[Federal Register Volume 73, Number 160 (Monday, August 18, 2008)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 48166-48169]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: E8-19073]


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

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

40 CFR Part 52

[EPA-R09-OAR-2008-0612; FRL-8705-7]


Disapproval of State Implementation Plan Revision, Yolo Solano 
Air Quality Management District

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Proposed rule.

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

SUMMARY: EPA is proposing to disapprove a revision to the Yolo Solano 
Air Quality Management District (YSAQMD) portion of the California 
State Implementation Plan (SIP) concerning the District's analysis of 
whether its rules meet Reasonably Available Control Technology (RACT) 
under the 8-hour ozone National Ambient Air Quality Standard (NAAQS). 
We are proposing to disapprove the analysis 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.

DATES: Any comments must arrive by September 17, 2008.

ADDRESSES: Submit comments, identified by docket number EPA-R09-OAR-
2008-0612, by one of the following methods:
    1. Federal eRulemaking Portal: www.regulations.gov. Follow the on-
line instructions.
    2. E-mail: <a href="/cdn-cgi/l/email-protection#83f0f7e6e0e8e6efade2ede7f1e6f4c3e6f3e2ade4ecf5"><span class="__cf_email__" data-cfemail="81f2f5e4e2eae4edafe0efe5f3e4f6c1e4f1e0afe6eef7">[email protected]</span></a>.
    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 e-mail. 
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 e-mail 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: 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.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Stanley Tong, EPA Region IX, (415) 
947-4122, <a href="/cdn-cgi/l/email-protection#40342f2e276e3334212e2c2539002530216e272f36"><span class="__cf_email__" data-cfemail="64100b0a034a1710050a08011d240114054a030b12">[email protected]</span></a>.

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

Table of Contents

I. The State's Submittal
    A. What document did the State submit?
    B. Are there other versions of this document?
    C. What is the purpose of the submitted RACT SIP analysis?
II. EPA's Evaluation and Action
    A. How is EPA evaluating the RACT SIP analysis?

[[Page 48167]]

    B. Does the analysis meet the evaluation criteria?
    C. What are the deficiencies?
    D. EPA Recommendations to Further Improve the RACT SIP Analysis
    E. Proposed Action and Public Comment
III. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews

I. The State's Submittal

A. What document did the State submit?

    Table 1 lists the document proposed for disapproval with the date 
that it was adopted and submitted by the California Air Resources 
Board.

                                           Table 1--Submitted Document
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
               Local agency                               Document                    Adopted        Submitted
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
YSAQMD....................................  Reasonably Available Control                09/13/06        01/31/07
                                             Technology.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    This submittal became complete by operation of law on July 31, 
2007.

B. Are there other versions of this document?

    There is no previous version of this document in the SIP.

C. What is the purpose of the submitted RACT SIP analysis?

    VOCs and NO<INF>X</INF> 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 and 
NO<INF>X</INF> emissions. Sections 172(c)(1) and 182 require areas that 
are designated as moderate or above for ozone non-attainment to adopt 
RACT. The YSAQMD is subject to this requirement as it is designated as 
a serious ozone non-attainment area under the 8-hour NAAQS for ozone 
(40 CFR 81.305). Therefore, the YSAQMD must, at a minimum, adopt RACT 
level controls for sources covered by a Control Technique Guidelines 
(CTG) document and for any major non-CTG source.
    Section IV.G. of EPA's final rule to implement the 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 ozone standard generally must assure that RACT is met, 
either through a certification that previously required RACT controls 
represent RACT for 8-hour implementation purposes or through a new RACT 
determination. The submitted document provides YSAQMD's analysis of 
their RACT rules for the 8-hour NAAQS for ozone. EPA's technical 
support document (TSD) has more information about YSAQMD's RACT 
analysis.

II. EPA's Evaluation and Action

A. How is EPA evaluating the RACT SIP analysis?

    The rules and guidance documents that we use to evaluate whether 
the analysis fulfills RACT include the following:
    1. Final Rule to Implement the 8-Hour Ozone National Ambient Air 
Quality Standard (70 FR 71612; November 29, 2005).
    2. Letter from William T. Harnett to Regional Air Division 
Directors, (May 18, 2006), ``RACT Qs & As--Reasonably Available Control 
Technology (RACT) Questions and Answers''.
    3. 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).
    4. 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.
    5. RACT SIPs, Letter dated April 4, 2006 from EPA Region IX (Andrew 
Steckel) to CARB (Kurt Karperos) listing EPA's current CTGs, ACTs, and 
other documents which may help to establish RACT.

B. Does the analysis meet the evaluation criteria?

    YSAQMD's staff report included a table (Table A) listing all CTG 
source categories and matching those CTG categories with the 
corresponding District rule which implements RACT. Given its 
designation as a serious ozone non-attainment area, YSAQMD was also 
required to analyze RACT for all sources that emit or have the 
potential to emit at least 50 tons per year of NO<INF>X</INF> or VOCs 
(CAA 182(c)). YSAQMD staff searched for all sources that would be 
subject to a CTG and for sources that emitted or have the potential to 
emit at least 25 tpy of VOC or NO<INF>X</INF>. YSAQMD identified three 
sources, Agrium U.S., Inc, Premier Industries (now Insulfoam), and 
Woodland Biomass Power Ltd., as major sources not subject to a District 
RACT rule.
    YSAQMD points out that under Section 110(k)(4) of the CAA, the 
District can submit a plan revision based on a commitment to adopt 
specific enforceable measures up to one year after the date of approval 
of the plan revision. YSAQMD generally committed to submitting the 
required RACT rules for these sources within one year of approval of 
the plan revision. Under CAA Section 110(k)(4), however, EPA may 
approve a plan revision only where the State commits to adopt 
``specific enforceable measures by a date certain'', not later than one 
year after the approval of the plan revision. YSAQMD's generalized 
commitment to submit RACT rules within a year for the sources and 
source categories that are currently not subject to RACT rules fails to 
provide the ``specific enforceable measures by a date certain'' 
required by CAA Section 110(k)(4). Accordingly, EPA concludes it is not 
appropriate to grant a conditional approval of the District's RACT 
certification.
    The RACT certification provisions which do not meet the evaluation 
criteria are summarized in the next section and discussed further in 
the TSD.
    YSAQMD's staff report also includes a negative declaration listing 
13 CTG categories for which there are no sources in the District 
subject to the CTGs and no District rules covering those categories. 
These categories are provided in Table 2.

                                         Table 2--Negative Declarations
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                  CTG source category                                     CTG reference document
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Aerospace..............................................  EPA-453/R-97-004--Aerospace Manufacturing and Rework
                                                          Operations.

[[Page 48168]]

 
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.
Synthetic Organic Chemical.............................  Possible error--YSAQMD listed the polymer/Resin CTG
                                                          under this category.
                                                         EPA-450/3-83-006--Fugitive Emissions from Synthetic
                                                          Organic Chemical Polymer and Resin Manufacturing
                                                          Equipment.
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.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

C. What are the deficiencies?

    The following deficiencies prevent full approval of YSAQMD's RACT 
certification.
    1. YSAQMD identified three major non-CTG sources in the District 
that are not covered by RACT rules or SIP approved permits. Such rules 
or permits should be submitted to EPA for approval.
    2. YSAQMD's pharmaceutical manufacturing rule may be less stringent 
than the CTG. Rule 2.35 should be revised and submitted to EPA for 
approval.
    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, EPA.
    4. YSAQMD should submit a negative declaration for the Wood 
Furniture CTG or submit Rule 2.39 for SIP approval.

D. EPA Recommendations To Further Improve the RACT SIP Analysis

    The TSD describes additional revisions that do not affect EPA's 
current action but are recommended to strengthen the RACT analysis.

E. Proposed Action and Public Comment

    As authorized in Section 110(k)(3) of the Act, we are proposing a 
disapproval of the submitted YSAQMD RACT SIP analysis. If finalized, 
sanctions would be imposed unless EPA approves a revised RACT SIP 
analysis and the required rules that correct the deficiencies discussed 
above within 18 months of the disapproval. These sanctions would be 
imposed as described in CAA section 179 and 40 CFR 52.30-52.32. A final 
disapproval would also trigger the 2 year clock for the federal 
implementation plan (FIP) requirement under section 110(c)(1).
    We will accept comments from the public on the proposed disapproval 
for the next 30 days.

III. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews

A. Executive Order 12866, Regulatory Planning and Review

    The Office of Management and Budget (OMB) has exempted this 
regulatory action from Executive Order 12866, entitled ``Regulatory 
Planning and Review.''

B. Paperwork Reduction Act

    This rulemaking does not impose an information collection burden 
under the provisions of the Paperwork Reduction Act, 44 U.S.C. 3501 et 
seq. Burden is defined at 5 CFR 1320.3(b).

C. Regulatory Flexibility Act

    The Regulatory Flexibility Act (RFA) generally requires an agency 
to conduct a regulatory flexibility analysis of any rule subject to 
notice and comment rulemaking requirements unless the agency certifies 
that the rule will not have a significant economic impact on a 
substantial number of small entities. Small entities include small 
businesses, small not-for-profit enterprises, and small governmental 
jurisdictions.
    This rulemaking will not have a significant impact on a substantial 
number of small entities because SIP disapproval actions under section 
110 and subchapter I, part D of the Clean Air Act do not create any new 
requirements but simply disapproves for inclusion into the SIP 
requirements that the State is already imposing. Therefore, because the 
Federal SIP disapproval does not create any new requirements, I certify 
that this action will not have a significant economic impact on a 
substantial number of small entities.
    Moreover, due to the nature of the Federal-State relationship under 
the Clean Air Act, preparation of flexibility analysis would constitute 
Federal inquiry into the economic reasonableness of state action. The 
Clean Air Act forbids EPA to base its actions concerning SIPs on such 
grounds. Union Electric Co., v. U.S. EPA, 427 U.S. 246, 255-66 (1976); 
42 U.S.C. 7410(a)(2).

D. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act

    Under sections 202 of the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995 
(``Unfunded Mandates Act''), signed into law on March 22, 1995, EPA 
must prepare a budgetary impact statement to accompany any proposed or 
final rule that includes a Federal mandate that may result in estimated 
costs to State, local, or tribal governments in the aggregate; or to 
the private sector, of $100 million or more. Under section 205, EPA 
must select the most cost-effective and least burdensome alternative 
that achieves the objectives

[[Page 48169]]

of the rule and is consistent with statutory requirements. Section 203 
requires EPA to establish a plan for informing and advising any small 
governments that may be significantly or uniquely impacted by the rule.
    EPA has determined that the disapproval action proposed does not 
include a Federal mandate that may result in estimated costs of $100 
million or more to either State, local, or tribal governments in the 
aggregate, or to the private sector. This Federal action proposes to 
disapprove a pre-existing analysis under State or local law, and 
imposes no new requirements. Accordingly, no additional costs to State, 
local, or tribal governments, or to the private sector, result from 
this action.

E. Executive Order 13132, Federalism

    Federalism (64 FR 43255, August 10, 1999) revokes and replaces 
Executive Orders 12612 (Federalism) and 12875 (Enhancing the 
Intergovernmental Partnership). Executive Order 13132 requires EPA to 
develop an accountable process to ensure ``meaningful and timely input 
by State and local officials in the development of regulatory policies 
that have federalism implications.'' ``Policies that have federalism 
implications'' is defined in the Executive Order to include regulations 
that have ``substantial direct effects on the States, on the 
relationship between the national government and the States, or on the 
distribution of power and responsibilities among the various levels of 
government.'' Under Executive Order 13132, EPA may not issue a 
regulation that has federalism implications, that imposes substantial 
direct compliance costs, and that is not required by statute, unless 
the Federal government provides the funds necessary to pay the direct 
compliance costs incurred by State and local governments, or EPA 
consults with State and local officials early in the process of 
developing the proposed regulation. EPA also may not issue a regulation 
that has federalism implications and that preempts State law unless the 
Agency consults with State and local officials early in the process of 
developing the proposed regulation.
    This rulemaking will not have substantial direct effects on the 
States, on the relationship between the national government and the 
States, or on the distribution of power and responsibilities among the 
various levels of government, as specified in Executive Order 13132, 
because it merely disapproves a state analysis, and does not alter the 
relationship or the distribution of power and responsibilities 
established in the Clean Air Act. Thus, the requirements of section 6 
of the Executive Order do not apply to this rulemaking.

F. Executive Order 13175, Coordination With Indian Tribal Governments

    Executive Order 13175, entitled ``Consultation and Coordination 
with Indian Tribal Governments'' (65 FR 67249, November 9, 2000), 
requires EPA to develop an accountable process to ensure ``meaningful 
and timely input by tribal officials in the development of regulatory 
policies that have tribal implications.'' This proposed rule 
disapproval does not have tribal implications, as specified in 
Executive Order 13175. It will not have substantial direct effects on 
tribal governments, on the relationship between the Federal government 
and Indian tribes, or on the distribution of power and responsibilities 
between the Federal government and Indian tribes. Thus, Executive Order 
13175 does not apply to this rule disapproval.
    EPA specifically solicits additional comment on this proposed rule 
disapproval from tribal officials.

G. Executive Order 13045, Protection of Children From Environmental 
Health Risks and Safety Risks

    EPA interprets Executive Order 13045 (62 FR 19885, April 23, 1997) 
as applying only to those regulatory actions that concern health or 
safety risks, such that the analysis required under section 5-501 of 
the Executive Order has the potential to influence the regulation. This 
rulemaking is not subject to Executive Order 13045, because it 
disapproves a state analysis.

H. Executive Order 13211, Actions that Significantly Affect Energy 
Supply, Distribution, or Use

    This rulemaking is not subject to Executive Order 13211, ``Actions 
Concerning Regulations That Significantly Affect Energy Supply, 
Distribution, or Use'' (66 FR 28355, May 22, 2001) because it is not a 
significant regulatory action under Executive Order 12866.

I. National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act

    Section 12 of the National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act 
(NTTAA) of 1995 requires Federal agencies to evaluate existing 
technical standards when developing a new regulation. To comply with 
NTTAA, EPA must consider and use ``voluntary consensus standards'' 
(VCS) if available and applicable when developing programs and policies 
unless doing so would be inconsistent with applicable law or otherwise 
impractical.
    The EPA believes that VCS are inapplicable to this action. Today's 
action does not require the public to perform activities conducive to 
the use of VCS.

List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52

    Environmental protection, Air pollution control, Intergovernmental 
relations, Nitrogen dioxide, Ozone, Reporting and recordkeeping 
requirements, Volatile organic compounds.

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

    Dated: August 7, 2008.
Laura Yoshii,
Acting Regional Administrator, Region IX.
[FR Doc. E8-19073 Filed 8-15-08; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P


</pre><script data-cfasync="false" src="/cdn-cgi/scripts/5c5dd728/cloudflare-static/email-decode.min.js"></script></body>
</html>