA is proposing to approve 

revisions to the San Joaquin Valley 

Unified Air Pollution Control District 

(SJVUAPCD) portion of the California 

State Implementation Plan (SIP). These 

revisions concern: volatile organic 

compound (VOC) emissions from steam 

enhanced crude oil production and 

aerospace coating operations. We are 

approving local rules that regulate these 

emission sources under the Clean Air 

Act as amended in 1990 (CAA or the 

Act). We are taking comments on this 

proposal and plan to follow with a final 

action. In a separate interim final action 

published in the Rules section in 

today’s Federal Register, we are 

deferring sanctions that would 

otherwise apply to the SJVUAPCD. 

DATES: Any comments must arrive by 

October 12, 2011. 

ADDRESSES: Submit comments, 

identified by docket number EPA–R09– 

OAR–2011–0701, by one of the 

following methods: 

1. Federal eRulemaking Portal: 

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

on-line instructions. 

2. E-mail: steckel.andrew@epa.gov. 

3. Mail or deliver: Andrew Steckel 

(Air–4), U.S. Environmental Protection 

Agency Region IX, 75 Hawthorne Street, 

San Francisco, CA 94105–3901. 

Instructions: All comments will be 

included in the public docket without 

change and may be made available 

online at http://www.regulations.gov, 

including any personal information 

provided, unless the comment includes 

Confidential Business Information (CBI) 

or other information whose disclosure is 

restricted by statute. Information that 

you consider CBI or otherwise protected 

should be clearly identified as such and 

should not be submitted through 

http://www.regulations.gov or e-mail. 

http://www.regulations.gov is an 

‘‘anonymous access’’ system, and EPA 

will not know your identity or contact 

information unless you provide it in the 

body of your comment. If you send email directly to EPA, your e-mail 

address will be automatically captured 

and included as part of the public 

comment. If EPA cannot read your 

comment due to technical difficulties 

and cannot contact you for clarification, 

EPA may not be able to consider your 

comment. 

Docket: Generally, documents in the 

docket for this action are available 

electronically at http:// 

www.regulations.gov and in hard copy 

at EPA Region IX, 75 Hawthorne Street, 

San Francisco, California. While all 

documents in the docket are listed at 

http://www.regulations.gov, some 

information may be publicly available 

only at the hard copy location (e.g., 

copyrighted material, large maps), and 

some may not be publicly available in 

either location (e.g., CBI). To inspect the 

hard copy materials, please schedule an 

appointment during normal business 

hours with the contact listed in the FOR

FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Adrianne Borgia, EPA Region IX, (415) 

972–3576, borgia.adrianne@epa.gov. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

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

and ‘‘our’’ refer to EPA. 

Table of Contents 

I. The State’s Submittal 

A. What rules did the State submit? 

B. Are there other versions of these rules? 

C. What is the purpose of the submitted 

rules and rule revisions? 

II. EPA’s Evaluation and Action 

A. How is EPA evaluating the rules? 

B. Do the rules meet the evaluation 

criteria? 

C. EPA Recommendations to Further 

Improve the Rules 

D. Public Comment and Final Action 

III. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews 

I. The State’s Submittal 

A. What rules did the State submit? 

Table 1 lists the rules addressed by 

this proposal with the dates that they 

were amended by the local air agency 

and submitted by the California Air 

Resources Board. 

TABLE 1—SUBMITTED RULES

Local Agency Rule No. Rule title Amended Submitted 

SJVUAPCD ....... 4401 Steam-Enhanced Crude Oil Production Wells ............................................. 06/16/11 07/28/11 

SJVUAPCD ....... 4605 Aerospace Assembly and Component Coating Operations ........................ 06/16/11 07/28/11 

On August 3, 2011, EPA determined 

that the submittal for SJVUAPCD Rules 

4401 and 4605 met the completeness 

criteria in 40 CFR part 51 Appendix V, 

which must be met before formal EPA 

review. 

B. Are there other versions of these 

rules? 

On January 26, 2010 (75 FR 3996) we 

finalized a limited approval of versions 

of Rules 4401 and 4605 that were 

adopted locally on December 14, 2006 

and September 20, 2007 respectively, 

thereby incorporating those versions of 

the two rules into the SIP. We 

simultaneously finalized a limited 

disapproval of the same two rules based 

on our identification of deficiencies in 

each of these rules. SJVUAPCD adopted 

revisions to the SIP-approved versions 

on June 16, 2011 that were intended to 

address the deficiencies identified in 

our January 2010 action, and CARB 

submitted these revisions to us on July 

28, 2011. 


emcdonald on DSK5VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 176 / Monday, September 12, 2011 / Proposed Rules 56135 

C. What is the purpose of the submitted 

rules and rule revisions? 

SJVUAPCD Rules 4401 and 4605 are 

both intended to limit emissions of 

VOCs, which help produce ground-level 

ozone and smog that are harmful to 

human health and the environment. 

Section 110(a) of the CAA requires 

States to submit regulations that control 

VOC emissions. 

SJVUAPCD Rule 4401, SteamEnhanced Crude Oil Production Wells, 

is designed to limit VOC emissions at 

steam-enhanced crude oil production 

wells. The rule establishes requirements 

for inspection, maintenance and 

replacement/retrofit of leaking 

components. It includes administrative 

and recordkeeping requirements, such 

as inspection logs. The purpose of this 

rule amendment is to correct the rule 

deficiency in Section 6.2.4 as identified 

by EPA and to clarify existing rule 

provisions by removing expired 

language throughout the rule. 

SJVUAPCD Rule 4605, Aerospace 

Assembly and Component Coating 

Operations, is designed to limit VOC 

emissions at these operations. The rule 

establishes limits for coatings used in 

the aerospace industry and defines 

alternative emission control system 

requirements. It also includes 

recordkeeping, reporting, and 

monitoring requirements. The primary 

purpose of the June 2011 rule 

amendment is to correct deficiencies 

identified by EPA in the January 26, 

2010 (75 FR 3996) final rulemaking on 

the previous version of this rule. 

EPA’s technical support documents 

(TSDs) for Rules 4401 and 4605 have 

more information about these rules. 

II. EPA’s Evaluation and Action 

A. How is EPA evaluating the rules? 

Several statutory provisions apply to 

EPA’s evaluation of the rules. CAA 

section 110(a)(2)(A) requires that 

regulations submitted to EPA for 

approval into a SIP must be clear and 

legally enforceable. CAA section 110(l) 

prohibits EPA from approving any SIP 

revision that would interfere with any 

applicable requirement concerning 

attainment and reasonable further 

progress (RFP) or any other applicable 

requirement of the CAA, and CAA 

section 193 prohibits the modification 

of any SIP-approved control 

requirement in effect before November 

15, 1990, in a nonattainment area. CAA 

section 172(c)(1) requires nonattainment 

areas to implement all reasonably 

available control measures (RACM), 

including such reductions in emissions 

from existing sources in the area as may 

be obtained through the adoption, at a 

minimum, of reasonably available 

control technology (RACT), as 

expeditiously as practicable. In 

addition, under CAA section 182(b)(2), 

ozone nonattainment areas classified as 

moderate or above must implement 

RACT for all VOC sources covered by a 

Control Technique Guideline (CTG) 

document and for all other major 

sources of VOCs. The SJVUAPCD 

regulates an ozone nonattainment area 

that is classified as Extreme under both 

the one-hour ozone and eight-hour 

ozone standards (40 CFR 81.305 (2011)) 

and Rules 4401 and 4605 apply to 

sources covered by a CTG document. 

Therefore, Rules 4401 and 4605 must 

fulfill RACT requirements for VOCs. 

Guidance and policy documents that 

we use to evaluate enforceability and 

RACT requirements consistently 

include the following: 

1. ‘‘Issues Relating to VOC Regulation 

Cutpoints, Deficiencies, and 

Deviations,’’ EPA, May 25, 1988 (the 

Bluebook). 

2. ‘‘Guidance Document for Correcting 

Common VOC & Other Rule 

Deficiencies,’’ EPA Region 9, August 21, 

2001 (the Little Bluebook). 

3. EPA’s CTG titled, ‘‘Surface Coating 

Operations at Aerospace Manufacturing 

& Rework Operations’’ (EPA–453/R–97– 

004, December 1997). 

4. EPA’s CTG titled, ‘‘Control of VOC 

Emissions from Solvent Metal Cleaning’’ 

(EPA–450/2–77–022, November 1977) 

SJVAPCD’s 2009 RACT SIP 

Demonstration (April 16, 2009). 

B. Do the rules meet the evaluation 

criteria? 

We believe these rules are consistent 

with the relevant statutory criteria and 

guidance regarding enforceability, 

RACT and SIP relaxations. We also 

believe these rules have adequately 

addressed the deficiencies identified in 

our January 26, 2010 action by removing 

inappropriate director’s discretion in 

Rule 4401, and adding and lowering 

emission limits consistent with the 

relevant national guidance in Rule 4605. 

The TSD for each rule has more 

information on our evaluation. 

C. EPA Recommendations To Further 

Improve The Rules 

The TSDs describe additional rule 

revisions that we recommend for the 

next time the local agency modifies 

these rules but are not currently the 

basis for rule disapproval. 

D. Public Comment and Final Action 

Because EPA believes the submitted 

rules fulfill all relevant requirements 

and incorporate revisions that correct 

the deficiencies identified for both Rule 

4401 and 4605 in the limited 

disapproval on January 26, 2010 (75 FR 

3996), we are proposing to fully approve 

them under section 110(k)(3) of the Act. 

We will accept comments from the 

public on this proposal for the next 

30 days. Unless we receive convincing 

new information during the comment 

period, we intend to publish a final 

approval action that will incorporate 

these rules into the Federally 

enforceable SIP. Our final action will 

permanently terminate the sanctions 

clocks associated with our January 26, 

2010 action on the effective date of the 

final approval. 

III. Statutory and Executive Order 

Reviews 

Under the Clean Air Act, the 

Administrator is required to approve a 

SIP submission that complies with the 

provisions of the Act and applicable 

Federal regulations. 42 U.S.C. 7410(k); 

40 CFR 52.02(a). Thus, in reviewing SIP 

submissions, EPA’s role is to approve 

State choices, provided that they meet 

the criteria of the Clean Air Act. 

Accordingly, this proposed action 

merely proposes to approve State law as 

meeting Federal requirements and does 

not impose additional requirements 

beyond those imposed by State law. For 

that reason, this proposed action: 

• Is not a ‘‘significant regulatory 

action’’ subject to review by the Office 

of Management and Budget under 

Executive Order 12866 (58 FR 51735, 

October 4, 1993); 

• Does not impose an information 

collection burden under the provisions 

of the Paperwork Reduction Act (44 

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

• Is certified as not having a 

significant economic impact on a 

substantial number of small entities 

under the Regulatory Flexibility Act 

(5 U.S.C. 601 et seq.); 

• Does not contain any unfunded 

mandate or significantly or uniquely 

affect small governments, as described 

in the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act 

of 1995 (Pub. L. 104–4); 

• Does not have Federalism 

implications as specified in Executive 

Order 13132 (64 FR 43255, August 10, 

1999); 

• Is not an economically significant 

regulatory action based on health or 

safety risks subject to Executive Order 

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

• Is not a significant regulatory action 

subject to Executive Order 13211 (66 FR 

28355, May 22, 2001); 

• Is not subject to requirements of 

Section 12(d) of the National 

Technology Transfer and Advancement 

Act of 1995 (15 U.S.C. 272) because 

application of those requirements would 


emcdonald on DSK5VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
56136 Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 176 / Monday, September 12, 2011 / Proposed Rules 

be inconsistent with the Clean Air Act; 

and 

• Does not provide EPA with the 

discretionary authority to address 

disproportionate human health or 

environmental effects with practical, 

appropriate, and legally permissible 

methods under Executive Order 12898 

(59 FR 7629, February 16, 1994). 

In addition, this proposed action does 

not have Tribal implications as 

specified by Executive Order 13175 (65 

FR 67249, November 9, 2000), because 

the SIP is not approved to apply in 

Indian country located in the State, and 

EPA notes that it will not impose 

substantial direct costs on Tribal 

governments or preempt Tribal law. 

List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52 

Environmental protection, Air 

pollution control, Intergovernmental 

relations, Ozone, Reporting and 

recordkeeping requirements, Volatile 

organic compounds. 

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

Dated: August 31, 2011. 

Jared Blumenfeld, 

Regional Administrator, Region IX. 

[FR Doc. 2011–23142 Filed 9–9–11; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 6560–50–P 

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION 

AGENCY 

40 CFR Part 745 

[EPA–R04–OPPT–2010–0789; FRL–9457–7] 

Lead-Based Paint Renovation, Repair 

and Painting, and Pre-Renovation 

Education Activities in Target Housing 

and Child Occupied Facilities; North 

Carolina and Mississippi; Notice of 

Self-certification Program 

Authorization, Request for Public 

Comment, Opportunity for Public 

Hearing 

AGENCY: Environmental Protection 

Agency (EPA). 

ACTION: Program authorization, request 

for comments and opportunity for 

public hearing. 

SUMMARY: This notice announces that on 

January 21, 2010, the State of North 

Carolina and on March 31, 2010, the 

State of Mississippi were deemed 

authorized under section 404(a) of the 

Toxic Substances Control Act (TSCA), 

15 U.S.C. 2684(a), to administer and 

enforce requirements for a renovation, 

repair and painting program in 

accordance with section 402(c)(3) of 

TSCA, 15 U.S.C. 2682(c)(3), and a leadbased paint pre-renovation education 

program in accordance with 406(b) of 

TSCA, 15 U.S.C. 2686(b). This notice 

also announces that EPA is seeking 

comment during a 45-day public 

comment period, and is providing an 

opportunity to request a public hearing 

within the first 15 days of this comment 

period, on whether these North Carolina 

and Mississippi programs are at least as 

protective as the Federal programs and 

provide for adequate enforcement. This 

notice also announces that the 

authorization of the North Carolina and 

Mississippi 402(c)(3) and 406(b) 

programs, which were deemed 

authorized by regulation and statute on 

January 21, 2010, and March 31, 2010, 

respectively, will continue without 

further notice unless EPA, based on its 

own review and/or comments received 

during the comment period, 

disapproves one or both of these North 

Carolina and Mississippi program 

applications. 

DATES: Comments, identified by Docket 

Control Number EPA–R04–OPPT–2010– 

0789, must be received on or before 

October 27, 2011. In addition, a public 

hearing request must be submitted on or 

before September 27, 2011. 

ADDRESSES: Comments and requests for 

a public hearing may be submitted by 

mail, electronically, or in person. Please 

follow the detailed instructions for each 

method as provided in Section I of the 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION. To ensure 

proper receipt by EPA, it is important 

that you identify Docket Control 

Number EPA–R04–OPPT–2010–0789 in 

the subject line on the first page of your 

response. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Elizabeth Wilde, Technical Contact, 

Children’s Health and Lead Section, 

Pesticides and Toxics Substances 

Branch, Air, Pesticides and Toxics 

Management Division, United States 

Environmental Protection Agency, 61 

Forsyth Street, Atlanta, Georgia 30303– 

8960. The telephone number where Ms. 

Wilde can be reached is: (404) 562– 

8998. Ms. Wilde can be contacted via 

electronic mail at wilde.liz@epa.gov. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

Table of Contents 

I. General Information 

II. Background 

III. State Program Description Summaries 

IV. Federal Overfiling 

V. Withdrawal of Authorization 

I. General Information 

A. Does this action apply to me? 

This action is directed to the public 

in general, to entities offering Lead Safe 

Renovation courses, and to firms and 

individuals engaged in renovation and 

remodeling activities of pre-1978 

housing and child-occupied facilities in 

the States of Mississippi and North 

Carolina. Individuals and firms falling 

under the North American Industrial 

Classification System (NAICS) codes 

231118, 238210, 238220, 238320, 

531120, 531210, 53131, e.g., General 

Building Contractors/Operative 

Builders, Renovation Firms, Individual 

Contractors, and Special Trade 

Contractors like Carpenters, Painters, 

Drywall workers, and Plumbers, ‘‘Home 

Improvement’’ Contractors, as well as 

Property Management Firms and some 

Landlords are also affected by these 

rules. This listing is not intended to be 

exhaustive, but rather provides a guide 

for readers regarding entities likely to be 

affected by this action. Other types of 

entities not listed here could also be 

affected. The NAICS codes have been 

provided to assist you and others in 

determining whether this action might 

apply to certain entities. If you have any 

questions regarding the applicability of 

this action to a particular entity, consult 

the technical person listed under FOR

FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT. 

B. How can I get additional information, 

including copies of this document or 

other related documents? 

1. Electronically: you may obtain 

electronic copies of this document, and 

certain other related documents that 

might be available electronically, from 

the EPA Internet Home Page at http:// 

www.epa.gov/ or from http:// 

www.regulations.gov/. You can also go 

directly to the Federal Register listings 

at http://www.gpoaccess.gov/fr/. 

2. In person: you may read this 

document, and certain other related 

documents, by visiting the North 

Carolina Department of Health and 

Human Services, 1912 Mail Service 

Center, Raleigh, NC 27699–1912, 

contact person, Mr. Donald Chaney, 

telephone number: (919) 707–5974, or 

by visiting the Mississippi Department 

of Environmental Quality, 101 W. 

Capitol St., Jackson, MS 39201, contact 

person, Mr. Jimmie Asbill, telephone 

number (601) 961–5164. You may also 

read this document, and certain other 

related documents, by visiting the 

United States Environmental Protection 

Agency, Region 4 Office, 61 Forsyth 

Street, Atlanta, Georgia 30303–8960. 

You should arrange your visit to the 

EPA office by contacting the technical 

person listed under FOR FURTHER

INFORMATION CONTACT. Also, EPA has 

established an official record for this 

action under Docket Control Number 

EPA–R04–OPPT–2010–0789. The 

official record consists of the documents 

specifically referenced in this action, 

this notice, the State of North Carolina 


emcdonald on DSK5VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS