Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 114 / Tuesday, June 16, 2009 / Proposed Rules 28467 

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION 

AGENCY 

40 CFR Part 52 

[EPA–R09–OAR–2009–0350; FRL–8918–3] 

Revisions to the California State 

Implementation Plan, San Joaquin 

Valley Air Pollution Control District 

AGENCY: Environmental Protection 

Agency (EPA). 

ACTION: Proposed rule. 

SUMMARY: EPA is proposing to approve 

revisions to the San Joaquin Valley Air 

Pollution Control District portion of the 

California State Implementation Plan 

(SIP). These revisions concern volatile 

organic compound (VOC) emissions 

from coating of metal parts, large 

appliances, metal furniture, motor 

vehicles, mobile equipment, cans, coils, 

and organic solvent cleaning, storage, 

and disposal related to such operations. 

We are approving three local rules that 

regulate these emission sources 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 

July 16, 2009. 

ADDRESSES: Submit comments, 

identified by docket number [EPA–R09– 

OAR–2009–0350], 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 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: 

Nicole Law, EPA Region IX, (415) 947– 

4126, Law.Nicole@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 

rule revisions? 

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 addressed by 

this proposal with the dates that they 

were adopted by the local air agency 

and submitted by the California Air 

Resources Board. 

TABLE 1—SUBMITTED RULES

Local agency Rule # Rule title Adopted Submitted 

SJVAPCD ......... 4603 Surface Coating of Metal Parts and Products ............................................. 10/16/08 12/23/08 

SJVAPCD ......... 4604 Can and Coil Coating Operations ................................................................ 09/20/07 03/07/08 

SJVAPCD ......... 4612 Motor Vehicle and Mobile Equipment Coating Operations .......................... 09/20/07 03/07/08 

On April 20, 2009 and April 17, 2008, 

these rule submittals were found to 

meet 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? 

We approved versions of Rules 4603 

and 4604 into the SIP on June 25, 2002 

and May 19, 2002. Rule 4612 is 

replacing Rule 4602 which was 

approved into the SIP on June 26, 2002. 

The San Joaquin Valley Air Pollution 

Control District adopted revisions to the 

SIP-approved version of Rule 4603 on 

May 18, 2006, September 20, 2007, and 

October 16, 2008 and CARB submitted 

them to us on October 5, 2006, March 

7, 2008, and December 23, 2008. While 

we can act on only the most recently 

submitted version, we have reviewed 

materials provided with previous 

submittals. No other versions of Rule 

4604 and 4602/4612 have been adopted 

by the district after 2002. 

C. What is the purpose of the submitted 

rule revisions? 

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. The rules control VOC 

emissions by limiting VOC content in 

the coatings used for metal parts, large 

appliances, metal furniture, motor 

vehicles, mobile equipment, cans, and 

coils. In addition, the rules also limit 

emission of VOCs by regulating organic 

solvent cleaning, storage, and disposal 

relating to the coating operations. The 

most significant changes in the rules are 

reductions of the VOC limits on organic 

solvents to 25 grams of VOC per liter 

solvent. EPA’s technical support 

documents (TSDs) have more 

information about these rules. 

II. EPA’s Evaluation and Action 

A. How is EPA evaluating the rules? 

Generally, SIP rules must be 

enforceable (see section 110(a) of the 

Act), must require Reasonably Available 

Control Technology (RACT) for each 

category of sources covered by a Control 

Techniques Guidelines (CTG) document 

as well as each major source in 

nonattainment areas (see section 


cprice-sewell on PRODPC61 with PROPOSALS
28468 Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 114 / Tuesday, June 16, 2009 / Proposed Rules 

182(a)(2)), and must not relax existing 

requirements (see sections 110(l) and 

193). The San Joaquin Valley Air 

Pollution Control District regulates an 

ozone nonattainment area (see 40 CFR 

part 81), so Rules 4603, 4604, and 4612 

must fulfill RACT. 

Guidance and policy documents that 

we use to help evaluate specific 

enforceability and RACT requirements 

consistently include the following: 

1. Portions of the proposed post-1987 

ozone and carbon monoxide policy that 

concern RACT, 52 FR 45044, November 

24, 1987. 

2. ‘‘Issues Relating to VOC Regulation 

Cutpoints, Deficiencies, and 

Deviations,’’ EPA, May 25, 1988 (the 

Bluebook). 

3. ‘‘Guidance Document for Correcting 

Common VOC & Other Rule 

Deficiencies,’’ EPA Region 9, August 21, 

2001 (the Little Bluebook). 

4. ‘‘Control Techniques Guidelines for 

Miscellaneous Metal and Plastic Parts 

Coatings,’’ EPA–453/R–08–003, 

September 2008. 

5. ‘‘Control Techniques Guidelines for 

Large Appliance Coatings,’’ EPA–453/ 

R–07–004, September 2007. 

6. ‘‘Control Techniques Guidelines for 

Metal Furniture Coatings,’’ EPA–453/R– 

07–005, September 2007. 

7. ‘‘Control of Volatile Organic 

Emissions From Existing Stationary 

Sources Volume II: Surface Coating of 

Cans, Coils, Paper, Fabrics, 

Automobiles, and Light-Duty Trucks,’’ 

EPA–450/2–77–008, May 1977. 

8. ‘‘Reasonably Available Control 

Technology (RACT) Demonstration for 

Ozone State Implementation Plans 

(SIP)’’ SJVAPCD, April 16, 2009. 

9. ‘‘Suggested Control Measure for 

Automotive Coatings,’’ CARB, October 

2005. 

10. Portions of the proposed post1987 ozone and carbon monoxide policy 

that concern RACT, 52 FR 45044, 

November 24, 1987. 

11. ‘‘State Implementation Plans, 

General Preamble for the 

Implementation of Title I of the Clean 

Air Amendments of 1990’’ 57 FR 13498, 

April 16, 1992. 

12. ‘‘Preamble, Final Rule to 

Implement the 8-hour Ozone National 

Ambient Air Quality Standard’’ 70 FR 

71612; Nov. 29, 2005. 

13. Letter from William T. Hartnett to 

Regional Air Division Directors, ‘‘RACT 

Qs & As—Reasonable Available Control 

Technology (RACT) Questions and 

Answers,’’ May 18, 2006. 

B. Do the rules meet the evaluation 

criteria? 

We believe these rules are generally 

consistent with the relevant policy and 

guidance regarding enforceability, 

RACT, and SIP relaxations. The TSDs 

have more information on our 

evaluation. 

C. EPA recommendations to further 

improve the rule 

The TSDs describe additional rule 

revisions that do not affect EPA’s 

current action but are recommended for 

the next time the local agency modifies 

the rule. 

D. Public comment and final action 

Because EPA believes the submitted 

rules fulfill all relevant requirements, 

we are proposing to fully approve them 

as described in section 110(k)(3) of the 

Act. We will accept comments from the 

public on this proposal for the next 30 

days. Unless we receive convincing new 

information during the comment period, 

we intend to publish a final approval 

action that will incorporate these rules 

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, 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, 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, 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. 

List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52 

Environmental protection, Air 

pollution control, Intergovernmental 

relations, Ozone, Reporting and 

recordkeeping requirements, Volatile 

organic compounds. 

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

Dated: June 2, 2009. 

Keith Takata, 

Acting Regional Administrator, Region IX. 

[FR Doc. E9–14020 Filed 6–15–09; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 6560–50–P 

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION 

AGENCY 

40 CFR Parts 191 and 194 

[EPA–HQ–OAR–2009–0330; FRL–8916–5] 

Intent To Evaluate Whether the Waste 

Isolation Pilot Plant Continues To 

Comply With the Disposal Regulations 

and Compliance Criteria 

AGENCY: Environmental Protection 

Agency (EPA). 

ACTION: Notice of availability; official 

opening of public comment period. 

SUMMARY: The Environmental Protection 

Agency (EPA) intends to evaluate and 

recertify whether or not the Waste 

Isolation Pilot Plant (WIPP) continues to 

comply with EPA’s environmental 

radiation protection standards for the 

disposal of radioactive waste. Pursuant 

to the 1992 WIPP Land Withdrawal Act 

(LWA), as amended, the U.S. 


cprice-sewell on PRODPC61 with PROPOSALS