```

[Federal Register Volume 80, Number 112 (Thursday, June 11, 2015)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 33195-33198]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2015-14079]

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

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

40 CFR Part 52

[EPA-R09-OAR-2015-0246; FRL-9928-09-Region 9]

Revisions to the California State Implementation Plan, Butte 
County Air Quality Management District, Feather River Air Quality 
Management District, and San Luis Obispo County Air Pollution Control 
District

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Direct final rule.

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

SUMMARY: The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is proposing to 
approve revisions to the Butte County Air Quality Management District 
(BCAQMD), Feather River Air Quality Management District (FRAQMD), and 
San Luis Obispo County Air Pollution Control District (SLOCAPCD) 
portions of the California State Implementation Plan (SIP). These 
revisions concern emission statements, definitions, and vehicle and 
mobile equipment coating operations (VMECO). We are approving local 
rules that regulate these emission sources under the Clean Air Act (CAA 
or the Act).

DATES: This rule is effective on August 10, 2015 without further 
notice, unless the EPA receives adverse comments by July 13, 2015. If 
we receive such comments, we will publish a timely withdrawal in the 
Federal Register to notify the public that this direct final rule will 
not take effect.

ADDRESSES: Submit comments, identified by docket number EPA-R09-OAR-
2015-0246, by one of the following methods:
    1. Federal eRulemaking Portal: www.regulations.gov. Follow the on-
line instructions.
    2. Email: steckel.andrew@epa.gov.
    3. Mail or deliver: Andrew Steckel (Air-4), U.S. Environmental 
Protection Agency Region IX, 75 Hawthorne Street, San Francisco, CA 
94105-3901.
    Instructions: All comments will be included in the public docket 
without change and may be made available online at www.regulations.gov, 
including any personal information provided, unless the comment 
includes Confidential Business Information (CBI) or other information 
whose disclosure is restricted by statute. Information that you 
consider CBI or otherwise protected should be clearly identified as 
such and should not be submitted through www.regulations.gov or email. 
www.regulations.gov is an ``anonymous access'' system, and the 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 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. Electronic files should 
avoid the use of special characters, any form of encryption, and be 
free of any defects or viruses.
    Docket: Generally, documents in the docket for this action are 
available electronically at www.regulations.gov and in hard copy at EPA 
Region IX, 75 Hawthorne Street, San Francisco, California 94105-3901. 
While all documents in the docket are listed at www.regulations.gov, 
some information may be publicly available only at the hard copy 
location (e.g., copyrighted material, large maps), and some may not be 
publicly available in either location (e.g., CBI). To inspect the hard 
copy materials, please schedule an appointment during normal business 
hours with the contact listed in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT 
section.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Arnold Lazarus, EPA Region IX, (415) 
972-3024 lazarus.arnold@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 rules did the State submit?
    B. Are there other versions of these rules?
    C. What is the purpose of the submitted rules?
II. The EPA's Evaluation and Action
    A. How is the EPA evaluating the rules?
    B. Do the rules meet the evaluation criteria?
    C. The EPA Recommendations To Further Improve the Rules
    D. Public Comment and Final Action
III. Incorporation by Reference
IV. 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 action with the dates 
that they were adopted by the local air agencies and submitted by the 
California Air Resources Board (CARB).

                                            Table 1--Submitted Rules
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                                          Adopted/
              Local agency                  Rule No.              Rule title              Amended     Submitted
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
BCAQMD..................................          101  Definitions....................      4/24/14     11/06/14
BCAQMD..................................          434  Emissions Statements...........      4/25/13      2/10/14
FRAQMD..................................         3.19  Vehicle and Mobile Equipment         8/01/11      2/10/14
                                                        Coating Operations.
SLOCAPCD................................          222  Federal Emission Statement.....      5/28/14     11/06/14
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

[[Page 33196]]

    On May 5, 2014, the EPA determined that the submittal for BCAQMD 
Rule 434 and FRAQMD Rule 3.19 met the completeness criteria in 40 CFR 
part 51 Appendix V, which must be met before formal EPA review. On 
December 18, 2014, the EPA determined that BCAQMD Rule 101 and SLOCAPCD 
Rule 222 met the completeness criteria.

B. Are there other versions of these rules?

    There are no previous versions of BCAQMD Rule 434, FRAQMD Rule 
3.19, and SLOCAPCD Rule 222 in the SIP. We approved an earlier version 
of BCAQMD Rule 101 into the SIP on February 3, 1987 (52 FR 3226).

C. What is the purpose of the submitted rules?

    Volatile Organic Compounds (VOCs) help produce ground-level ozone 
and smog, which harm human health and the environment. Section 110(a) 
of the CAA requires States to submit regulations that control VOC 
emissions.
    BCAQMD Rule 101, ``Definitions'' is amended by adding new 
definitions and revising existing definitions which improve clarity and 
enforceability of other BCAQMD rules which reduce emissions.
    BCAQMD Rule 434 and SLOCAPCD Rule 222 require ``Emissions 
Statements.'' CAA section 182(a)(3)(B)(i) directs ozone nonattainment 
areas to require certified emission data from sources of VOCs and 
oxides of nitrogen (NOX).
    FRAQMD Rule 3.19, Vehicle and Mobile Equipment Coating Operations, 
establishes limits on the emission of VOC from VMECO.
    The EPA's technical support documents (TSDs) have more information 
about these rules.

II. EPA's Evaluation and Action

A. How is the EPA evaluating the rules?

    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).
    Guidance and policy documents that we use to evaluate 
enforceability, revision/relaxation and rule stringency requirements 
for the applicable criteria pollutants include the following:

    1. ``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 and 57 FR 18070, April 28, 1992).
    2. ``Issues Relating to VOC Regulation Cutpoints, Deficiencies, 
and Deviations'' (``the Bluebook,'' U.S. EPA, May 25, 1988; revised 
January 11, 1990).
    3. ``Guidance Document for Correcting Common VOC & Other Rule 
Deficiencies'' (``the Little Bluebook'', EPA Region 9, August 21, 
2001).
    4. EPA's draft ``Guidance on the Implementation of an Emission 
Statement Program,'' July 1992.
    5. FRAQMD ``Reasonably Available Control Technology Analysis and 
Negative Declaration'', July 3, 2014.
    6. National Volatile Organic Compound Emission Standards, 40 CFR 
59.102, Subpart B, Table 1, VOC Content Limits for Automobile 
Refinish Coatings.
    7. California Air Resources Board (CARB) Resolution 05-46, 
October 20, 2005, Attachment A, ``Suggested Control Measure for 
Automotive Coatings,'' Section 4.1 ``Coating Limits.''
    8. South Coast Air Quality Management District Rule 1151, Motor 
Vehicle and Motor Equipment Non-Assembly Line Coating Operations, 
amended December 2, 2005, and approved into the SIP on September 24, 
2013 (78 FR 58459.)
    9. San Joaquin Valley Unified Air Pollution Control District 
Rule 4612, Motor Vehicle and Mobile Equipment Coating Operations, 
amended October 21, 2010, and approved into the SIP on February 13, 
2012 (77 FR 7536.)
    10. Ventura County Air Quality Management District, Rule 74.18, 
Motor Vehicle and Mobile Equipment Coating Operations amended 
November 11, 2008, and approved into the SIP on September 24, 2013 
(78 FR 58459.)

    Generally, SIP rules must require Reasonably Available Control 
Technology (RACT) for each category of sources covered by a Control 
Techniques Guidelines (CTG) document as well as each VOC major source 
in ozone nonattainment areas classified as moderate or above (see 
sections 182(b)(2) and 182(f)).
    The FRAQMD covers both Yuba and Sutter Counties, and the EPA has 
designated a portion of the FRAQMD (specifically, southern Sutter 
County) as a Severe nonattainment area for the 1-hour ozone standard 
and the 1997 and 2008 8-hour ozone national ambient air quality 
standards (NAAQS or standards). See 40 CFR 81.305. Therefore, FRAQMD 
must implement RACT for at least portions of the District. The EPA 
believes that FRAQMD Rule 3.19 does not implement RACT-level 
requirements. However, on September 29, 2014, CARB submitted to the EPA 
on behalf of FRAQMD, ``Reasonably Available Control Technology Analysis 
and Negative Declaration,'' dated July 3, 2014, which demonstrates that 
Rule 3.19 does not have to implement RACT because no CTGs apply to the 
source category and there are no major sources in the non-attainment 
area that the rule addresses. RACT is not required of the other rules 
addressed in this action because they are not intended to directly 
control emissions.
    As noted above, CAA section 182(a)(3)(B)(i) requires all states 
with ozone nonattainment areas classified under subpart 2 (of part D of 
title I), i.e., as Marginal, Moderate, Serious, etc., to submit SIP 
revisions that require owners and operators of stationary sources of 
VOCs and NOX to provide the state with a statement showing 
the actual emissions from that source. The EPA has designated all or 
portions of BCAQMD and SLOCAPCD as Marginal nonattainment areas for the 
1997 or the 2008 8-hour ozone standards. See 40 CFR 81.305. Thus, 
BCAQMD Rule 434 and SLOCAPCD Rule 222 are required SIP revisions. Based 
on our evaluation of these two emissions statement rules, we find that 
they meet the requirements of CAA section 182(a)(3)(B)(i).

B. Do the rules meet the evaluation criteria?

    We believe these rules are consistent with the relevant policy and 
guidance regarding enforceability, rule stringency, and SIP 
relaxations. The TSDs have 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 the rules but are not currently 
the basis for rule disapproval.

D. Public Comment and Final Action

    As authorized in section 110(k)(3) of the Act, the EPA is fully 
approving the submitted rules because we believe they fulfill all 
relevant requirements.\1\ We do not think anyone will object to this 
approval, so we are finalizing it without proposing it in advance. 
However, in

[[Page 33197]]

the Proposed Rules section of this Federal Register, we are 
simultaneously proposing approval of the same submitted rules. If we 
receive adverse comments by July 13, 2015, we will publish a timely 
withdrawal in the Federal Register to notify the public that the direct 
final approval will not take effect and we will address the comments in 
a subsequent final action based on the proposal. If we do not receive 
timely adverse comments, the direct final approval will be effective 
without further notice on August 10, 2015. This will incorporate these 
rules into the federally enforceable SIP.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ BCAQMD Rule 434, FRAQMD Rule 3.19, and SLOCAPCD Rule 222 are 
all new to the SIP and thus would not supersede any existing SIP 
rules. Upon the effective date of this final action, BCAQMD Rule 101 
would supersede existing SIP BCAQMD Rules 101 (``Title'') and 102 
(``Definitions''), approved at 52 FR 3226 (February 3, 1987), in the 
applicable California SIP, except for the following definitions from 
existing SIP BCAQMD Rule 102: ``approved ignition devices,'' ``open 
out-door fire,'' ``permissive burn day,'' ``range improvement 
burning,'' ``submerged fill pipe,'' and ``vapor recovery system.'' 
While these terms are no longer included in BCAQMD's definitions 
rule (i.e., Rule 101), they are relied upon by certain existing SIP 
prohibitory rules, such as existing SIP BCAQMD Rules 213, 215, 302, 
313, 317, and 323.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Please note that if the EPA receives adverse comment on an 
amendment, paragraph, or section of this rule and if that provision may 
be severed from the remainder of the rule, the EPA may adopt as final 
those provisions of the rule that are not the subject of an adverse 
comment.

III. Incorporation by Reference

    In this rule, the EPA is finalizing regulatory text that includes 
incorporation by reference. In accordance with requirements of 1 CFR 
51.5, the EPA is finalizing the incorporation by reference of the 
BCAQMD, FRAQMD and SLOCAPCD rules described in the amendments to 40 CFR 
part 52 set forth below. The EPA has made, and will continue to make, 
these documents generally available electronically through 
www.regulations.gov and in hard copy at the appropriate EPA office (see 
the ADDRESSES section of this preamble for more information).

IV. 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, the EPA's role is to approve state 
choices, provided that they meet the criteria of the Clean Air Act. 
Accordingly, this action merely approves state law as meeting Federal 
requirements and does not impose additional requirements beyond those 
imposed by state law. For that reason, this action:
     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 13563 (76 FR 3821, January 21, 2011);
     does not impose an information collection burden under the 
provisions of the Paperwork Reduction Act (44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.);
     is certified as not having a significant economic impact 
on a substantial number of small entities under the Regulatory 
Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 601 et seq.);
     does not contain any unfunded mandate or significantly or 
uniquely affect small governments, as described in the Unfunded 
Mandates Reform Act of 1995 (Pub. L. 104-4);
     does not have Federalism implications as specified in 
Executive Order 13132 (64 FR 43255, August 10, 1999);
     is not an economically significant regulatory action based 
on health or safety risks subject to Executive Order 13045 (62 FR 
19885, April 23, 1997);
     is not a significant regulatory action subject to 
Executive Order 13211 (66 FR 28355, May 22, 2001);
     is not subject to requirements of Section 12(d) of the 
National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act of 1995 (15 U.S.C. 272 
note) because application of those requirements would be inconsistent 
with the Clean Air Act; and
     does not provide the EPA with the discretionary authority 
to address, as appropriate, disproportionate human health or 
environmental effects, using practicable and legally permissible 
methods, under Executive Order 12898 (59 FR 7629, February 16, 1994).
    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).
    The Congressional Review Act, 5 U.S.C. 801 et seq., as added by the 
Small Business Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act of 1996, generally 
provides that before a rule may take effect, the agency promulgating 
the rule must submit a rule report, which includes a copy of the rule, 
to each House of the Congress and to the Comptroller General of the 
United States. The EPA will submit a report containing this action and 
other required information to the U.S. Senate, the U.S. House of 
Representatives, and the Comptroller General of the United States prior 
to publication of the rule in the Federal Register. A major rule cannot 
take effect until 60 days after it is published in the Federal 
Register. This action is not a ``major rule'' as defined by 5 U.S.C. 
804(2).
    Under section 307(b)(1) of the Clean Air Act, petitions for 
judicial review of this action must be filed in the United States Court 
of Appeals for the appropriate circuit by August 10, 2015. Filing a 
petition for reconsideration by the Administrator of this final rule 
does not affect the finality of this action for the purposes of 
judicial review nor does it extend the time within which a petition for 
judicial review may be filed, and shall not postpone the effectiveness 
of such rule or action Parties with objections to this direct final 
rule are encouraged to file a comment in response to the parallel 
notice of proposed rulemaking for this action published in the Proposed 
Rules section of this Federal Register, rather than file an immediate 
petition for judicial review of this direct final rule, so that the EPA 
can withdraw this direct final rule and address the comment in the 
proposed rulemaking. This action may not be challenged later in 
proceedings to enforce its requirements (see section 307(b)(2)).

List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52

    Environmental protection, Air pollution control, Incorporation by 
reference, Intergovernmental relations, Nitrogen dioxide, Ozone, 
Particulate matter, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements, Volatile 
organic compounds.

    Dated: May 8, 2015.
Alexis Strauss,
Acting Regional Administrator, Region IX.

    Part 52, chapter I, title 40 of the Code of Federal Regulations is 
amended as follows:

PART 52--APPROVAL AND PROMULGATION OF IMPLEMENTATION PLANS

0
1. The authority citation for part 52 continues to read as follows:

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

Subpart F--California

0
2. Section 52.220, is amended by adding paragraphs (c)(442) (i)(E)(4) 
and (G) and (c)(457)(i)(C) and (D) to read as follows:

Sec.  52.220  Identification of plan.

* * * * *
    (c) * * *
    (442) * * *
    (i) * * *
    (E) * * *
    (4) Rule 3.19, ``Vehicle and Mobile Equipment Coating Operations,'' 
amended on August 1, 2011.
* * * * *

[[Page 33198]]

    (G) Butte County Air Quality Management District.
    (1) Rule 434, ``Emission Statements,'' adopted on April 25, 2013.
* * * * *
    (457) * * *
    (i) * * *
    (C) * * *
    (1) Rule 101, ``Definitions,'' amended on April 24, 2014.
    (D) San Luis Obispo County Air Pollution Control District.
    (1) Rule 222, ``Federal Emission Statement,'' adopted on May 28, 
2014.
* * * * *
[FR Doc. 2015-14079 Filed 6-10-15; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 6560-50-P
```