Document ID: EPA-R09-OAR-2012-0614-0001
Agency: epa
Document Type: Proposed Rule
Title: Revisions to the State Implementation Plans: California; San Joaquin Valley Unified Air Pollution Control District
Posted Date: 2012-11-05T05:00Z

[Federal Register Volume 77, Number 214 (Monday, November 5, 2012)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 66429-66431]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2012-26978]

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

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

40 CFR Part 52

[EPA-R09-OAR-2012-0614; FRL-9749-1]

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 compounds (VOC), carbon monoxide (CO), oxides of 
nitrogen (NOX), oxides of sulfur (SOX), and 
particulate matter (PM) emissions from glass melting furnaces. We are 
approving a local rule that regulates these emission sources under the 
Clean Air Act (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 December 5, 2012.

ADDRESSES: Submit comments, identified by docket number EPA-R09-OAR-
2012-0614, by one of the following methods:
    1. Federal eRulemaking Portal: www.regulations.gov. Follow the on-
line instructions.
    2. Email: 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.
    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.

[[Page 66430]]

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Robert Marinaro, EPA Region IX, (415) 
972-3019, marinaro.robert@epa.gov.

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

Table of Contents

I. The State's Submittal
    A. What rule did the State submit?
    B. Are there other versions of this rule?
    C. What is the purpose of the submitted rule revision?
II. EPA's Evaluation and Action
    A. How is EPA evaluating the rule?
    B. Does the rule meet the evaluation criteria?
    C. EPA Recommendations to Further Improve the Rule
    D. Public Comment and Final Action
III. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews

I. The State's Submittal

A. What rule did the State submit?

    Table 1 lists the rule addressed by this proposal with the date 
that it was amended by the local air agency and submitted by the 
California Air Resources Board.

                                             Table 1--Submitted Rule
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
            Local agency                  Rule No.            Rule title            Amended         Submitted
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
SJVUAPCD............................            4354   Limiting Emissions from        05/19/11         09/27/11
                                                        Glass Melting Furnaces.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    On October 24, 2011, EPA determined that the submittal for SJVUAPCD 
Rule 4354 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 this rule?

    We approved an earlier version of Rule 4354 into the SIP on June 
24, 2011 (76 FR 53640). The SJVUAPCD adopted revisions to the SIP-
approved version on May 19, 2011 and CARB submitted them to us on 
September 27, 2011.

C. What is the purpose of the submitted rule revision?

    VOCs and NOX help produce ground-level ozone and smog, 
which harm human health and the environment. PM, NOX and 
SOX also contribute 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, SOX and PM emissions. The purpose of 
this rule revision is to incorporate provisions for new oxy-fuel firing 
technology. This technology, by design, operates in an oxygen-rich 
environment in excess of the existing requirement, but still has 
inherently low NOX emissions during start-up. The proposed 
amendment prevents oxy-fuel fired glass melting furnaces from having to 
comply with an unnecessary start-up requirement. EPA's technical 
support document (TSD) has more information about this rule.

II. EPA's Evaluation and Action

A. How is EPA evaluating the rule?

    Generally, SIP rules must be enforceable (see section 110(a) of the 
Act), and 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 182(f)), and must not relax existing 
requirements (see sections 110(l) and 193). In addition, SIPs must 
implement Reasonably Available Control Measures (RACM) in PM 2.5 
nonattainment areas (see CAA sections 189(a)(1) and 189(b)(1)).
    The SJVUAPCD regulates an ozone and PM 2.5 nonattainment area (see 
40 CFR part 81), so Rule 4354 must fulfill RACT and the overall SIP 
must fulfill RACM.
    Guidance and policy documents that we use to evaluate 
enforceability, RACT and RACM 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).
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); 57 FR 18070 (April 28, 1992).
4. ``State Implementation Plans for Serious PM-10 Nonattainment 
Areas, and Attainment Date Waivers for PM-10 Nonattainment Areas 
Generally; Addendum to the General Preamble for the Implementation 
of Title I of the Clean Air Act Amendments of 1990,'' 59 FR 41998 
(August 16, 1994).
5. ``PM-10 Guideline Document,'' EPA 452/R-93-008, April 1993.
6. ``Fugitive Dust Background Document and Technical Information 
Document for Best Available Control Measures,'' EPA 450/2-92-004, 
September 1992.
7. ``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.
8. ``Improving Air Quality with Economic Incentive Programs,'' U.S. 
EPA, January 2001.
9. ``Interim White Paper--Midwest RPO Candidate Control Measure: 
Glass Manufacturing'', Lake Michigan Air Directors Consortium, 
December 12, 2005.
10. ``Alternative Control Techniques Document--OX 
Emissions from Glass Manufacturing'', US EPA, June 1994.
11. ``Integrated Pollution Prevention and Control (IPPC) Reference 
Document on Best Available Techniques in the Glass Manufacturing 
Industry'', European Commission, December 2001.
12. ``State Implementation Plans (SIP): Policy Regarding Excess 
Emissions During Malfunctions, Startup and Shutdown,'' EPA 
memorandum, Steven A. Herman and Robert Perciasepe, August 11, 1999. 
http://www.epa.gov/ttn/oarpg/t1/memoranda/excem.pdf.

B. Does the rule meet the evaluation criteria?

    We believe this rule is consistent with the relevant policy and 
guidance regarding enforceability, RACM/RACT, and SIP relaxations. The 
TSD has more information on our evaluation.

C. EPA Recommendations to Further Improve the Rule

    The TSD describes an additional rule revision that we recommend for 
the next time the local agency modifies the rule but is not currently 
the basis for rule disapproval.

D. Public Comment and Final Action

    Because EPA believes the submitted rule fulfills all relevant 
requirements, we are proposing to fully approve it 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 this rule into the federally 
enforceable SIP.

[[Page 66431]]

III. Statutory and Executive Order Review

    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 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 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 proposed action 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, Incorporation by 
reference, Intergovernmental relations, Nitrogen dioxide, Ozone, 
Particulate matter, Volatile organic compounds, Reporting and 
recordkeeping requirements.

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

    Dated: October 17, 2012.
Jared Blumenfeld,
Regional Administrator, Region IX.
[FR Doc. 2012-26978 Filed 11-2-12; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P