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

27084 

Vol. 74, No. 108 

Monday, June 8, 2009 

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION 

AGENCY 

40 CFR Part 52 

[EPA–R09–OAR–2009–0296; FRL–8914–3] 

Revisions to the California State 

Implementation Plan, San Joaquin 

Valley Unified Air Pollution Control 

District 

AGENCY: Environmental Protection 

Agency (EPA). 

ACTION: Proposed rule. 

SUMMARY: EPA is proposing to approve 

revisions to the San Joaquin Valley 

Unified Air Pollution Control District 

(SJVUAPCD) portion of the California 

State Implementation Plan (SIP). These 

revisions concern volatile organic 

compound (VOC) emissions from 

organic solvent cleaning and degreasing 

operations. We are approving 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 8, 2009. 

ADDRESSES: Submit comments, 

identified by docket number EPA–R09– 

OAR–2009–0296, by one of the 

following methods: 

1. Federal eRulemaking Portal: 

http://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 http://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 

http://www.regulations.gov or e-mail. 

http://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 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 

http://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 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 No. Rule title Adopted Submitted 

SJVUAPCD ................................. 4662 Organic Solvent Degreasing Operations ........................................ 09/20/07 03/07/08 

SJVUAPCD ................................. 4663 Organic Solvent Cleaning, Storage, and Disposal ......................... 09/20/07 03/07/08 

On April 17, 2008, EPA determined 

that these rule submittals 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? 

We approved versions of Rules 4662 

and 4663 into the SIP on July 27, 2002. 

The San Joaquin Valley Unified Air 

Pollution Control District adopted 

revisions to the SIP-approved rules on 

September 20, 2007 and CARB 

submitted these to us on March 7, 2008. 

CARB has not submitted any other 

revisions to these rules since 2002. 

C. What Is the Purpose of the 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 revised rules limit VOC 

emissions from organic solvent 

degreasing operations, organic solvent 

cleaning and from the storage and 

disposal of solvents and waste solvent 

materials. 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. 


cprice-sewell on PRODPC61 with PROPOSALS
Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 108 / Monday, June 8, 2009 / Proposed Rules 27085 

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 sections 

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

existing requirements (see sections 

110(l) and 193). The San Joaquin Valley 

Unified Air Pollution Control District 

regulates an ozone nonattainment area 

for both the 1-hr and the 8-hr ozone 

standard (see 40 CFR part 81), so Rules 

4662 and 4663 must fulfill RACT. 

Guidance and policy documents that 

we use to evaluate 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 of Volatile Organic 

Emissions from Solvent Metal 

Cleaning,’’ EPA–450/2–77–022, 

November 1977. 

5. ‘‘Control Techniques Guidelines for 

Industrial Cleaning Solvents,’’ EPA– 

453/R–06–001, September 2006. 

6. ‘‘Organic Solvent Cleaning and 

Degreasing Operations,’’ CARB, July 18, 

1991. 

7. ‘‘Reasonably Available Control 

Technology (RACT) Demonstration for 

Ozone State Implementation Plans 

(SIP)’’ SJVAPCD, April 16, 2009. 

8. ‘‘State Implementation Plans, 

General Preamble for the 

Implementation of Title I of the Clean 

Air Amendments of 1990,’’ 57 FR 13498 

(April 16, 1992). 

9. ‘‘Preamble, Final Rule to 

Implement the 8-hour Ozone National 

Ambient Air Quality Standard’’ 70 FR 

71612 (November 29, 2005). 

10. 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 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 Rules 

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 Rules. 

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: May 21, 2009. 

Jane Diamond, 

Acting Regional Administrator, Region IX. 

[FR Doc. E9–13331 Filed 6–5–09; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 6560–50–P 

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION 

AGENCY 

40 CFR Part 93 

[EPA–HQ–OAR–2008–0540; FRL–8914–5] 

RIN 2060–AP29 

Transportation Conformity Rule PM2.5

and PM10 Amendments 

AGENCY: Environmental Protection 

Agency (EPA). 

ACTION: Notice of Extension of Public 

Comment Period. 

SUMMARY: EPA is announcing the 

extension of the public comment period 

on the proposed rule, ‘‘Transportation 

Conformity Rule PM2.5 and PM10

Amendments.’’ This proposed rule was 

published May 15, 2009 in the Federal 

Register (74 FR 23024), and written 

comments on the proposed rule were to 

be submitted by June 15, 2009. EPA also 

stated in the proposal that the comment 

period would be extended if a public 


cprice-sewell on PRODPC61 with PROPOSALS