Document ID: EPA-R09-OAR-2012-0252-0001
Agency: epa
Document Type: Proposed Rule
Title: Revisions to California State Implementation Plan: South Coast Air Quality Management District; San Joaquin Valley Unified Air Pollution Control District
Posted Date: 2012-06-21T04:00Z

[Federal Register Volume 77, Number 120 (Thursday, June 21, 2012)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 37359-37361]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2012-15196]

=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

40 CFR Part 52

[EPA-R09-OAR-2012-0252; FRL-9687-4]

Revisions to the California State Implementation Plan, South 
Coast Air Quality Management District; 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 South Coast Air 
Quality Management District (SCAQMD) and the San Joaquin Valley Unified 
Air Pollution Control District (SJVUAPCD) portions of the California 
State Implementation Plan (SIP). These revisions concern volatile 
organic compound (VOC) emissions from chipping and grinding activities, 
and composting 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.

DATE: Any comments must arrive by July 23, 2012.

ADDRESSES: Submit comments, identified by docket number EPA-R09-OAR-
2012-0252, 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.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Nancy Levin, EPA Region IX, (415) 942-
3848, levin.nancy@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 rules and rule revision?
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 agencies and submitted by the 
California Air Resources Board.

[[Page 37360]]

                                            Table 1--Submitted Rules
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                                    Adopted or
           Local agency                Rule No.              Rule title               amended        Submitted
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
SCAQMD...........................           1133.1  Chipping and Grinding                 7-8-11        11-18-11
                                                     Activities.
SCAQMD...........................           1133.3  Emission Reductions from              7-8-11        11-18-11
                                                     Greenwaste Composting
                                                     Operations.
SJVUAPCD.........................           4566    Organic Material Composting          8-18-11        11-18-11
                                                     Operations.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    On December 22, 2011, EPA determined that the submittal for SCAQMD 
and SJVUAPCD met the completeness criteria in 40 CFR part 51 Appendix 
V, which must be met before formal EPA review. On January 10, 2012, EPA 
partially approved and partially disapproved the RACT SIP submitted by 
California on June 18, 2009, for the SJV extreme ozone nonattainment 
area (2009 RACT SIP), based in part on our conclusion that the State 
had not fully satisfied CAA section 182 RACT requirements for certain 
source categories, including organic material composting operations. 
See 77 FR 1417 (January 10, 2012). At that time, EPA had not yet made a 
RACT determination for this source category. Final approval of Rule 
4566 would satisfy California's obligation to implement RACT under CAA 
section 182 for this source category for the 1-hour ozone and 1997 8-
hour ozone NAAQS.

B. Are there other versions of these rules?

    There are no previous versions of SCAQMD Rule 1133.3 and SJVUAPCD 
Rule 4456 in the SIP. We approved an earlier version of SCAQMD Rule 
1133.1 into the SIP on July 21, 2004 (69 FR 43518).

C. What is the purpose of the submitted rules and 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 purpose of SCAQMD 
Rule 1133.1 is to prevent inadvertent decomposition associated with 
chipping and grinding activities, including stockpile operations. This 
rule applies to operators of chipping and grinding activities that 
produce materials other than active or finished compost, unless 
otherwise exempted. The purpose of SCAQMD Rule 1133.3 is to reduce 
fugitive emissions of VOCs and ammonia occurring during greenwaste 
composting operations. This rule applies to the operators of all new 
and existing greenwaste composting operations that produce active or 
finished compost from greenwaste by itself or greenwaste in combination 
with manure or foodwaste, unless otherwise exempted. The purpose of 
SJVUAPCD Rule 4566 is to limit emissions of VOC from composting 
operations, and it applies to composting facilities that compost and/or 
stockpile organic material.
    EPA's technical support documents (TSD) 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 
sections 182(a)(2) and (b)(2)), and must not relax existing 
requirements (see sections 110(l) and 193). The SCAQMD and SJVUAPCD 
regulate ozone nonattainment areas (see 40 CFR part 81) and the 
proposed regulations should be sufficiently stringent to implement 
RACT-level controls.
    Guidance and policy documents that we use to evaluate 
enforceability and RACT requirements consistently include the 
following:
    1. ``Issues Relating to VOC Regulation Cutpoints, Deficiencies, and 
Deviations,'' EPA, May 25, 1988 (the Bluebook).
    2. ``Guidance Document for Correcting Common VOC & Other Rule 
Deficiencies,'' EPA Region 9, August 21, 2001 (the Little Bluebook).
    3. Portions of the proposed post-1987 ozone and carbon monoxide 
policy that concern RACT, 52 FR 45044, November 24, 1987.
    4. ``State Implementation Plans, General Preamble for the 
Implementation of Title I of the Clean Air Amendments of 1990,'' 57 FR 
13498, April 16, 1992.
    5. ``Preamble, Final Rule To Implement the 8-Hour Ozone National 
Ambient Air Quality Standard,'' 70 FR 71612, November 29, 2005.
    6. ``Reasonably Available Control Technology (RACT) Demonstration 
for Ozone State Implementation Plans (SIP)'' SJVUAPCD, April 16, 2009.
    7. Letter from William T. Hartnett to Regional Air Division 
Directors, ``RACT Qs & As--Reasonable Available Control Technology 
(RACT): Questions and Answers,'' EPA, 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 
rules' applicability and requirements are clearly stated. They contain 
test methods to demonstrate compliance. Alternative methods to meet 
compliance must be approved by EPA. Based on our analysis, EPA believes 
the proposed regulations are sufficiently stringent to implement RACT-
level controls. Given the lack of regulatory history regarding 
greenwaste composting, there is not sufficient precedent to clearly 
define additional RACT compost controls at this time. There are no 
prior versions of SCAQMD Rule 1133.3 and SJVUAPCD Rule 4566 in the SIP. 
Their inclusion would strengthen the SIP. There is a prior version of 
SCAQMD Rule 1133.1 in the SIP (69 FR 43518) July 21, 2004. Overall, the 
amended rule appears to be more stringent than the prior version. The 
TSDs have more information on our evaluation.

C. EPA Recommendations to Further Improve the Rules

    We recommend that the compost emission factors be reviewed and 
adjusted as more data become available. The estimated greenwaste 
compost emission factors used for SCAQMD Rule 1133.3 and SJVUAPCD Rule 
4566 rule are based on the average VOC/ton of between four and six 
facilities in California that had a relatively wide range of results 
(0.85-10.03 lbs-VOC/ton).\1\ We further recommend that the local 
agencies develop and incorporate food waste emission factors to more 
accurately characterize the VOC emissions from greenwaste composting 
that contains food material. SJVUAPCD Rule 4566 sections 5.2.1.2, 
5.2.2.2, and

[[Page 37361]]

5.2.3 allow APCO- and EPA-approved alternative mitigation measures that 
demonstrate at least 19%, 60%, or 80% reduction in VOC. However, these 
sections do not specify the test methods that will be used to 
demonstrate these VOC control efficiencies. EPA recommends that the 
next revision to SJVUAPCD Rule 4566 include the appropriate test 
methods and test protocol guidelines to determine percent VOC reduction 
(See, for example, South Coast Rule 1133.3). Finally, we recommend 
that, in order to determine compliance with the 5,000 tons per year 
foodwaste threshold and other percentage requirements, the SCAQMD add 
daily recordkeeping requirements for each type of raw material 
received, including the dates and amounts of the following: Foodwaste 
received, greenwaste received, manure received, and their monthly 
totals.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ Compost VOC Emission Factors, September 15, 2010. http://valleyair.org/Workshops/postings/2010/9-22-10-rule4566/SJVAPCD%20Compost%20VOC%20EF%20Report%209-15-10.pdf (SJVUACPD 
Workshop September 22, 2010).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The TSDs describe additional rule revisions that we recommend for 
the next time the local agencies modify the rules but are not currently 
the basis for rule disapproval.

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 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, Intergovernmental 
relations, Ozone, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements, Volatile 
organic compounds.

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

    Dated: May 25, 2012.
Jared Blumenfeld,
Regional Administrator, Region IX.
[FR Doc. 2012-15196 Filed 6-20-12; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P