Document ID: EPA-R09-OAR-2014-0538-0002
Agency: epa
Document Type: Rule
Title: Air Quality State Implementation Plans; Approvals and Promulgations: California; Placer County Air Pollution Control District; Stationary Source Permits
Posted Date: 2014-09-29T04:00Z

[Federal Register Volume 79, Number 188 (Monday, September 29, 2014)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 58263-58266]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2014-23003]

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

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

40 CFR Part 52

[EPA-R09-OAR-2014-0538; FRL-9915-51-Region 9]

Revision of Air Quality Implementation Plan; California; Placer 
County Air Pollution Control District; Stationary Source Permits

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Direct final rule.

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

SUMMARY: The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is taking direct 
final action to approve a revision to the Placer County Air Pollution 
Control District (PCAPCD) portion of the California State 
Implementation Plan (SIP). This revision concerns a permitting rule 
that regulates construction and modification of major stationary 
sources of air pollution. These revisions correct deficiencies in 
PCAPCD Rule 502, New Source Review, previously identified by EPA in a 
final rule dated September 24, 2013. We are approving revisions that 
correct the identified deficiencies.

DATES: This rule is effective on November 28, 2014 without further 
notice, unless EPA receives adverse comments by October 29, 2014. If we 
receive such comments, we will publish a timely withdrawal in the 
Federal Register to notify the public that this direct final rule will 
not take effect.

ADDRESSES: Submit comments, identified by docket number EPA-R09-OAR-
2014-0538, by one of the following methods:
    1. Federal eRulemaking Portal: http://www.regulations.gov. Follow 
the on-line instructions.
    2. Email: R9airpermits@epa.gov.
    3. Mail or deliver: Gerardo Rios (Air-3), 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 http://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 http://www.regulations.gov or email. http://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

[[Page 58264]]

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. Electronic files should avoid the use of special 
characters, any form of encryption, and be free of any defects or 
viruses.
    Docket: EPA has established a docket for this action under EPA-R09-
OAR-2014-0538. Generally, documents in the docket for this action are 
available electronically at http://www.regulations.gov or in hard copy 
at EPA Region IX, 75 Hawthorne Street, San Francisco, California. While 
all documents are listed at http://www.regulations.gov, some 
information may be publicly available only at the hard copy location 
(e.g., copyrighted material, large maps, multi-volume reports), 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: La weeda Ward, EPA Region IX, (213) 
244-1812, ward.laweeda@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. 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 we are approving with the date it was 
adopted by the local air agency and submitted to EPA by the California 
Air Resources Board (CARB).

                                             Table 1--Submitted Rule
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                         Rule               Rule title              Amended        Submitted
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
PCAPCD.................................          502  New Source Review.........          8/8/13         5/13/14
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    On July 18 2014, EPA determined that the submittal for PCAPCD Rule 
502 met the completeness criteria in 40 CFR part 51, appendix V, 
including evidence of public adoption of this regulation, which must be 
met before formal EPA review.

B. Are there other versions of this rule?

    EPA approved a previous version of Rule 502, into the SIP on 
September 24, 2013 (78 FR 58460).

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

    Section 110(a)(2) of the Clean Air Act (CAA) requires that each SIP 
include, among other things, a preconstruction permit program to 
provide for regulation of the construction and modification of 
stationary sources within the areas covered by the plan as necessary to 
assure that the National Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS) are 
achieved, including a permit program as required in parts C and D of 
title I of the CAA. For areas designated as nonattainment for one or 
more NAAQS, the SIP must include preconstruction permit requirements 
for new or modified major stationary sources of such nonattainment 
pollutant(s), commonly referred to as ``Nonattainment New Source 
Review'' or ``NNSR.'' CAA 172(c)(5).
    The portion of Placer County that lies within the Sacramento Metro 
air basin is currently designated severe nonattainment for both the 
1997 and 2008 8-hour ozone NAAQS and moderate nonattainment for the 
2006 24-hour PM2.5 NAAQS. See 40 CFR 81.305. Therefore, 
California is required under part D of title I of the Act to adopt and 
implement a SIP-approved NNSR program for the nonattainment portions of 
Placer County that applies, at a minimum, to new or modified major 
stationary sources of the following pollutants: volatile organic 
compounds (VOCs), nitrogen oxides (NOX), particular matter 
of 2.5 microns or less (PM2.5) and sulfur oxides 
(SOx).\1\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ VOCs and NOX are subject to NNSR as ozone 
precursors, and NOX and SOx are subject to 
NNSR as PM2.5 precursors. See 40 CFR 
51.165(a)(1)(xxxvii)(C).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Rule 502, New Source Review, implements the NNSR requirements under 
part D of title I of the CAA for new or modified major stationary 
sources of nonattainment pollutants. The PCAPCD amended Rule 502 to 
correct minor program deficiencies identified by EPA on September 24, 
2013 (78 FR 58460).

II. EPA's Evaluation and Action

A. How is EPA evaluating the rule?

    EPA has reviewed the submitted permitting rule for compliance with 
the CAA's general requirements for SIPs in CAA section 110(a)(2), EPA's 
regulations for nonattainment stationary source permit programs in 40 
CFR 51.165, and the CAA requirements for SIP revisions in CAA section 
110(l).\2\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \2\ Section 110(l) of the CAA require that SIP revisions undergo 
reasonable notice and public hearing prior to adoption and submittal 
by states to EPA and prohibits EPA from approving any SIP revision 
that would interfere with any applicable requirement concerning 
attainment and reasonable further progress or any other applicable 
requirement of the Act.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

B. Does the rule meet the evaluation criteria?

    With respect to procedures, CAA sections 110(a) and 110(l) require 
that revisions to a SIP be adopted by the State after reasonable notice 
and public hearing. EPA has promulgated specific procedural 
requirements for SIP revisions in 40 CFR part 51, subpart F. These 
requirements include publication of notices, by prominent advertisement 
in the relevant geographic area, a public comment period of at least 30 
days, and an opportunity for a public hearing.
    Based on our review of the public process documentation included in 
CARB's May 13, 2014 submittal, we find that the State has provided 
sufficient evidence of public notice and opportunity for comment and 
public hearing prior to adoption and submittal of this rule to EPA.
    With respect to substantive requirements, EPA has reviewed the 
submitted rule in accordance with the CAA and regulatory requirements 
that apply to NNSR permit programs under part D of title I of the Act. 
Based on our evaluation of this rule, as summarized in the Public 
Comment and Final Action section of this document, we find that the 
rule meets the CAA and regulatory requirements for NNSR permit programs 
in part D of title I of the Act and EPA's NNSR implementing regulations 
in 40 CFR section 51.165 for new or modified major stationary sources 
proposing to locate within the District. Final

[[Page 58265]]

approval of Rule 502 would correct all deficiencies in PCAPCD's permit 
program identified in our September 24, 2013 final rule. 78 FR 58460.

C. Public Comment and Final Action.

    As authorized in section 110(k)(3) of the Act, EPA is fully 
approving the submitted rule because we believe it fulfills all 
relevant requirements. We do not think anyone will object to this 
approval, so we are finalizing it without proposing it in advance. 
However, in the Proposed Rules section of this Federal Register, we are 
simultaneously proposing approval of the same submitted rule. If we 
receive adverse comments by October 29, 2014, we will publish a timely 
withdrawal in the Federal Register to notify the public that the direct 
final approval will not take effect and we will address the comments in 
a subsequent final action based on the proposal. If we do not receive 
timely adverse comments, the direct final approval will be effective 
without further notice on November 28, 2014. This will incorporate the 
rule into the federally enforceable SIP.
    Please note that if EPA receives adverse comment on an amendment, 
paragraph, or section of this rule and if that provision may be severed 
from the remainder of the rule, EPA may adopt as final those provisions 
of the rule that are not the subject of an adverse comment.
    For the reasons given above, under CAA section 110(k)(3) and 
301(a), we are approving Rule 502. In the State's May 13, 2014 
submittal, PCAPCD corrected certain deficiencies noted in our September 
24, 2013 rule (78 FR 58460) that prevented full approval at that time. 
The deficiencies for Rule 502 \3\ were: (1) An inadequate definition of 
the term ``Regulated NSR Pollutant''; and (2) missing justification for 
the stated PM2.5 interpollutant offset ratios. The first 
deficiency was corrected by adding the following sentences to the 
definitions of PM10 and PM2.5: ``Gaseous 
emissions which condense to form PM10 shall also be counted 
as PM10.'', and ``Gaseous emissions which condense to form 
PM2.5 shall also be counted as PM2.5.'' The 
second deficiency was corrected by deleting the following wording in 
section 303.6.4 of the rule: ``The interpollutant offset ratios for 
PM2.5 shall be: NOX to PM2.5--100:1 
and SOX to PM2.5--40:1; and adding the wording 
``Interpollutant emission offsets between PM2.5 and 
PM2.5 precursors are not allowed unless modeling 
demonstrates that PM2.5 interpollutant offset ratios are 
appropriate in an approved PM2.5 attainment plan.'' This 
language resolves the deficiency by prohibiting the use of 
PM2.5 interpollutant offsets until a justification for 
specified PM2.5 interpollutant offset ratios is approved 
into the SIP.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \3\ The submitted rule also corrects an issue with public notice 
requirements regarding lead emissions. For a full review of all 
revisions, please see the ``Placer County Air Pollution Control 
District Staff Report, Rule 502, New Source Review, August 8, 
2013'', which can also be found in the docket for this final action.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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 action merely approves State law as meeting Federal 
requirements and does not impose additional requirements beyond those 
imposed by State law. For that reason, this 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 rule 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.
    The Congressional Review Act, 5 U.S.C. 801 et seq., as added by the 
Small Business Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act of 1996, generally 
provides that before a rule may take effect, the agency promulgating 
the rule must submit a rule report, which includes a copy of the rule, 
to each House of the Congress and to the Comptroller General of the 
United States. EPA will submit a report containing this action and 
other required information to the U.S. Senate, the U.S. House of 
Representatives, and the Comptroller General of the United States prior 
to publication of the rule in the Federal Register. A major rule cannot 
take effect until 60 days after it is published in the Federal 
Register. This action is not a ``major rule'' as defined by 5 U.S.C. 
804(2).

List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52

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

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

    Dated: July 31, 2014.
Jared Blumenfeld,
Regional Administrator, Region IX.

    Part 52, Chapter I, Title 40 of the Code of Federal Regulations is 
amended as follows:

PART 52--APPROVAL AND PROMULGATION OF IMPLEMENTATION PLANS

0
1. The authority citation for part 52 continues to read as follows:

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

Subpart F--California

0
2. Section 52.220 is amended by adding paragraph (c)(441) (i)(B) to 
read as follows:

Sec.  52.220  Identification of plan.

* * * * *
    (c) * * *
    (441) * * *

[[Page 58266]]

    (i) * * *
    (B) Placer County Air Pollution Control District.
    (1) Rule 502, ``New Source Review,'' amended on August 8, 2013.
* * * * *
[FR Doc. 2014-23003 Filed 9-26-14; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P