
[Federal Register Volume 76, Number 107 (Friday, June 3, 2011)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 32113-32115]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2011-13830]


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

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

40 CFR Part 52

EPA-R09-OAR-2011-0356; FRL-9314-8]


Revisions to the California State Implementation Plan

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Proposed rule.

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

SUMMARY: EPA is proposing to approve revisions to the San Joaquin 
Valley Unified Air Pollution Control District (SJVUAPCD) and Imperial 
County Air Pollution Control District (ICAPCD) portions of the 
California State Implementation Plan (SIP). These revisions concern 
volatile organic compound (VOC) emissions from Motor Vehicle Assembly 
Coatings, Surface Coatings of Metal Parts and Products, Plastic Parts 
and Products and Pleasure Crafts, Aerospace Coating Operations and 
Automotive Refinishing Operations. We are proposing to approve local 
rules to 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.

DATES: Any comments must arrive by July 5, 2011.

ADDRESSES: Submit comments, identified by docket number EPA-R09-OAR-
2011-0356, by one of the following methods:
    1. Federal eRulemaking Portal: http://www.regulations.gov. Follow 
the on-line instructions.

[[Page 32114]]

    2. E-mail: 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 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 e-mail. 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 your comment. 
If you send e-mail directly to EPA, your e-mail 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: The docket for this action is available electronically at 
http://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 http://www.regulations.gov, some information may 
be publicly available only at the hard copy location (e.g., copyrighted 
material), 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: Adrianne Borgia, EPA Region IX, (415) 
972-3576, borgia.adrianne@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?
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 local air agencies and submitted by the 
California Air Resources Board (CARB).

                                            Table 1--Submitted Rules
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
             Local agency                 Rule No.               Rule title               Amended     Submitted
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
SJVUAPCD..............................         4602  Motor Vehicle Assembly Coatings..      9/17/09      5/17/10
SJVUAPCD..............................         4603  Surface Coating of Metal Parts         9/17/10      5/17/10
                                                      and Products, Plastic Parts and
                                                      Products and Pleasure Crafts.
ICAPCD................................          425  Aerospace Coating Operations.....      2/23/10      7/20/10
ICAPCD................................          427  Automotive Refinishing Operations      2/23/10      7/20/10
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    On 7/8/2010 for the SJUAPCD rules and 8/25/2010 for the ICAPCD 
rules, these rule submittals were found to meet the completeness 
criteria in 40 CFR part 51, Appendix V, which must be met before formal 
EPA review.

B. Are there other versions of these rules?

    We approved a version of SJVUAPCD Rule 4602 into the SIP on 6/26/
2002. We approved a version of SJVUAPCD Rule 4603 into the SIP on 1/19/
2010. We approved a version of ICAPCD Rule 425 into the SIP on 5/19/
2005. We approved a version of ICAPCD Rule 427 into the SIP on 10/3/
2001.

C. What is the purpose of the submitted rules?

    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. In general, these 
rules control the VOC emissions by limiting the VOC of commercial 
coatings and solvents.
    Originally SJVUAPCD Rule 4602 was Motor Vehicle and Mobile 
Equipment Coating Operations but was retired on January 1, 2009 when 
Rule 4612, Motor Vehicle and Mobile Equipment Coating Operations--Phase 
II became effective. SJVUAPCD Rule 4602 is revised to implement RACT 
requirements as recommended in the CTG for Automobile and the CTG for 
Light-Duty Truck Assembly Coatings, EPA-453/R-08-006 and Miscellaneous 
Metal and Plastic Parts Coatings, EPA-453/R-08-003. The rule was also 
revised to reduce solvent VOC emissions to 25 grams/liter.
    SJVUAPCD Rule 4603 is revised to implement RACT requirements as 
recommended in the CTG for Miscellaneous Metal and Plastic Parts 
Coatings, EPA-453/R-08-003, for Large Appliance Coatings, EPA-453/R-07-
004, and for Metal Furniture Coatings, EPA-453/R-07-005. Rule 4603 now 
includes plastic parts and products and also includes pleasure crafts. 
Rule 4603 establishes work practices for large appliance parts and 
products and metal furniture coating operations. This rule also 
establishes a 25 gram/liter VOC limit for all cleaning solvents.
    ICAPCD Rule 425 is revised to implement the new recordkeeping 
requirements consistent with other air districts and to comply with the 
National Emissions Standards for Aerospace Manufacturing and Rework 
Facilities: Summary of Requirements for Implementing NESHAP, EPA-456/R-
97-006.
    ICAPCD Rule 427 is revised to implement the California Air 
Resources Board (CARB) Automotive Coatings Suggested Control Methods 
(SCM), to add prohibitions regarding sale and ownership of specific 
coatings and to add requirements for manufacturers and providers of 
automotive coatings and related materials to provide all necessary 
information to their clients.
    EPA's technical support documents (TSDs) 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 
section 182(a)(2)), and must not relax existing requirements (see 
sections 110(l) and

[[Page 32115]]

193). The SJVUAPCD regulates an ozone nonattainment area (see 40 CFR 
part 81), so Rules 4602 and 4603 must fulfill RACT. The ICAPCD 
regulates an ozone nonattainment area (see 40 CFR part 81), so Rules 
425 and 427 must fulfill RACT.
    Guidance and policy documents that we used to help evaluate 
enforceability and RACT requirements consistently include the 
following:
    1. Portions of the proposed post-1987 ozone and carbon monoxide 
policy that concern RACT, 52 FR 45044, November 24, 1987.
    2. Issues Relating to ``VOC Regulation Cutpoints, Deficiencies, and 
Deviations,'' EPA, May 25, 1988 (the Bluebook).
    3. ``A Guidance Document for Correcting Common VOC & Other Rule 
Deficiencies,'' EPA Region 9, August 21, 2001 (the Little Bluebook).
    4. CTG for Automobile and the CTG for Light-Duty Truck Assembly 
Coatings, EPA-453/R-08-006, Miscellaneous Metal and Plastic Parts 
Coatings, EPA-453/R-08-003,
    5. CTG for Fiberglass Boat Manufacturing Materials, EPA-453/R-08-
004,
    6. National Emissions Standards for Aerospace Manufacturing and 
Rework Facilities: Summary of Requirements for Implementing NESHAP, 
EPA-456/R-97-006 and CARB Automotive Coatings SCM.

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 TSDs 
have more information on our evaluation.

C. EPA Recommendations to Further Improve the Rules

    The TSDs describe additional rule revisions that do not affect 
EPA's current action but are recommended for the next time the local 
agency modifies the rules.

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 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, these rules do 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 compound.

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

    Dated: May 19, 2011.
Jared Blumenfeld,
Regional Administrator, Region IX.
[FR Doc. 2011-13830 Filed 6-2-11; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P


