Document ID: EPA-R09-OAR-2018-0104-0001
Agency: epa
Document Type: Proposed Rule
Title: Air Quality State Implementation Plans; Approvals and Promulgations: California; Yolo-Solano Air Quality Management District
Posted Date: 2018-05-03T04:00Z

[Federal Register Volume 83, Number 86 (Thursday, May 3, 2018)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 19495-19497]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2018-09213]

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

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

40 CFR Part 52

[EPA-R09-OAR-2018-0104; FRL-9977-33-Region 9]

Approval of California Air Plan Revisions, Yolo-Solano Air 
Quality Management District

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Proposed rule.

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

SUMMARY: The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is proposing to 
approve a revision to the Yolo-Solano Air Quality Management District 
(YSAQMD or ``District'') portion of the California State Implementation 
Plan (SIP). This revision concerns emissions of volatile organic 
compounds (VOCs) from architectural coatings. 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: Any comments must arrive by June 4, 2018.

ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, identified by Docket ID No. EPA-R09-
OAR-2018-0104 at http://www.regulations.gov, or via email to Arnold 
Lazarus, at [email protected]. For comments submitted at 
Regulations.gov, follow the online instructions for submitting 
comments. Once submitted, comments cannot be removed or edited from 
Regulations.gov. For either manner of submission, 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 http://www2.epa.gov/dockets/commenting-epa-dockets.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Arnold Lazarus, EPA Region IX, (415) 
972 3024, [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. EPA Recommendations To Further Improve the Rule
    D. 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 date 
that the revision was adopted by the YSAQMD and the date that it was 
submitted by the California Air Resources Board (CARB) to the EPA.

[[Page 19496]]

                                             Table 1--Submitted Rule
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
             Local agency                  Rule No.            Rule title             Revised        Submitted
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
YSAQMD................................            2.14  Architectural Coatings..      10/12/2016      01/24/2017
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    On April 17, 2017, the EPA determined that the submittal for YSAQMD 
Rule 2.14 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?

    On January 2, 2004 (69 FR 34), the EPA finalized a limited approval 
and limited disapproval of a previous submission of Rule 2.14 with no 
sanctions because the part of the rule that was disapproved, ``Appendix 
A,'' expired by its own terms on January 1, 2005. For additional 
information, please see the technical support document (TSD) for 
today's rulemaking.

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

    VOCs contribute to the production of ground-level ozone, smog and 
particulate matter, 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.
    YSAQMD Rule 2.14 controls VOC emissions from architectural coatings 
by establishing VOC limits on architectural coatings supplied, sold, 
offered for sale, manufactured, blended, or repackaged for use within 
the YSAQMD, as well as architectural coatings applied or solicited for 
application within the District. The revisions to Rule 2.14 include the 
elimination of the averaging provision, which was the basis for the 
EPA's 2004 limited disapproval of a prior version of this rule, and the 
tightening of many of the Rule's VOC limits. The TSD has more 
information about this rule.

II. The EPA's Evaluation and Action

A. How is the EPA evaluating the rule?

    SIP rules 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 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, and each major source of VOCs in 
ozone nonattainment areas classified as moderate or above (see CAA 
section 182(b)(2)). The YSAQMD regulates an ozone nonattainment area 
classified as severe nonattainment for the 2008 and the 1997 8-hour 
ozone National Ambient Air Quality Standards (40 CFR 81.305).
    Because there is no relevant EPA CTG document and because there are 
no major architectural coating sources within the District, 
architectural coatings are not subject to RACT requirements. However, 
architectural coatings are subject to other VOC content limits and 
control measures described in the TSD.
    Guidance and policy documents that we used to evaluate the 
enforceability, revision/relaxation, and stringency requirements for 
this rule 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 and 57 FR 18070, April 28, 1992).
    2. ``Issues Relating to VOC Regulation Cutpoints, Deficiencies, and 
Deviations'' (``the Bluebook,'' U.S. EPA, May 25, 1988; revised January 
11, 1990).
    3. ``Guidance Document for Correcting Common VOC & Other Rule 
Deficiencies'' (``the Little Bluebook,'' EPA Region 9, August 21, 
2001).
    4. National Volatile Organic Compound Emission Standards for 
Architectural Coatings, 40 CFR 59, Subpart D.
    5. CARB ``Suggested Control Measure for Architectural Coatings,'' 
Approved 2007.
    6. YSAQMD Rule 2.14, ``Architectural Coatings,'' EPA Limited 
Approval and Limited Disapproval on January 2, 2004 (69 FR 34).

B. Does the rule meet the evaluation criteria?

    This rule is consistent with CAA requirements and relevant guidance 
regarding enforceability, stringency, and SIP revisions. The TSD has 
more information on our evaluation.

C. EPA Recommendations To Further Improve the Rule

    The TSD describes additional rule revisions that we recommend for 
the next time the local agency modifies the rule.

D. Public Comment and Proposed Action

    As authorized in section 110(k)(3) of the Act, 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 June 4, 2018. If we take final action to approve the submitted 
rule, our final action will incorporate this rule into the federally 
enforceable 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 YSAQMD rule described in Table 1 of this preamble. The 
EPA has made, and will continue to make, these materials available 
through 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:

[[Page 19497]]

     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);
     Is not an Executive Order 13771 (82 FR 9339, February 2, 
2017) regulatory action because SIP approvals are exempted under 
Executive Order 12866;
     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 the 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, 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.

    Dated: April 18, 2018.
Alexis Strauss,
Acting Regional Administrator, Region IX.
[FR Doc. 2018-09213 Filed 5-2-18; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P