```

[Federal Register Volume 77, Number 168 (Wednesday, August 29, 2012)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 52277-52279]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2012-21338]

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

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

40 CFR Part 52

[EPA-R09-OAR-2012-0513; FRL-9721-3]

Approval of Air Quality Implementation Plans; California; South 
Coast Air Quality Management District; Prevention of Significant 
Deterioration; Greenhouse Gases

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Proposed rule.

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

SUMMARY: EPA is proposing approval of a permitting rule submitted for 
the South Coast Air Quality Management District (District) portion of 
the California State Implementation Plan (SIP). The State is required 
under Part C of title I of the Clean Air Act (CAA or Act) to adopt and 
implement a SIP-approved Prevention of Significant Deterioration (PSD) 
permit program. This SIP revision proposes to incorporate District Rule 
1714--Prevention of Significant Deterioration for Greenhouse Gases, 
into the SIP to establish a PSD permit program for pre-construction 
review of certain new and modified major stationary sources that emit 
or may emit greenhouse gases (GHGs). Because the State does not 
currently have a SIP-approved PSD program within the District, the 
District will continue to be subject to the Federal Implementation 
Program (FIP) for pollutants other than GHGs that are also subject to 
the PSD program. Currently, the District issues PSD permits according 
to the FIP through a delegation agreement with EPA. We are soliciting 
public comments on this proposal and plan to follow with a final action 
after consideration of comments received.

DATES: Any comments must be submitted no later than September 28, 2012.

ADDRESSES: Submit comments, identified by docket number EPA-R09-OAR-
2012-0513, by one of the following methods:
    1. Federal eRulemaking Portal: www.regulations.gov. Follow the on-
line instructions.
    2. Email: R9airpermits@epa.gov.
    3. Mail or deliver: Gerardo Rios (Air-3), 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 
the disclosure of which is restricted by statute. Information that you 
consider to be 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 EPA 
will not know your identity or contact information unless you provide 
it in the body of your comment. If you send

[[Page 52278]]

email directly to EPA, your email 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: The index to the docket for this action is available 
electronically at 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 in the index, some information may be publicly 
available only at the hard copy location (e.g., copyrighted material), 
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 below.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Lisa Beckham, Permits Office (AIR-3), 
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Region IX, (415) 972-3811, 
beckham.lisa@epa.gov.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Throughout this document, ``we,'' ``us'' and 
``our'' refer to EPA.

Table of Contents

I. The State's Submittal
    A. What rule did the State submit?
    B. Are there other versions of this rule?
    C. What is the purpose of the submitted rule?
II. EPA's Evaluation and Action
    A. How is EPA evaluating this rule?
    B. Does the rule meet the evaluation criteria?
    C. Public comment and proposed action.
III. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews

I. The State's Submittal

A. What rule did the State submit?

    Table 1 lists the rule on which we are proposing action along with 
the dates on which it was adopted by the District and submitted to EPA 
by the California Air Resources Board (CARB).

                                             Table 1--Submitted Rule
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
          Local agency                Rule No.              Rule title              Adopted         Submitted
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
SCAQMD..........................            1714   Prevention of Significant         11/5/2010       12/30/2010
                                                    Deterioration for
                                                    Greenhouse Gases.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    CAA section 110(k)(1)(B) requires EPA to determine whether a SIP 
submittal is complete within 60 days of receipt. The December 30, 2010 
SIP submittal package was considered complete on March 22, 2011 
according to the criteria in Appendix V to 40 CFR Part 51.

B. Are there other versions of this rule?

    There are no previous versions of Rule 1714 in the California SIP. 
The District originally adopted Rule 1714 on November 5, 2010 and it 
has not been revised since that date.

C. What is the purpose of the submitted rule?

    Section 110(a) of the CAA requires states to adopt and submit 
regulations for the implementation, maintenance and enforcement of the 
primary and secondary NAAQS. Specifically, section 110(a)(2)(J) 
requires the state's plan to meet the applicable requirements of 
section 165 relating to a pre-construction permit program for the 
prevention of significant deterioration of air quality and visibility 
protection. The purpose of District Rule 1714--Prevention of 
Significant Deterioration for Greenhouse Gases is to implement a pre-
construction PSD permit program, as required by section 165 of the CAA, 
for certain new and modified major stationary sources that emit or may 
emit GHGs. Currently, EPA is the PSD permitting authority within the 
District because the State does not have a SIP-approved PSD program. 
However, pursuant to 40 CFR 52.21(u), the District currently issues PSD 
permits through a delegation agreement between EPA and the District. 
The District determined that this delegation agreement does not extend 
to GHGs, so EPA currently administers the GHG portion of 40 CFR 52.21 
within the District. Approval of Rule 1714 into the SIP will transfer 
PSD permitting authority for GHGs from EPA to the District. Rule 1714 
would apply only to sources that trigger the PSD program for GHGs. For 
pollutants other than GHGs that trigger the PSD program, the District 
will continue to administer the PSD program under the criteria and 
procedures in the delegation agreement, 40 CFR 52.21, and Part 124 
(including the opportunity to petition for review by EPA's 
Environmental Appeals Board). Upon approval of the District's PSD SIP 
revision for GHGs, EPA would continue its role of overseeing the 
District's entire PSD permitting program, including both the delegated 
program for non-GHG pollutants and the SIP-approved portion for GHGs.

II. EPA's Evaluation and Action

A. How is EPA evaluating this rule?

    The relevant statutory and regulatory provisions for our review of 
the submitted rules include CAA sections 110(a), 110(l), and 165 and 40 
CFR 51.166. Section 110(a) requires, among other things, that SIP rules 
be enforceable, while section 110(l) precludes EPA approval of SIP 
revisions that would interfere with any applicable requirements 
concerning attainment and reasonable further progress. Section 165 of 
the CAA requires states to adopt a pre-construction permitting program 
for certain new and modified major stationary sources located in 
attainment or unclassifiable areas. 40 CFR 51.166 establishes the 
specific requirements for SIP-approved PSD permit programs that must be 
met to satisfy the requirements of section 165 of the CAA.

B. Does the rule meet the evaluation criteria?

    With some exclusions and revisions, Rule 1714 incorporates by 
reference EPA's PSD permit program, as it pertains to GHGs, at 40 CFR 
52.21. We generally consider EPA's PSD permit program at 40 CFR 52.21 
to be consistent with the criteria in 40 CFR 51.166. However, we 
conducted a review of Rule 1714, including additional clarifications 
regarding procedural requirements provided by the District in a letter 
to EPA dated August 15, 2012, to ensure that all requirements of 40 CFR 
51.166 are met as they pertain to GHGs. Our evaluation is available as 
an attachment to the technical support document (TSD) for this 
rulemaking. We also reviewed the revisions the District made to 40 CFR 
52.21 that were incorporated by reference into Rule 1714, such as 
revising certain terms and definitions to reflect that the District, 
rather than EPA, will be the PSD permitting authority. Based on our 
review of Rule 1714 and the clarifications in the District's letter of 
August 15, 2012, we are proposing to find the SIP revision acceptable 
under CAA sections 110(a), 110(l) and 165 and 40 CFR 51.166.
    EPA's TSD for this rulemaking has more information about this rule, 
including our evaluation and recommendation to approve it into the SIP.

[[Page 52279]]

C. Public comment and proposed action

    Because EPA believes the submitted rule fulfills all relevant 
requirements, we are proposing to fully approve it as a revision to the 
SIP pursuant to section 110(k)(3) of the Act. Specifically, we are 
proposing to approve District Rule 1714--Prevention of Significant 
Deterioration, as adopted by the District on November 5, 2010 and 
submitted by CARB on December 30, 2010.
    We will accept comments from the public on this proposal until 
September 28, 2012.

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 approves 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 
note) because application of those requirements would 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 rule 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, Greenhouse gases, 
Incorporation by reference, Intergovernmental relations, Reporting and 
recordkeeping requirements.

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

    Dated: August 16, 2012.
Alexis Strauss,
Acting Regional Administrator, Region IX.
[FR Doc. 2012-21338 Filed 8-28-12; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P
```