Document ID: EPA-R09-OAR-2022-0837-0001
Agency: epa
Document Type: Proposed Rule
Title: Air Quality State Implementation Plans; Approvals and Promulgations: California; Ventura County Air Pollution Control District
Posted Date: 2022-11-15T05:00Z

[Federal Register Volume 87, Number 219 (Tuesday, November 15, 2022)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 68410-68413]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2022-24613]

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

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

40 CFR Part 52

[EPA-R09-OAR-2022-0837; FRL-10294-01-R9]

Air Plan Approval; California; Ventura County Air Pollution 
Control District

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Proposed rule.

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

[[Page 68411]]

SUMMARY: The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is proposing to 
approve a revision to the Ventura County Air Pollution Control District 
(VCAPCD) portion of the California State Implementation Plan (SIP). 
This revision concerns emissions of volatile organic compounds (VOCs) 
from architectural coating operations. We are proposing to approve a 
local rule to regulate 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: Comments must be received on or before December 15, 2022.

ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, identified by Docket ID No. EPA-R09-
OAR-2022-0837 at https://www.regulations.gov. For comments submitted at 
Regulations.gov, follow the online instructions for submitting 
comments. Once submitted, comments cannot be edited or removed from 
Regulations.gov. The EPA may publish any comment received to its public 
docket. Do not submit electronically any information you consider to be 
Confidential Business Information (CBI) or other information whose 
disclosure is restricted by statute. Multimedia submissions (audio, 
video, etc.) must be accompanied by a written comment. The written 
comment is considered the official comment and should include 
discussion of all points you wish to make. The EPA will generally not 
consider comments or comment contents located outside of the primary 
submission (i.e., on the web, cloud, or other file sharing system). For 
additional submission methods, please contact the person identified in 
the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section. For the full EPA public 
comment policy, information about CBI or multimedia submissions, and 
general guidance on making effective comments, please visit https://www.epa.gov/dockets/commenting-epa-dockets. If you need assistance in a 
language other than English or if you are a person with disabilities 
who needs a reasonable accommodation at no cost to you, please contact 
the person identified in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Arnold Lazarus, EPA Region IX, 75 
Hawthorne St., San Francisco, CA 94105. By phone: (415) 972-3204 or by 
email at [email protected].

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Throughout this document, ``we,'' ``us'' and 
``our'' refer to the 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. The EPA's Evaluation and Action
    A. How is the EPA evaluating the rule?
    B. Does the rule meet the evaluation criteria?
    C. Public comment and proposed action
III. Incorporation by Reference
IV. 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 dates 
that it was adopted by the local air agency and submitted by the 
California Air Resources Board (CARB).

                                             Table 1--Submitted Rule
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                                     Adopted/
             Local agency                  Rule No.            Rule title            amended/        Submitted
                                                                                      revised
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
VCAPCD................................            74.2  Architectural Coatings..      11/10/2020       7/26/2021
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    On January 26, 2022, the submittal for VCAPCD Rule 74.2 was deemed 
complete by operation of law.

B. Are there other versions of this rule?

    We approved an earlier version of Rule 74.2 into the SIP on July 6, 
2011 (76 FR 39303). The VCAPCD adopted revisions to Rule 74.2 on 
November 10, 2020. CARB submitted the amended rule to the EPA on July 
26, 2021, as an attachment to a letter of the same date. If we take 
final action to approve the November 10, 2020 version of Rule 74.2, it 
will replace the previously-approved version of the rule in the VCAPCD 
portion of the applicable California SIP.

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

    Emissions of VOCs contribute to the production of ground-level 
ozone, smog and particulate matter (PM), which harm human health and 
the environment. Section 110(a) of the CAA requires states to submit 
regulations that control VOC emissions. Architectural coatings are 
coatings that are applied to stationary structures and their 
accessories. They include house paints, stains, industrial maintenance 
coatings, traffic coatings, and many other products. VOCs are emitted 
from the coatings during application and curing, and from the 
associated solvents used for thinning and clean-up.
    VCAPCD Rule 74.2 regulates VOC emissions from architectural 
coatings. The rule was updated to conform to CARB's Suggested Control 
Measures (SCM) for Architectural Coatings, May 2019. More specifically, 
to conform with CARB's 2019 update of the SCM for architectural 
coatings, VCAPCD added new categories of coatings, tightened VOC limits 
for certain other categories of coatings, added new limits for 
colorants, updated test methods, and clarified and tightened certain 
definitions and administrative requirements. VCAPCD estimates that 
aligning Rule 74.2 with the CARB 2019 SCM for architectural coatings 
will reduce VOC emissions by 22.12 tons per year (i.e., approximately 
0.06 tons per day (tpd)) in Ventura County.\1\ In addition, the Ventura 
County 2016 Air Quality Management Plan includes revisions to Rule 74.2 
as one of the control measures in the plan.\2\ While not needed to meet 
CAA requirements for the 2008 ozone national ambient air quality 
standard (NAAQS), revisions to Rule 74.2 are intended to provide 
emissions reductions for the 2015 ozone NAAQS and to fulfill State air 
quality requirements.\3\ The EPA's technical support document (TSD) has 
more information about this rule.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ VCAPCD, Staff Report ``Proposed Amendments to Rule 74.2, 
Architectural Coatings,'' August 2020, page 3.
    \2\ VCAPCD, Final 2016 Ventura County Air Quality Management 
Plan, February 14, 2017, pp. 33-35.
    \3\ 84 FR 70109, at 70117 (December 20, 2019).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

II. The EPA's Evaluation and Action

A. How is the EPA evaluating the rule?

    Rules in the SIP must be enforceable (see CAA section 110(a)(2)), 
must not interfere with applicable requirements concerning attainment 
and reasonable further progress or other CAA requirements (see CAA 
section 110(l)), and must not modify certain SIP control requirements 
in nonattainment areas without ensuring equivalent or greater

[[Page 68412]]

emissions reductions (see CAA section 193).
    Generally, SIP rules 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 of 
VOCs in ozone nonattainment areas classified as Moderate or above (see 
CAA section 182(b)(2)). The VCAPCD regulates an ozone nonattainment 
area classified as Serious nonattainment for the 2008 and 2015 8-hour 
ozone National Ambient Air Quality Standards (40 CFR 81.305). Because 
there is no relevant EPA CTG document for architectural coatings and 
because there are no major architectural coating sources within Ventura 
County, architectural coatings are not subject to RACT requirements. 
However, as a nonattainment area for ozone, Ventura County is subject 
to the requirement to implement all reasonably available control 
measures (RACM) as needed to attain the 2008 and 2015 ozone NAAQS by 
the applicable attainment dates.
    Guidance and policy documents that we used to evaluate 
enforceability, revision/relaxation and rule stringency requirements 
for the applicable criteria pollutants include the following:
    1. ``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).
    2. ``Issues Relating to VOC Regulation Cutpoints, Deficiencies, and 
Deviations,'' EPA, May 25, 1988 (the Bluebook, revised January 11, 
1990).
    3. ``Guidance Document for Correcting Common VOC & Other Rule 
Deficiencies,'' EPA Region 9, August 21, 2001 (the Little Bluebook).
    4. National Volatile Organic Compound Emission Standards for 
Architectural Coatings, 40 CFR 59, Subpart D.
    5. California Air Resources Board (CARB) Suggested Control Measure 
for Architectural Coatings, May 2019.

B. Does the rule meet the evaluation criteria?

    We have evaluated the enforceability of submitted VCAPCD Rule 74.2 
with respect to applicability and exemptions; standard of conduct and 
compliance dates; sunset provisions; discretionary provisions; and test 
methods, recordkeeping and reporting, and have concluded that the rule 
continues to be enforceable for the purposes of CAA section 
110(a)(2)(A).
    We have also determined that the submitted rule implements RACM-
level controls for this particular area source because the VOC content 
limits are more stringent than the corresponding federal requirements 
in Table 1 to Subpart D of 40 CFR part 59, ``Content Limits for 
Architectural Coatings,'' and are consistent with CARB's 2019 SCM.
    Third, we have found that, because the submitted rule tightens VOC 
content limits for certain coating categories and restricts certain 
existing exemptions, it would not interfere with any applicable 
requirement concerning attainment or reasonable further progress (RFP) 
or any other requirement of the CAA, and as such, may be approved under 
CAA sections 110(l) and 193. The TSD has more information on our 
evaluation.

C. Public Comment and Proposed Action

    As authorized in section 110(k)(3) of the Act, and for the reasons 
given above, the EPA proposes to fully approve the submitted rule 
because it fulfills all relevant requirements. We will accept comments 
from the public on this proposal until December 15, 2022. If finalized 
as proposed, this action would incorporate the submitted architectural 
coatings rule into the federally enforceable SIP, and the submitted 
rule would replace the corresponding existing SIP version of the rule 
in the VCAPCD portion of the California SIP.

III. Incorporation by Reference

    In this rule, the EPA is proposing to include in a final EPA rule 
regulatory text that includes incorporation by reference. In accordance 
with requirements of 1 CFR 51.5, the EPA is proposing to incorporate by 
reference the November 10, 2020 version of VCAPCD Rule 74.2, listed in 
Table 1 of this preamble, which regulates emissions of VOCs from 
architectural coating operations. The EPA has made, and will continue 
to make, these materials available through https://www.regulations.gov 
and at the EPA Region IX Office (please contact the person identified 
in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section of this preamble for 
more information).

IV. 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, the 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 Orders 
12866 (58 FR 51735, October 4, 1993) and 13563 (76 FR 3821, January 21, 
2011);
     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); and
     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.
    In addition, the state did not evaluate environmental justice 
considerations as part of its SIP submittal. There is no information in 
the record inconsistent with the stated goals of Executive Order 12898 
(59 FR 7629, February 16, 1994) of achieving environmental justice for 
people of color, low-income populations, and indigenous peoples.
    Lastly, the SIP is not approved to apply on any Indian reservation 
land or in any other area where the EPA or an Indian tribe has 
demonstrated that a tribe has jurisdiction. In those areas of Indian 
country, the rule does not have tribal implications and will not impose 
substantial direct costs on tribal governments or preempt tribal law as 
specified by Executive Order 13175 (65 FR 67249, November 9, 2000).

List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52

    Environmental protection, Air pollution control, Incorporation by 
reference, Intergovernmental relations, Ozone, Particulate matter, 
Reporting and recordkeeping requirements, Volatile organic compounds.

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

[[Page 68413]]

    Dated: November 4, 2022.
Martha Guzman Aceves,
Regional Administrator, Region IX.
[FR Doc. 2022-24613 Filed 11-14-22; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P