This section of the FEDERAL REGISTER

contains notices to the public of the proposed

issuance of rules and regulations. The

purpose of these notices is to give interested

persons an opportunity to participate in the

rule making prior to the adoption of the final

rules.

Proposed Rules Federal Register

764 

Vol. 83, No. 5 

Monday, January 8, 2018 

1Under the EPA’s ‘‘parallel processing’’ 

procedure, the EPA proposes rulemaking action 

concurrently with the state’s proposed rulemaking. 

If the state’s proposed rule is changed, the EPA will 

evaluate that subsequent change and may publish 

another notice of proposed rulemaking. If no 

significant change is made, the EPA will publish a 

final rulemaking on the rule after responding to any 

submitted comments. Final rulemaking action by 

the EPA will occur only after the rule has been fully 

adopted by California and submitted formally to the 

EPA for incorporation into the SIP. See 40 CFR part 

51, appendix V. 

2The Yolo-Solano AQMD’s Governing Board is 

scheduled to consider adopting the four negative 

declarations on January 10, 2018. See public 

hearing notice available at http://www.ysaqmd.org/ 

news/public-hearing-notice-negative-declarationsfour-control-techniques-guidelines/. 

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION 

AGENCY 

40 CFR Part 52 

[EPA–R09–OAR–2008–0612; FRL–9972– 

81—Region 9] 

Approval of California Air Plan 

Revisions, Yolo-Solano Air Quality 

Management District 

AGENCY: Environmental Protection 

Agency (EPA). 

ACTION: Proposed rule. 

SUMMARY: The Environmental Protection 

Agency (EPA) is proposing to approve a 

revision to the Yolo-Solano Air Quality 

Management District (YSAQMD) 

portion of the California State 

Implementation Plan (SIP). This 

revision concerns the District’s 

demonstration regarding Reasonably 

Available Control Technology (RACT) 

requirements for the 1997 8-hour ozone 

National Ambient Air Quality Standard 

(NAAQS). The EPA previously 

proposed to disapprove YSAQMD’s 

2006 RACT SIP submittal for the 1997 

8-hour ozone NAAQS because we found 

that existing District rules implemented 

RACT for many but not all applicable 

sources. The YSAQMD has since 

addressed these deficiencies by 

adopting approvable rules that 

implement RACT and by adopting 

negative declarations where the District 

concluded it had no sources subject to 

RACT requirements. Therefore, we 

withdraw our previous proposed 

disapproval of YSAQMD’s 2006 RACT 

SIP and now propose to approve it into 

the California SIP. The EPA is also 

proposing to approve YSAQMD’s 

negative declarations into the SIP for the 

1997 8-hour ozone NAAQS. 

We are proposing to approve local SIP 

revisions under the Clean Air Act (CAA 

or Act). We are taking comments on this 

proposal and plan to follow with a final 

action. 

DATES: Any comments must arrive by 

February 7, 2018. 

ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, 

identified by Docket ID No. EPA–R09– 

OAR–2008–0612 at https://

www.regulations.gov, or via email to 

Stanley Tong, at tong.stanley@epa.gov. 

For comments submitted at 

Regulations.gov, follow the online 

instructions for submitting comments. 

Once submitted, comments cannot be 

removed or edited from Regulations.gov. 

For either manner of submission, 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 

http://www2.epa.gov/dockets/ 

commenting-epa-dockets. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Stanley Tong, EPA Region IX, (415) 

947–4122, tong.stanley@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 documents did the State submit? 

B. Are there other versions of these 

documents? 

C. What is the purpose of the submitted 

documents? 

II. The EPA’s Evaluation and Proposed 

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. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews 

I. The State’s Submittal 

A. What documents did the State 

submit? 

On September 13, 2006, the YSAQMD 

adopted its ‘‘Reasonably Available 

Control Technology (RACT) State 

Implementation Plan (SIP)’’ (‘‘2006 

RACT SIP’’) analysis to demonstrate its 

stationary sources are subject to RACT 

rules for the 1997 8-hour ozone 

standard. On January 31, 2007, the 

California Air Resources Board (CARB) 

submitted it to the EPA for approval as 

a revision to the California SIP. On July 

31, 2007, the submittal was deemed 

complete by operation of law. On 

August 18, 2008, the EPA proposed 

action on YSAQMD’s 2006 RACT SIP 

and stated that four deficiencies 

prevented full approval of the submittal. 

On December 22, 2017, CARB 

transmitted the District’s public draft 

version of negative declarations for four 

Control Techniques Guidelines (CTG) 

documents along with a request for 

parallel processing.1 The District plans 

to adopt negative declarations for CTGs 

covering the Manufacture of 

Synthesized Pharmaceutical Products, 

Wood Furniture Manufacturing 

Operations, Air Oxidation Processes in 

Synthetic Organic Chemical 

Manufacturing Industry (SOCMI), and 

Reactor Processes and Distillation 

Operations in SOCMI.2 The negative 

declarations are being adopted because 

the District states it does not have 

stationary sources subject to these CTGs. 

As noted in footnote 1 of this document, 

under our parallel processing 

procedure, the EPA proposes action on 

a public draft version of a SIP revision 

but will take final action only after the 

final version is adopted and submitted 

to the EPA for approval. In this instance, 


jstallworth on DSKBBY8HB2PROD with PROPOSALS
Federal Register / Vol. 83, No. 5 / Monday, January 8, 2018 / Proposed Rules 765 

3 40 CFR 81.305; 75 FR 24409 (May 5, 2010). The 

YSAQMD regulates the Solano County and Yolo 

County portions of the Sacramento Metro ozone 

nonattainment area. 

4 YSAQMD 2006 RACT SIP pages 6 and 9. 

5The docket for this proposed action (https://

www.regulations.gov/docket?D=EPA-R09-OAR2008-0612) contains two TSDs. One supported our 

August 18, 2008 proposed action (73 FR 48166) on 

the 2006 YSAQMD RACT SIP (2008 RACT SIP 

TSD). Although we are withdrawing our August 18, 

2008 proposed disapproval, the 2008 RACT SIP 

TSD contains pertinent information and analysis 

that support our current action. The second TSD 

supports today’s action, and is dated December 

2017 (2017 RACT SIP TSD). 

6 57 FR 13498, 13512 (April 16, 1992). 

we are proposing action based on the 

public draft version of the negative 

declarations transmitted by CARB on 

December 22, 2017, and will not take 

final action until the final version of the 

negative declarations is adopted and 

submitted to the EPA. CARB’s December 

22, 2017 letter states that the YSAQMD 

Governing Board is scheduled to 

consider adoption of the negative 

declarations on January 10, 2018, and if 

it is approved, CARB will submit the 

final package to the EPA as a revision 

to the SIP. 

B. Are there other versions of these 

documents? 

There are no previous versions of the 

documents described above in the 

YSAQMD portion of the California SIP 

for the 1997 8-hour ozone NAAQS. 

C. What is the purpose of the submitted 

documents? 

Volatile Organic Compounds (VOCs) 

and Nitrogen Oxides (NOX) together 

produce ground-level ozone, smog and 

particulate matter, which harm human 

health and the environment. Section 

110(a) of the CAA requires states to 

submit regulations that control VOC and 

NOX emissions. Sections 182(b)(2) and 

(f) require that SIPs for ozone 

nonattainment areas classified as 

Moderate or above implement RACT for 

any source covered by a CTG document 

and for any major source of VOCs or 

NOX. The YSAQMD is subject to this 

requirement because it regulates part of 

the Sacramento Metro ozone 

nonattainment area that was previously 

designated and classified as a Serious 

nonattainment area for the 1997 8-hour 

ozone NAAQS and is currently 

classified as a Severe-15 ozone 

nonattainment area for the 1997 8-hour 

ozone NAAQS.3 Therefore, the 

YSAQMD must, at a minimum, adopt 

RACT-level controls for all sources 

covered by a CTG document and for all 

major non-CTG sources of VOCs or NOX

within the nonattainment area that it 

regulates. Any stationary source that 

emits or has the potential to emit at least 

50 tons per year (tpy) of VOCs or NOX

is a major stationary source in a Serious 

ozone nonattainment area (CAA section 

182(c), (f), and 302(j)), and any 

stationary source that emits or has the 

potential to emit at least 25 tpy of VOCs 

or NOX is a major stationary source in 

a Severe ozone nonattainment area 

(CAA sections 182(d) and (f)). 

YSAQMD’s 2006 RACT SIP reviewed 

for RACT major stationary sources that 

emit or had the potential to emit at least 

25 tpy of VOC or NOX.4

Section IV.G of the preamble to the 

EPA’s final rule to implement the 1997 

8-hour ozone NAAQS (70 FR 71612, 

November 29, 2005) discusses RACT 

requirements. It states in part that where 

a RACT SIP is required, states 

implementing the 8-hour standard 

generally must assure that RACT is met, 

either through a certification that 

previously required RACT controls still 

represent RACT for 8-hour 

implementation purposes or through a 

new RACT determination. The 

submitted documents provide 

YSAQMD’s analyses of its compliance 

with the CAA section 182 RACT 

requirements for the 1997 8-hour ozone 

NAAQS. The EPA’s technical support 

documents (TSDs) 5 have more 

information about the District’s 

submissions and the EPA’s evaluations 

thereof. 

II. The EPA’s Evaluation and Proposed 

Action 

A. How is the EPA evaluating the 

submitted documents? 

SIP rules must require RACT for each 

category of sources covered by a CTG 

document as well as each major source 

of VOCs or NOX in ozone nonattainment 

areas classified as Moderate or above 

(see CAA section 182(b)(2)). The 

YSAQMD regulates a Severe ozone 

nonattainment area (see 40 CFR 81.305) 

so the District’s rules must implement 

RACT. 

States should also submit for SIP 

approval negative declarations for those 

source categories for which they are not 

adopting CTG-based regulations 

(because they have no sources above the 

CTG recommended applicability 

threshold) regardless of whether such 

negative declarations were made for an 

earlier SIP.6 To do so, the submittal 

should provide reasonable assurance 

that no sources subject to the CTG 

requirements currently exist or are 

planned for the YSAQMD. 

The District’s analysis must 

demonstrate that each major source of 

NOX or VOCs in the nonattainment area 

is covered by a RACT-level rule. In 

addition, for each CTG source category, 

the District must either demonstrate that 

a RACT-level rule is in place, or submit 

a negative declaration. Guidance and 

policy documents that we use to 

evaluate CAA section 182 RACT 

requirements include the following: 

1. ‘‘Final Rule to Implement the 8-hour 

Ozone National Ambient Air Quality 

Standard—Phase 2’’: (70 FR 71612; 

November 29, 2005). 

2. ‘‘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); 57 FR 18070 

(April 28, 1992). 

3. ‘‘Issues Relating to VOC Regulation 

Cutpoints, Deficiencies, and Deviations,’’ 

EPA, May 25, 1988 (the Bluebook, revised 

January 11, 1990). 

4. ‘‘Guidance Document for Correcting 

Common VOC & Other Rule Deficiencies,’’ 

EPA Region 9, August 21, 2001 (the Little 

Bluebook). 

5. ‘‘State Implementation Plans; Nitrogen 

Oxides Supplement to the General Preamble; 

Clean Air Act Amendments of 1990 

Implementation of Title I; Proposed Rule,’’ 

(the NOX Supplement), 57 FR 55620, 

November 25, 1992. 

6. Memorandum from William T. Harnett 

to Regional Air Division Directors, (May 18, 

2006), ‘‘RACT Qs & As—Reasonably 

Available Control Technology (RACT) 

Questions and Answers.’’ 

7. RACT SIPs, Letter dated March 9, 2006 

from EPA Region IX (Andrew Steckel) to 

CARB (Kurt Karperos) describing Region IX’s 

understanding of what constitutes a 

minimally acceptable RACT SIP. 

8. RACT SIPs, Letter dated April 4, 2006 

from EPA Region IX (Andrew Steckel) to 

CARB (Kurt Karperos) listing EPA’s current 

CTGs, Alternative Control Techniques 

(ACTs), and other documents which may 

help to establish RACT. 

With respect to major stationary 

sources, the Sacramento Metro ozone 

nonattainment area was classified as 

‘‘Serious’’ nonattainment for the 1997 

8-hour ozone NAAQS at the time that 

California submitted the YSAQMD 2006 

RACT SIP to the EPA. The Sacramento 

Metro ozone nonattainment area was 

subsequently reclassified to ‘‘Severe’’ 

ozone nonattainment. YSAQMD’s 2006 

RACT SIP lists major stationary sources 

within its jurisdiction that emit or have 

the potential to emit at least 25 tpy of 

VOC or NOX—the threshold associated 

with major stationary sources in Severe 

ozone nonattainment areas. 

B. Do the submitted documents meet the 

evaluation criteria? 

Our August 18, 2008 proposed 

disapproval rulemaking and associated 

2008 RACT SIP TSD provide an 

extensive evaluation of YSAQMD’s 2006 

RACT SIP and negative declarations. 

See 73 FR 48166. The August 18, 2008 

proposal found that the District’s 


jstallworth on DSKBBY8HB2PROD with PROPOSALS
766 Federal Register / Vol. 83, No. 5 / Monday, January 8, 2018 / Proposed Rules 

7EPA–450/2–79–004, September 1979, Guidance 

to State and Local Agencies in Preparing 

Regulations to Control Volatile Organic Compounds from Ten Stationary Source Categories, page 61. 

Document available at https://www.epa.gov/nscep. 

submission generally met the CAA 

section 182 RACT requirements, with 

the exception of the following four 

deficiencies that prevented full approval 

of YSAQMD’s 2006 RACT SIP: 

1. YSAQMD identified three major 

non-CTG sources in the District that 

were not covered by RACT rules or SIP 

approved permits. Such rules or permits 

should be submitted to the EPA for 

approval. 

Complete—YSAQMD adopted the 

following rules and the EPA approved 

them into the SIP: 

Rule 2.41 Expandable Polystyrene 

Manufacturing Operations (adopted 

September 10, 2008); SIP approved 

September 8, 2011 (76 FR 55581). 

Rule 2.42 Nitric Acid Production 

(adopted May 13, 2009); SIP approved 

on May 10, 2010 (75 FR 25778). 

Rule 2.43 Biomass Boilers (adopted 

November 10, 2010); SIP approved July 

2, 2012. 

2. YSAQMD’s pharmaceutical 

manufacturing rule may be less 

stringent than the CTG. Rule 2.35 

Pharmaceutical Manufacturing 

Operations should be revised and 

submitted to the EPA for approval. 

Parallel processing negative 

declaration—YSAQMD determined that 

emissions from pharmaceutical 

manufacturing operations are well 

below the CTG’s applicability threshold. 

The primary process at its facility 

performing pharmaceutical 

manufacturing operations involves 

fermentation, which is exempted by a 

supporting document that helps 

implement the CTG. The guidance 

document indicates that the 

applicability threshold for the 

Manufacture of Synthesized 

Pharmaceutical Products CTG is 15 lb/ 

day and that the CTG does not apply to 

fermentation processes.7 YSAQMD 

plans to adopt a negative declaration for 

this CTG in January 2018 and, as 

discussed below, has requested parallel 

processing of the negative declaration. 

3. On May 14, 2008, YSAQMD 

amended the solvent cleaning 

provisions in several rules to address 

RACT requirements. These rules need to 

be submitted to, and approved by, the 

EPA. 

Complete—The VOC limits for 

solvent cleaning operations were 

consolidated into Rule 2.31 Solvent 

Cleaning and Degreasing, and made 

more stringent. Rule 2.31 was approved 

into the SIP on April 28, 2015 (80 FR 

23449). In general, we propose to 

conclude that the existing SIP-approved 

rules from which the solvent cleaning 

limits were consolidated, in concert 

with SIP-approved Rule 2.31, 

implement RACT for the 1997 8-hour 

ozone standard. 

4. YSAQMD should submit a negative 

declaration for the Wood Furniture CTG 

or submit Rule 2.39 Wood Products 

Coatings Operations for SIP approval. 

Parallel processing negative 

declaration—YSAQMD plans to adopt a 

negative declaration for this CTG in 

January 2018 and, as discussed below, 

has requested parallel processing of the 

negative declaration. 

The EPA concludes that YSAQMD 

has effectively taken actions to address 

each of the four deficiencies identified 

in our August 18, 2008 proposal. 

Where there are no existing sources 

covered by a particular CTG document, 

states may, in lieu of adopting RACT 

requirements for those sources, adopt 

negative declarations certifying that 

there are no such sources in the relevant 

ozone nonattainment area. YSAQMD 

plans to adopt, at its January 10, 2018 

Board hearing, negative declarations for 

the following CTGs: 

EPA–450/2–78–029 Control of Volatile 

Organic Emissions from 

Manufacture of Synthesized 

Pharmaceutical Products; 

EPA–450/3–84–015 Control of Volatile 

Organic Compound Emissions from 

Air Oxidation Processes in 

Synthetic Organic Chemical 

Manufacturing Industry; 

EPA–450/4–91–031 Control of Volatile 

Organic Compound Emissions from 

Reactor Processes and Distillation 

Operations in Synthetic Organic 

Chemical Manufacturing Industry; 

EPA–453/R–96–007 Control of Volatile 

Organic Compound Emissions from 

Wood Furniture Manufacturing 

Operations. 

The EPA has searched the CARB 

emissions inventory database and 

verified that there do not appear to be 

facilities in the YSAQMD that might be 

subject to these CTGs. We believe that 

these negative declarations are 

consistent with the relevant policy and 

guidance regarding RACT. 

Our analysis of the remainder of 

YSAQMD’s 2006 RACT SIP for the 1997 

8-hour ozone NAAQS remains 

unchanged, and we propose to find that 

the District’s RACT SIP submission is 

consistent with CAA requirements and 

relevant guidance regarding RACT, and 

SIP revisions. 

Our August 18, 2008 proposed action 

also listed 13 CTG categories for which 

the YSAQMD states it has no sources in 

the District subject to the CTGs and no 

District rules covering those categories. 

These categories are repeated in Table 1 

below. Table 2 lists the additional 

negative declarations that YSAQMD is 

adopting and for which it has requested 

parallel processing. 

TABLE 1—NEGATIVE DECLARATIONS

CTG source category CTG reference document 

Aerospace .......................................................................... EPA–453/R–97–004—Aerospace Manufacturing and Rework Operations. 

Ships .................................................................................. 61 FR 44050 Shipbuilding and Ship Repair. 

Metal Coil Container and Closure ...................................... EPA–450/2–77–008—Surface Coating of Cans, Coils, Paper, Fabrics, Automobiles, 

and Light-Duty Trucks. 

Magnetic Wire .................................................................... EPA–450/2–77–033—Surface Coating of Insulation of Magnet Wire. 

Natural Gas/Gasoline Processing Plants, Equipment 

Leaks.

EPA–450/2–83–007—Equipment Leaks from Natural Gas/Gasoline Processing 

Plants. 

Refineries ........................................................................... EPA–450/2–77–025—Refinery Vacuum Producing Systems, Wastewater Separators, 

and Process Unit Turnarounds. 

EPA–450/2–78–036—VOC Leaks from Petroleum Refinery Equipment. 

Paper and Fabric ............................................................... EPA–450/2–77–008—Surface Coating of Cans, Coils, Paper, Fabrics, Automobiles, 

and Light-Duty Trucks. 

Dry Cleaning ...................................................................... EPA–450/3–82–009—Large Petroleum Dry Cleaners. 

Rubber Tires ...................................................................... EPA–450/2–78–030—Manufacture of Pneumatic Rubber Tires. 

Large Appliances, Surface Coating ................................... EPA–450/2–77–034—Surface Coating of Large Appliances. 

Wood Coating .................................................................... EPA–450/2–78–032—Factory Surface of Flat Wood Paneling. 


jstallworth on DSKBBY8HB2PROD with PROPOSALS
Federal Register / Vol. 83, No. 5 / Monday, January 8, 2018 / Proposed Rules 767 

8 YSAQMD listed the Polymer and Resin 

Manufacturing Equipment CTG under the Synthetic 

Organic Chemical category and the Polyester Resin 

category. Accordingly, the 2006 RACT SIP 

submittal lacked the appropriate negative 

declarations for the SOCMI category. YSAQMD 

plans to adopt the correct negative declarations for 

the SOCMI category in January 2018 (see Table 2— 

Negative Declarations—Parallel Processing). 

9Although we are withdrawing our August 18, 

2008 proposed action, our TSD associated with that 

proposed action still contains pertinent information 

that summarizes our evaluation of YSAQMD’s 2006 

RACT SIP. On September 17, 2008, the YSAQMD 

submitted a comment letter outlining actions it took 

or planned to take to remedy the deficiencies 

identified in our August 18, 2008 proposed action. 

On March 16, 2009, YSAQMD transmitted a revised 

Final RACT SIP (draft) to the EPA. These 

documents are available in the docket for EPA– 

R09–OAR–2008–0612 under ‘‘comments’’. See 

https://www.regulations.gov/docketBrowser?rpp=

25&so=DESC&sb=commentDueDate&po=0&dct=

PS&D=EPA-R09-OAR-2008-0612. 

TABLE 1—NEGATIVE DECLARATIONS—Continued 

CTG source category CTG reference document 

Synthetic Organic Chemical ............................................... EPA–450/3–83–006—Fugitive Emissions from Synthetic Organic Chemical Polymer 

and Resin Manufacturing Equipment.8

Polyester Resin .................................................................. EPA–450/3–83–006—Fugitive Emissions from Synthetic Organic Chemical Polymer 

and Resin Manufacturing Equipment. 

EPA–450/3–83–008—Manufacture of High-Density Polyethylene, Polypropylene, and 

Polystyrene Resins. 

TABLE 2—NEGATIVE DECLARATIONS—PARALLEL PROCESSING

CTG source category CTG reference document 

Pharmaceutical Products ................................................... EPA–450/2–78–029 Control of Volatile Organic Emissions from Manufacture of Synthesized Pharmaceutical Products. 

Synthetic Organic Chemical Manufacturing ....................... EPA–450/3–84–015 Control of Volatile Organic Compound Emissions from Air Oxidation Processes in Synthetic Organic Chemical Manufacturing Industry. 

EPA–450/4–91–031 Control of Volatile Organic Compound Emissions from Reactor 

Processes and Distillation Operations in Synthetic Organic Chemical Manufacturing Industry. 

Wood Furniture Coating ..................................................... EPA–453/R–96–007 Control of Volatile Organic Compound Emissions from Wood 

Furniture Manufacturing Operations. 

Our 2008 and 2017 RACT SIP TSDs 

and our August 18, 2008 proposal have 

more information on our evaluation of 

the submitted RACT SIP and negative 

declarations. 

C. Public Comment and Proposed 

Action 

As authorized in section 110(k)(3) of 

the Act, and based on the rationale 

discussed above, the EPA proposes to 

approve YSAQMD’s 2006 RACT SIP and 

four negative declarations because they 

fulfill the RACT SIP requirements under 

CAA sections 182(b) and (f) and 40 CFR 

51.912 for the 1997 8-hour ozone 

NAAQS. As noted above, our proposed 

action also relies upon our evaluation of 

the public draft version of the four 

negative declarations planned for 

adoption by the YSAQMD in January 

2018 and we will not take final action 

until these negative declarations are 

adopted and submitted to us as a 

revision to the California SIP. If the 

negative declarations that we have 

evaluated were to be revised 

significantly prior to adoption and 

submittal, we would need to reconsider 

our proposed action accordingly. We are 

simultaneously withdrawing our 

previous proposal (73 FR 48166, August 

18, 2008) to disapprove the YSAQMD 

2006 RACT SIP because the YSAQMD 

has corrected the identified RACT 

deficiencies for the 1997 8-hour ozone 

standard and are now proposing full 

approval as meeting the relevant CAA 

requirements.9

We will accept comments from the 

public on this proposal until February 7, 

2018. If we take final action to approve 

the submitted documents, our final 

action will incorporate them into the 

federally enforceable SIP. 

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, the 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 Orders 12866 (58 FR 51735, 

October 4, 1993) and 13563 (76 FR 3821, 

January 21, 2011); 

• is not an Executive Order 13771 (82 

FR 9339, February 2, 2017) regulatory 

action because SIP approvals are 

exempted under Executive Order 12866; 

• 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 (Public Law 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 

disproportionate human health or 

environmental effects with practical, 

appropriate, and legally permissible 


jstallworth on DSKBBY8HB2PROD with PROPOSALS
768 Federal Register / Vol. 83, No. 5 / Monday, January 8, 2018 / Proposed Rules 

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). 

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. 

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

Dated: December 26, 2017. 

Deborah Jordan, 

Acting Regional Administrator, Region IX. 

[FR Doc. 2018–00025 Filed 1–5–18; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 6560–50–P 

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION 

AGENCY 

40 CFR Part 62 

[EPA–R08–OAR–2017–0552; FRL–_9971– 

27—Region 8] 

Approval and Promulgation of State 

Plans for Designated Facilities and 

Pollutants; Colorado; Control of 

Emissions From Existing Commercial 

and Industrial Solid Waste Incineration 

Units 

AGENCY: Environmental Protection 

Agency (EPA). 

ACTION: Proposed rule. 

SUMMARY: The Environmental Protection 

Agency (EPA) is proposing to approve a 

Clean Air Act (CAA) section 111(d)/129 

plan (the ‘‘plan’’) submitted by the 

Colorado Department of Public Health 

and Environment (CDPHE) on July 14, 

2017. The plan would allow for the 

implementation of emissions guidelines 

for existing commercial and industrial 

solid waste incineration (CISWI) units 

within the jurisdiction of the State of 

Colorado. The plan creates new 

enforceable emissions limits and 

operating procedures for existing CISWI 

units within the State of Colorado in 

accordance with the requirements 

established by the revised CISWI new 

source performance standards (NSPS) 

and emission guidelines (EG), 

promulgated by the EPA on March 21, 

2011, with subsequent final 

amendments to the rule promulgated on 

February 7, 2013. This proposed plan 

approval rulemaking is being taken in 

accordance with the requirements of 

sections 111(d) and 129 of the CAA and 

the relevant parts and subparts of the 

Code of Federal Regulations (CFR). 

DATES: Written comments must be 

received on or before February 7, 2018. 

ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, 

identified by Docket ID No. EPA–R08– 

OAR–2017–0552 at http://

www.regulations.gov. Follow the online 

instructions for submitting comments. 

Once submitted, comments cannot be 

edited or removed from 

www.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, the full 

EPA public comment policy, 

information about CBI or multimedia 

submissions, and general guidance on 

making effective comments, please visit 

http://www2.epa.gov/dockets/ 

commenting-epa-dockets. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Gregory Lohrke, Air Program, U.S. 

Environmental Protection Agency 

(EPA), Region 8, Mail Code 8P–AR, 

1595 Wynkoop Street, Denver, Colorado 

80202–1129, (303) 312–6396, 

lohrke.gregory@epa.gov. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

I. General Information 

What should I consider as I prepare my 

comments for EPA? 

1. Submitting Confidential Business 

Information (CBI). Do not submit CBI to 

the EPA through http://

www.regulations.gov or email. Clearly 

mark the part or all of the information 

that you claim to be CBI. For CBI 

information on a disk or CD–ROM that 

you mail to the EPA, mark the outside 

of the disk or CD–ROM as CBI and then 

identify electronically within the disk or 

CD–ROM the specific information that 

is claimed as CBI. In addition to one 

complete version of the comment that 

includes information claimed as CBI, a 

copy of the comment that does not 

contain the information claimed as CBI 

must be submitted for inclusion in the 

public docket. Information so marked 

will not be disclosed except in 

accordance with procedures set forth in 

40 CFR part 2. 

2. Tips for preparing your comments. 

When submitting comments, remember 

to: 

• Identify the rulemaking by docket 

number and other identifying 

information (subject heading, Federal 

Register volume, date, and page 

number); 

• Follow directions and organize your 

comments; 

• Explain why you agree or disagree; 

• Suggest alternatives and substitute 

language for your requested changes; 

• Describe any assumptions and 

provide any technical information and/ 

or data that you used; 

• If you estimate potential costs or 

burdens, explain how you arrived at 

your estimate in sufficient detail to 

allow for it to be reproduced; 

• Provide specific examples to 

illustrate your concerns, and suggest 

alternatives; 

• Explain your views as clearly as 

possible, avoiding the use of profanity 

or personal threats; and, 

• Make sure to submit your 

comments by the comment period 

deadline identified. 

II. Background Information 

Sections 111 and 129 of the CAA 

outline the EPA’s statutory authority for 

regulating new and existing solid waste 

incineration units. Section 111(b) 

directs the EPA Administrator to 

publish and periodically revise a list of 

source categories which significantly 

cause or contribute to air pollution. This 

subsection also directs the 

Administrator to establish federal 

standards of performance for new 

sources within these categories. Section 

111(d) grants the EPA statutory 

authority to require states to submit to 

the agency implementation plans for 

establishing performance standards 

applicable to existing sources belonging 

to those categories established in section 

111(b). Section 129 specifically 

addresses solid waste combustion and 

requires that the EPA regulate new and 

existing waste incineration units 

pursuant to section 111 of the Act, 

including the requirement that a state in 

which existing designated facilities 

operate submit for approval a state plan 

for each category of regulated waste 

incineration units. Section 129(b)(3) 

requires the EPA to promulgate a federal 

plan for existing waste incineration 

units of any designated category located 


jstallworth on DSKBBY8HB2PROD with PROPOSALS