```

[Federal Register Volume 78, Number 70 (Thursday, April 11, 2013)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 21540-21542]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2013-08246]

[[Page 21540]]

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

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

40 CFR Part 52

[EPA-R09-OAR-2012-0914; FRL-9776-8]

Revisions to the California State Implementation Plan, Butte 
County Air Quality Management District and Sacramento Metropolitan Air 
Quality Management District

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Direct Final Rule.

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

SUMMARY: EPA is taking direct final action to approve revisions to the 
Butte County Air Quality Management District (BCAQMD) and Sacramento 
Metropolitan Air Quality Management District (SMAQMD) portions of the 
California State Implementation Plan (SIP). These revisions concern 
volatile organic compound (VOC), oxides of nitrogen (NOX), 
and particulate matter (PM) emissions from residential wood burning 
devices. We are approving local rules that regulate these emission 
sources under the Clean Air Act (CAA or the Act).

DATES: These rules are effective on June 10, 2013 without further 
notice, unless EPA receives adverse comments by May 13, 2013. 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 EPA-R09-OAR-2012-0914, by one 
of the following methods:
    1. Federal eRulemaking Portal: 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 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 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 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. 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. 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: Rynda Kay, EPA Region IX, (415) 947-
4118, Kay.Rynda@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?
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 we are approving with the dates that they 
were adopted by the local air agency and submitted by the California 
Air Resources Board.

                                            Table 1--Submitted Rules
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                                          Adopted/
               Local agency                   Rule No.             Rule title             amended     Submitted
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
BCAQMD....................................          207  Wood Burning Devices.........     12/11/08     04/25/12
SMAQMD....................................          417  Wood Burning Appliances......     10/26/06     09/21/12
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    On June 7, 2012 and October 11, 2012, EPA determined that the 
submittals for BCAQMD Rule 207 and SMAQMD Rule 417 respectively, 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?

    There are no previous versions of Rules 207 and 417 in the SIP.

C. What is the purpose of the submitted rules?

    VOCs help produce ground-level ozone and smog, which harm human 
health and the environment. NOX helps produce ground-level 
ozone, smog and particulate matter, which harm human health and the 
environment. PM contributes to effects that are harmful to human health 
and the environment, including premature mortality, aggravation of 
respiratory and cardiovascular disease, decreased lung function, 
visibility impairment, and damage to vegetation and ecosystems. Section 
110(a) of the CAA requires States to submit regulations that control 
VOC, NOX, and PM emissions. Rules 207 and 417 are designed 
to minimize the impacts of smoke and other air pollutants generated 
during the use of wood burning devices.
    BCAQMD Rule 207 includes requirements that (a) Retailers of wood 
burning devices provide public awareness materials with each wood 
burning device sold, (b) newly installed wood burning devices be 
District-approved and inspected upon installation, (c) all newly 
installed outdoor wood-fired boilers meet certain EPA or equivalent 
emission standards, (d) no person shall advertise, sell, supply, or 
transfer ownership of a used wood burning device, unless it has been 
deemed permanently inoperable or is a District-approved device, and (e) 
fuel

[[Page 21541]]

used in wood burning devices include only firewood or other wood/plant-
based products. The rule also outlines the criteria for District-
approval of wood burning devices and exempts devices deemed of 
historical significance or those transferred via property sale. EPA's 
technical support document (TSD) has more information about this rule, 
including identification of several additional control options that are 
generally reasonably available.
    SMAQMD Rule 417 includes requirements that (a) No person sell, 
offer for sale, supply, install or transfer a wood burning appliance 
unless it is a U.S. EPA Phase II wood burning heater, a pellet fueled 
or masonry heater, or an appliance or fireplace that meets the emission 
standard set forth in 40 CFR Part 60 Subpart AAA and is approved by the 
Air Pollution Control Officer (APCO), (b) retailers of wood burning 
devices provide public awareness materials with each wood burning 
device sold, (c) no person advertise, sell, supply, or transfer 
ownership of a used wood burning device, unless it has been deemed 
permanently inoperable or is an approved device, (d) the burning of 
materials not intended for use in a fireplace/heater is prohibited, and 
(e) wood sold within the District as ``seasoned'' or ``dry'' must have 
a moisture content of 20 percent or less by weight. The TSD has more 
information about this rule, including the basis and conclusion that 
the rule requires all control measures that are reasonably available.

II. EPA's Evaluation and Action

A. How is EPA evaluating these rules?

    Generally, SIP rules must be enforceable (see section 110(a) of the 
Act) and must not relax existing requirements (see sections 110(l) and 
193).
    Guidance and policy documents that we use to evaluate 
enforceability requirements consistently include the following:
    1. ``Issues Relating to VOC Regulation Cutpoints, Deficiencies, and 
Deviations; Clarification to Appendix D of November 24, 1987 Federal 
Register Notice,'' (Blue Book), notice of availability published in the 
May 25, 1988 Federal Register.
    2. ``Guidance Document for Correcting Common VOC & Other Rule 
Deficiencies,'' EPA Region 9, August 21, 2001 (the Little Bluebook).
    Effective December 14, 2009, EPA designated portions of Chico 
(Butte County), California and Sacramento, California as nonattainment 
for the 2006 24-Hour PM2.5 National Ambient Air Quality 
Standard (NAAQS). 40 CFR 81.305 (2010); 74 FR 58688, 58705-58706 
(November 13, 2009). For nonattainment areas, a State Implementation 
Plan (SIP) submittal addressing implementation of all Reasonably 
Available Control Measures (RACM) as expeditiously as practicable, 
including Reasonably Available Control Technology (RACT) for existing 
sources was due by December 14, 2012. CAA Sec.  172(b) & (c)(1), 74 FR 
58689, September 21, 2012. On October 26, 2012 and October 30, 2012 EPA 
published proposed determinations that the Sacramento and Chico 
nonattainment areas had attained the 2006 24-hour PM2.5 
NAAQS based upon complete, quality-assured, and certified ambient air 
monitoring data showing that these areas had monitored attainment of 
the 2006 24-hour PM2.5 NAAQS based on the 2009-2011 
monitoring period. See 77 FR 65346 and 77 FR 65651. If EPA finalizes 
the determinations of attainment, the requirements for these areas to 
submit an attainment demonstration, together with RACM, a reasonable 
further progress (RFP) plan, and contingency measures for failure to 
meet RFP and attainment deadlines would be suspended for so long as the 
areas continues to attain the 2006 24-hour PM2.5 NAAQS. For 
purposes of implementing the 2006 PM2.5 NAAQS, EPA 
recommends that states evaluate potential RACM/RACT control measures 
for sources of direct PM2.5 (including condensable PM), 
SO2, and NOx in specific nonattainment areas, consistent 
with the approach to evaluating RACM/RACT provided in EPA's 
implementing regulations for the 1997 PM2.5 NAAQS at 40 CFR 
part 51, subpart Z. See Memorandum from Stephen D. Page, Director, EPA 
Office of Air Quality Planning and Standards to Regional Air Directors, 
Regions I-X, ``Implementation Guidance for the 2006 24-Hour Fine 
Particle (PM2.5) National Ambient Air Quality Standards 
(NAAQS).'' If EPA does not finalize the determinations of attainment 
for the Chico and Sacramento nonattainment areas, the BCAQMD and SMAQMD 
will need to adopt as RACM/RACT any potential PM2.5, 
SO2, or NOx control measures that are reasonably available 
considering technological and economic feasibility and that would, 
considered collectively, advance the attainment date by one year or 
more in the Chico or Sacramento nonattainment area. Id. Because Rules 
207 and 417 regulate direct PM2.5 emissions from residential 
wood-burning devices, the BCAQMD and SMAQMD should consider whether 
reasonably available control measures for these emission sources could, 
in combination with other reasonably available control measures, 
advance attainment of the 2006 PM2.5 NAAQS in the area by at 
least one year. If necessary, in separate rulemakings, EPA will act on 
the State's RACM demonstration for the 2006 PM2.5 standard 
based on an evaluation of the control measures submitted as a whole and 
their overall potential to advance the applicable attainment date in 
Chico, California and Sacramento, California. For additional control 
options for BCAQMD that are generally reasonably available see the Rule 
207's TSD's ``Additional Recommendations for the Next Rule Revision''.

B. Do the rules meet the evaluation criteria?

    We believe these rules are consistent with the relevant policy and 
guidance regarding enforceability, and SIP revisions. The TSDs have 
more information on our evaluation.

C. EPA Recommendations To Further Improve The Rule

    The TSDs describe additional rule revisions that we recommend for 
the next time the local agencies modify these rules.

D. Public Comment and Final Action

    As authorized in section 110(k)(3) of the Act, EPA is fully 
approving the submitted rules because we believe they fulfill all 
relevant requirements. We do not think anyone will object to this 
approval, so we are finalizing it without proposing it in advance. 
However, in the Proposed Rules section of this Federal Register, we are 
simultaneously proposing approval of the same submitted rule. If we 
receive adverse comments by May 13, 2013, 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 June 10, 2013. This will incorporate the rule 
into the federally enforceable SIP.
    Please note that if EPA receives adverse comment on an amendment, 
paragraph, or section of the rules and if that provision may be severed 
from the remainder of the rule, EPA may adopt as final those provisions 
of the rules that are not the subject of an adverse comment.

[[Page 21542]]

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 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 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 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.
    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. 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 June 10, 2013. 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 today's Federal Register, rather than file an 
immediate petition for judicial review of this direct final rule, so 
that 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: January 14, 2013.
Jared Blumenfeld,
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)(419)(i)(C) and 
(c)(423)(i)(B) to read as follows:

Sec.  52.220  Identification of plan.

* * * * *
    (c) * * *
    (419) * * *
    (i) * * *
    (C) Butte County Air Quality Management District.
    (1) Rule 207, ``Wood Burning Devices,'' amended on December 11, 
2008.
* * * * *
    (423) * * *
    (i) * * *
    (B) Sacramento Metropolitan Air Quality Management District.
    (1) Rule 417, ``Wood Burning Appliances,'' adopted on October 26, 
2006.

[FR Doc. 2013-08246 Filed 4-10-13; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P
```