Document ID: EPA-R09-OAR-2019-0423-0001
Agency: epa
Document Type: Proposed Rule
Title: Air Quality State Implementation Plans; Approvals and Promulgations: Arizona; Maricopa County
Posted Date: 2020-01-28T05:00Z

[Federal Register Volume 85, Number 18 (Tuesday, January 28, 2020)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 4928-4932]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2020-01466]

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

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

40 CFR Part 52

[EPA-R09-OAR-2019-0423; FRL-10004-66-Region 9]

Air Plan Conditional Approval; Arizona; Maricopa County

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Proposed rule.

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

SUMMARY: The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is proposing to 
conditionally approve revisions to the Maricopa County Air Quality 
Department (MCAQD or the ``County'') portion of the Arizona State 
Implementation Plan (SIP). These revisions concern emissions of 
volatile organic compounds (VOCs) from surface coating operations. We 
are proposing to conditionally approve a local rule to regulate these 
emission sources under the Clean Air Act (CAA or the ``Act'') and to 
conditionally approve the County's demonstration regarding Reasonably 
Available Control Technology requirements for the 2008 8-hour ozone 
National Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS) in the Phoenix-Mesa 
ozone nonattainment area, with respect to surface coating operations. 
We are taking comments on this proposal and plan to follow with a final 
action.

DATES: Any comments must arrive by February 27, 2020.

ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, identified by Docket ID No. EPA-R09-
OAR-2019-0423 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.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Arnold Lazarus, EPA Region IX, 75 
Hawthorne St., San Francisco, CA 94105. By phone: (415) 972-3024 or by 
email at lazarus.arnold@epa.gov.

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

Table of Contents

I. The State's Submittal
    A. What did the State submit?
    B. Are there other versions of these SIP revisions?
    C. What is the purpose of the SIP revisions?
II. The EPA's Evaluation and Action
    A. How is the EPA evaluating the SIP revisions?
    B. Do the SIP revisions meet the evaluation criteria?
    C. What are the deficiencies?
    D. What are the commitments to remedy the deficiencies?
    E. The EPA's Recommendations To Further Improve the SIP 
Revisions
    F. Public Comment and Proposed Action
III. Incorporation by Reference
IV. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews

I. The State's Submittal

A. What did the State submit?

    Table 1 lists the documents addressed by this proposal with the 
dates that they were adopted by the local air agency and submitted by 
the Arizona Department of Environmental Quality (ADEQ or the 
``State'').

                                          Table 1--Submitted Documents
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
              Local agency                               Document                     Revised        Submitted
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
MCAQD..................................  Analysis of Reasonably Available             06/16/2017      06/22/2017
                                          Control Technology for the 2008 8-Hour
                                          Ozone National Ambient Air Quality
                                          Standard (NAAQS) State Implementation
                                          Plan (RACT SIP).
MCAQD..................................  Rule 336: Surface Coating Operations...      11/02/2016      06/22/2017
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    On December 22, 2017, the submittal containing the documents listed 
in Table 1 was deemed by operation of law to meet the completeness 
criteria in 40 CFR part 51 Appendix V, which must be met before formal 
EPA review. In addition to these SIP submittals, the County and the 
ADEQ transmitted a

[[Page 4929]]

commitment letter to EPA 1 2 to adopt and submit specific 
enforceable measures within a year of our final action that would 
remedy the deficiencies identified in this notice and further described 
in the associated TSD for this action.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ Letter dated January 28, 2019, from Philip A. McNeely, 
Director, Maricopa County Air Control Department, to Misael Cabrera, 
Director, Arizona Department of Environmental Quality.
    \2\ Letter dated May 17, 2019, from Misael Cabrera, Director, 
Arizona Department of Environmental Quality, to Michael Stoker, 
Region Administrator, EPA, Region IX.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

B. Are there other versions of these SIP revisions?

    We approved an earlier version of Rule 336 listed in Table 1 into 
the SIP on September 20, 1999 (64 FR 50759). There is no previously 
approved version of the RACT SIP for the 2008 8-hour ozone standard in 
the MCAQD portion of the Arizona SIP. The ADEQ previously submitted the 
documents in Table 1 in a SIP revision on December 19, 2016, along with 
the County's RACT SIP. However, this submittal did not include 
documentation that showed the entirety of the County's SIP revision had 
met the public notice requirements required for completeness under 40 
CFR part 51 Appendix V. The County's June 22, 2017 submittal was 
provided to address this issue, and the State withdrew the December 19, 
2016 submittal on May 17, 2019.

C. What is the purpose of the SIP revisions?

    Emissions of VOCs contribute to ground-level ozone, or 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. Section 182(b)(2) requires that SIPs for ozone 
nonattainment areas classified as Moderate or above implement RACT for 
any source covered by a Control Techniques Guideline (CTG) document and 
for any major sources of VOCs. The MCAQD is subject to this requirement 
as it regulates a portion of the Phoenix-Mesa ozone nonattainment area, 
which is classified as Moderate for the 2008 8-hour ozone NAAQS (40 CFR 
81.303). The rule and RACT SIP in Table 1 were submitted to control VOC 
emissions from CTG VOC source categories of surface coating operations.
    Section III.D of the preamble to the EPA's final rule to implement 
the 2008 ozone NAAQS (80 FR 12264, March 6, 2015) discusses RACT 
requirements. It states in part that RACT SIPs must contain adopted 
RACT regulations; certifications where appropriate that existing 
provisions are RACT; and/or negative declarations that no sources in 
the nonattainment area are covered by a specific CTG.\3\ It also 
provides that states must submit appropriate supporting information for 
their RACT submissions as described in the EPA's implementation rule 
for the 1997 ozone NAAQS. See Id. and 70 FR 71612, 71652 (November 29, 
2005). The submitted RACT SIP and negative declarations provide MCAQD's 
analyses of its compliance with the CAA section 182 RACT requirements 
for the 2008 8-hour ozone NAAQS. The EPA's technical support document 
(TSD) has more information about the submitted rules and RACT SIP.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \3\ (80 FR 12278), March 6, 2015.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

II. The EPA's Evaluation and Action

A. How is the EPA evaluating these SIP revisions?

    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 emissions 
reductions (see CAA section 193).
    Generally, SIP rules must require RACT for each category of sources 
covered by a 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 MCAQD regulates a portion of the Phoenix-Mesa ozone 
nonattainment area, which is classified as Moderate for the 2008 8-hr 
ozone NAAQS. 40 CFR 81.303. Therefore, these rules must implement RACT.
    We are also evaluating the County's RACT SIP with respect to the 
source categories covered by the CTGs listed in numbers four through 
eleven below. Those CTG sources are regulated by Rule 336. Thus, our 
evaluation of the approvability of the MCAQD RACT SIP with respect to 
those CTG VOC source categories is dependent on the approvability of 
Rule 336. 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 ``Control of Volatile Organic Emissions from Existing Stationary 
Sources--Volume II: Surface Coating of Cans, Coils, Paper, Fabrics, 
Automobiles, and Light-Duty Trucks,'' EPA-450/2-77-008, May 1977.
    5. ``Control of Volatile Organic Emissions from Existing Stationary 
Sources--Volume III: Surface Coating of Metal Furniture,'' EPA-450/2-
77-032, December 1977.
    6. ``Control of Volatile Organic Emissions from Existing Stationary 
Sources--Volume IV: Surface Coating of Large Appliances,'' EPA-450/2-
77-034, December 1977.
    7. ``Control of Volatile Organic Emissions from Existing Stationary 
Sources--Volume VI: Surface Coating of Miscellaneous Metal Parts and 
Products,'' EPA-450/2-78-15, June 1978.
    8. ``Control Techniques Guidelines for Miscellaneous Metal and 
Plastic Parts Coatings,'' EPA-453/R-08-003, September 2008.
    9. ``Control Techniques Guidelines for Metal Furniture Coatings,'' 
EPA-453/R-07-005 September 2007.
    10. ``Control Techniques Guidelines for Paper, Film, and Foil 
Coatings,'' EPA-453/R-07-003, September 2007.
    11. ``Control Techniques Guidelines for Large Appliance Coatings,'' 
(EPA 453/R-07-004, September 2007)

B. Do the SIP revisions meet the evaluation criteria?

    Rule 336 applies to sources of VOC emissions from surface coating 
operations in the Phoenix-Mesa nonattainment area. Rule 336 is as 
stringent as the applicable CTGs, and has requirements for surface 
coating operations that are generally consistent with other local air 
district rules for these source categories and are largely consistent 
with the applicable CAA requirements. However, as identified below, the 
rule contains deficiencies that preclude full approval. In a letter 
dated January 28, 2019 and modified on December 5, 2019 (the 
``commitment letter''), the County committed to revise those provisions 
in accordance with EPA guidance, and submit the revised rule within 
eleven months of a

[[Page 4930]]

conditional approval.\4\ On February 25, 2019, the ADEQ provided their 
own commitment to submit the County's revised rule to the EPA within 
one month after the County's action and request for SIP revision.\5\ 
Because the commitments by the County would remedy the identified rule 
deficiencies, we propose to conditionally approve Rule 336 and the RACT 
SIP with respect to VOC sources covered by Rule 336. Summaries of the 
specific rule deficiencies and the County's commitments to address 
those deficiencies are included in the following sections. The EPA's 
TSD for Rule 336 provides further details on our evaluation for this 
conditional approval.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \4\ Letter dated January 28, 2019, from Philip A. McNeely, 
Director, Maricopa County Air Control Department, to Misael Cabrera, 
Director, Arizona Department of Environmental Quality, and letter 
dated December 5, 2019, from Philip A. McNeely to Doris Lo, Manager, 
Rules Office, Air and Radiation Division, U.S. EPA Region IX.
    \5\ Letter dated May 17, 2019, from Misael Cabrera, Director, 
Arizona Department of Environmental Quality, to Michael Stoker, 
Region Administrator, EPA, Region IX.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

C. What are the rule deficiencies?

    The following provisions of Rule 336 do not fully satisfy the 
requirements of section 110 and part D of title I of the Act and 
prevents full approval of Rule 336.
    1. Section 300, Standards, Table 336-2 contains VOC content limits 
for the categories of End Sealing Compound: Food or Beverage, End 
Sealing Compound: Non Food, Sheet Basecoat (Interior and Exterior) and 
Overvarnish, Two Piece Can Interior Body Spray, Three Piece Can 
Interior Body Spray, Two Piece Can Exterior Base Coat Overvarnish, and 
Two Piece Can Exterior End (Spray or Roll Coat), which comply with the 
1977 CTG, ``EPA-450/2-77-008, Control of Volatile Organic Emissions 
from Existing Stationary Sources--Volume II: Surface Coating of Cans, 
Coils, Paper, Fabrics Automobiles and Light Duty Trucks,'' May 1977, 
but are generally significantly higher than the same limits in 
currently SIP-approved rules such as SCAQMD Rule 1125, Sacramento AQMD 
Rule 452, BAAQMD Rule 8-11, and SJVUAPCD Rule 4604. Because the lower 
limits have been achieved in other areas for some time, the limits in 
Rule 336 do not demonstrate current RACT.
    2. Section 103.2 exempts Extreme Performance Coatings from the VOC 
limits when used on:
    (a) Internal combustion engines components that are normally above 
250 degrees Fahrenheit during use or
    (b) items that are used at temperatures above 250 degrees 
Fahrenheit that are included under various NAICS codes for 
telecommunications equipment and are electronic products in space 
vehicles and/or are communications equipment.
    The 2008 Miscellaneous Metal and Plastic Parts (MMPP), 2007 Metal 
Furniture, and 2007 Large Appliance CTGs do not exempt Extreme 
Performance Coatings. In addition, Rule 336, Tables 336-1, 336-3, 336-5 
contain the appropriate VOC content limits for this category and are 
consistent with the CTGs.
    3. Section 103.5.e exempts Tactical Military-Equipment coatings 
that are in a District-approved permit based on a demonstration that no 
compliant substitute exists. The rule does not define ``Tactical 
Military-Equipment'' and the 2008 MMPP CTG does not include this 
exemption.
    4. Rule 336 is missing the VOC limits and categories for ``Motor 
Vehicle Materials'' as is found in Table 6 Motor Vehicle Materials VOC 
Content Limits of the MMPP CTG. Rule 336 Table 336-4 ``Coating Limits 
for Business Machines'' is missing the VOC limits and categories for 
Automotive/Transportation Coatings as is found in the MMPP CTG Table 4 
for ``Automotive/Transportation and Business Machine Plastic Parts VOC 
Content Limits.'' The missing categories also do not appear in Maricopa 
Rule 345 Vehicle and Mobile Equipment Coating.
    5. Section 300, Standards, Table 336-1 contains VOC limits for the 
category ``Other Metal Parts and Products: Includes Non-Adhesive 
Coating, Adhesive, Adhesive Primer, Beaded Sealant, and Caulking'' 
which does not comply with the 2008 CTG, ``EPA-453/R-08-003, Control 
Techniques Guidelines for Miscellaneous Metal and Plastic Parts 
Coatings'' (MMPP) September 2008. Because the limits for General One 
Component and General Multi Component Coatings are lower in the CTG, 
the limits in Rule 336 do not meet the presumptive RACT standard 
established in the CTG.
    6. Section 300, Standards Table 336-3 contains VOC limits for 
``Flexible Plastic Parts and Products'' as well as ``Plastic Parts and 
Products That Are Not Defined as Flexible.'' These categories are not 
in the 2008 MMPP CTG and contain higher VOC limits than some of the 
existing categories in the CTG.

D. What are the commitments to remedy the deficiencies?

    The County's commitment letter included the following specific and 
enforceable commitments, outlined below, to address the above 
deficiencies for Rule 336.
    1. The MCAQD commits to lower the VOC limits for the following can 
coating materials: End sealing compound, sheet basecoat (interior and 
exterior) and overvarnish, two-piece can interior body spray, three-
piece can interior body spray, two-piece can exterior base coat and 
overvarnish, and two-piece can exterior end spray or roll coat. The 
lower emission limits will be consistent with current RACT, based on a 
comparison of RACT rules in other nonattainment areas.
    Proposed VOC Limits for Coating Cans and Coils in grams VOC per 
liter and pounds VOC per gallon:

------------------------------------------------------------------------
            Coating category                  g VOC/l       lb VOC/gal
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Can Coating:
    Can Printing Ink....................             300             2.5
    End Sealing Compound................              20             0.2
    Sheet Basecoat (Exterior and                     250             2.1
     Interior) and Overvarnish..........
    Three-Piece Can Side-Seam Spray.....             660             5.5
    Two and Three-Piece Can Interior                 440             3.7
     Body Spray.........................
    Two-Piece Can Exterior (Basecoat and             250             2.1
     Overvarnish).......................
    Two-Piece Can Exterior End (Spray or             250             2.1
     Roll Coat).........................
    Coil Coating........................             310             2.6
    Strippable Booth Coating (applies to             240             2.0
     both can and coil coating
     categories)........................
------------------------------------------------------------------------

[[Page 4931]]

    2. The MCAQD commits to evaluate the exemption for extreme 
performance coatings. Following this evaluation, the MCAQD will either 
remove or constrain the exemption. If a narrower exemption for extreme 
performance coatings is included in the revised rule, the MCAQD will 
provide documentation justifying the exemption is RACT.
    3. The MCAQD commits to evaluate the exemption for tactical 
military equipment coatings. Following this evaluation, the MCAQD will 
either remove the exemption or require EPA approval of non-compliant 
military specification coatings.
    4. The MCAQD commits to evaluate the CTG categories for ``Motor 
Vehicle Materials'' and ``Automotive/Transportation Coatings.'' 
Following the evaluation of each category, the MCAQD will either submit 
a negative declaration for the category or incorporate RACT emission 
limits for the category.
    5. The MCAQD commits to remove adhesives and adhesive primers from 
the ``Other Metal Parts and Products'' coating category in Table 336-1 
(VOC Limits for Miscellaneous Metal Part and Product Coatings). The 
MCAQD also commits to lower the VOC limit for the ``Other Metal Parts 
and Products'' coating category to 340 grams VOC per liter (g/L) for 
air dried coatings and 280 g/L for baked coatings.
    6. The MCAQD commits to remove the following coating categories 
from Table 336-3 (VOC Limits for Miscellaneous Plastic Part and Product 
Coatings):
     Flexible Plastic Parts and Products (Basecoat, Clearcoat, 
Color Topcoat, and Primer); and
     Plastic Parts and Products that are not Defined as 
Flexible.

E. EPA Recommendations To Further Improve the Rule

    The TSD for Rule 336 describes additional rule revisions that we 
recommend for the next time the County modifies the rule.

F. Public Comment and Proposed Action

    Rule 336 largely fulfills the relevant CAA Sec.  110 and part D 
requirements, but the deficiencies, as discussed in section C, preclude 
full SIP approval pursuant to 110(k)(3) of the Act. Section 110(k)(4) 
authorizes the EPA to conditionally approve SIP revisions based on a 
commitment by the State to adopt specific enforceable measures by a 
date certain but not later than one year after the date of the plan 
approval. Because the MCAQD and the ADEQ have committed to provide the 
EPA with a SIP submission within one year of this final action that 
will include specific rule revisions that would adequately address the 
identified deficiencies, we are proposing to conditionally approve Rule 
336 pursuant to section 110(k)(4) of the Act. We are also proposing to 
conditionally approve MCAQD's RACT demonstrations for the 2008 8-hr 
ozone NAAQS with respect to the VOC source categories covered by Rule 
336. If the MCAQD and the ADEQ submit the required rule revisions by 
the specified deadline, and the EPA approves the submission, then the 
identified deficiencies will be cured. However, if these proposed 
conditional approvals are finalized, and MCAQD, through the ADEQ, fails 
to submit these revisions within the required timeframe, the 
conditional approval would be treated as a disapproval for those rules 
for which the revisions are not submitted (and the associated RACT SIP 
CTG source categories). We will accept comments from the public on this 
proposal until February 27, 2020. If we take final action to approve 
the submitted rules, our final action will incorporate these rules 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 the requirements of 1 CFR 51.5, the EPA is proposing to 
incorporate by reference the MCAQD rules described in Table 1 of this 
preamble. 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

    Additional information about these statutes and Executive Orders 
can be found at https://www.epa.gov/laws-regulations/laws-and-executive-orders.

A. Executive Order 12866: Regulatory Planning and Review and Executive 
Order 13563: Improving Regulation and Regulatory Review

    This action is not a significant regulatory action and was 
therefore not submitted to the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) 
for review.

B. Executive Order 13771: Reducing Regulations and Controlling 
Regulatory Costs

    This action is not an Executive Order 13771 regulatory action 
because actions such as SIP approvals are exempted under Executive 
Order 12866.

C. Paperwork Reduction Act (PRA)

    This action does not impose an information collection burden under 
the PRA, because this proposed SIP conditional approval, if finalized, 
will not in-and-of itself create any new information collection 
burdens, but will simply conditionally approve certain State 
requirements for inclusion in the SIP.

D. Regulatory Flexibility Act (RFA)

    I certify that this action will not have a significant economic 
impact on a substantial number of small entities under the RFA. This 
action will not impose any requirements on small entities. This 
proposed SIP conditional approval, if finalized, will not in-and-of 
itself create any new requirements but will simply conditionally 
approve certain State requirements for inclusion in the SIP.

E. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act (UMRA)

    This action does not contain any unfunded mandate as described in 
UMRA, 2 U.S.C. 1531-1538, and does not significantly or uniquely affect 
small governments. This action proposes to conditionally approve pre-
existing requirements under State or local law, and imposes no new 
requirements. Accordingly, no additional costs to State, local, or 
tribal governments, or to the private sector, result from this action.

F. Executive Order 13132: Federalism

    This action does not have federalism implications. It will not have 
substantial direct effects on the states, on the relationship between 
the national government and the states, or on the distribution of power 
and responsibilities among the various levels of government.

G. Executive Order 13175: Coordination With Indian Tribal Governments

    This action does not have tribal implications, as specified in 
Executive Order 13175, because the SIP revisions that the EPA is 
proposing to conditionally approve would not 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, and will not impose 
substantial direct costs on tribal governments or preempt tribal law. 
Thus, Executive Order 13175 does not apply to this action.

[[Page 4932]]

H. Executive Order 13045: Protection of Children From Environmental 
Health Risks and Safety Risks

    The EPA interprets Executive Order 13045 as applying only to those 
regulatory actions that concern environmental health or safety risks 
that the EPA has reason to believe may disproportionately affect 
children, per the definition of ``covered regulatory action'' in 
section 2-202 of the Executive Order. This action is not subject to 
Executive Order 13045 because this proposed SIP conditional approval, 
if finalized, will not in-and-of itself create any new regulations, but 
will simply conditionally approve certain State requirements for 
inclusion in the SIP.

I. Executive Order 13211: Actions That Significantly Affect Energy 
Supply, Distribution, or Use

    This action is not subject to Executive Order 13211, because it is 
not a significant regulatory action under Executive Order 12866.

J. National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act (NTTAA)

    Section 12(d) of the NTTAA directs the EPA to use voluntary 
consensus standards in its regulatory activities unless to do so would 
be inconsistent with applicable law or otherwise impractical. The EPA 
believes that this action is not subject to the requirements of section 
12(d) of the NTTAA because application of those requirements would be 
inconsistent with the CAA.

K. Executive Order 12898: Federal Actions To Address Environmental 
Justice in Minority Populations and Low-Income Population

    The EPA lacks the discretionary authority to address environmental 
justice in this rulemaking.

List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52

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

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

    Dated: January 13, 2020.
Deborah Jordan,
Acting Regional Administrator, Region IX.
[FR Doc. 2020-01466 Filed 1-27-20; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P