
[Federal Register Volume 77, Number 81 (Thursday, April 26, 2012)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 24883-24885]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2012-10076]


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

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

40 CFR Part 52

[EPA-R09-OAR-2012-0266; FRL-9665-4]


Revisions to the California State Implementation Plan, San 
Joaquin Valley Unified Air Pollution Control District

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) portion of the 
California State Implementation Plan (SIP). These revisions concern 
oxides of nitrogen (NOX) from solid fuel fired boilers, 
steam generators and process heaters. We are approving a local rule 
that regulates 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 May 29, 2012.

ADDRESSES: Submit comments, identified by docket number EPA-R09-

[[Page 24884]]

OAR-2012-0266, by one of the following methods:
    1. Federal eRulemaking Portal: www.regulations.gov. Follow the on-
line instructions.
    2. Email: 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 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 www.regulations.gov or email. 
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 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.
    Docket: Generally, documents in the docket for this action are 
available electronically at 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 www.regulations.gov, some 
information may be publicly available only at the hard copy location 
(e.g., copyrighted material, large maps), 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: Andrew Steckel, EPA Region IX, (415) 
947-4115, steckel.andrew@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?
II. EPA's Evaluation
    A. How is EPA evaluating the rule?
    B. Does the rule meet the evaluation criteria?
    C. EPA Recommendations To Further Improve the Rule
III. EPA's Proposed Action
IV. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews

I. The State's Submittal

A. What rule did the State submit?

    Table 1 identifies the rule addressed by this proposal with the 
date that it was adopted by the local air agency and submitted by the 
California Air Resources Board (CARB).

                                             Table 1--Submitted Rule
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
              Local agency                  Rule No.              Rule title              Amended     Submitted
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
SJVUAPCD................................         4352  Solid Fuel Fired Boilers, Steam     12/15/11     02/23/12
                                                        Generators and Process Heaters.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    On March 13, 2012, EPA determined that the submittal for SJVUAPCD 
Rule 4352 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?

    We finalized a limited approval and limited disapproval of an 
earlier version of Rule 4352 on October 1, 2010 (75 FR 60623). That 
action incorporated Rule 4352 into the California SIP, including those 
provisions identified as deficient.

C. What is the purpose of the submitted rule?

    NOX emissions help produce 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 NOX emissions. Rule 4352 limits NOX and 
carbon monoxide (CO) emissions from solid fuel fired boilers, steam 
generators and process heaters. EPA's technical support document (TSD) 
has more information about this rule.

II. EPA's Evaluation

A. How is EPA evaluating the rule?

    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 and each major source of NOX or VOC emissions 
in ozone nonattainment areas classified as moderate or above (see CAA 
sections 182(b)(2) and 182(f)), and must not relax existing 
requirements (see CAA sections 110(l) and 193). Section 172(c)(1) of 
the Act also requires implementation of all reasonably available 
control measures (RACM) as expeditiously as practicable in 
nonattainment areas.
    Because the San Joaquin Valley (SJV) area is designated 
nonattainment for the 1997 and 2006 fine particulate matter 
(PM2.5) National Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS) and 
for the 1-hour and 8-hour ozone NAAQS (see 40 CFR 81.305), the RACM 
requirement in CAA section 172(c)(1) applies to this area.\1\ In 
addition, because SJV is classified as ``extreme'' nonattainment for 
the 1-hour and 8-hour ozone NAAQS (see 40 CFR 81.305), the specific 
RACT requirement in CAA sections 182(b)(2) and (f) applies to all major 
sources of NOX or VOC in the SJV area. We are evaluating 
Rule 4352 for compliance with the NOX RACT requirement in 
CAA section 182 because the rule applies to major NOX 
emission sources.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ EPA generally takes action on a RACM demonstration as part 
of our action on the State's attainment demonstration for the 
relevant NAAQS, based on an evaluation of the control measures 
submitted as a whole and their overall potential to advance the 
applicable attainment date in the area. See, e.g., 76 FR 69896 
(November 9, 2011) (final rule partially approving and partially 
disapproving PM2.5 attainment plan for SJV); 77 FR 12652 
(March 1, 2012) (final rule approving 8-hour ozone attainment plan 
for SJV).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Guidance and policy documents that we use to evaluate 
enforceability and RACT requirements consistently 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) (the General Preamble) and 57 FR 18070 (April 
28, 1992) (Appendices).
    2. ``State Implementation Plans; Nitrogen Oxides Supplement to the 
General Preamble; Clean Air Act Amendments of 1990 Implementation of 
Title I; Proposed Rule,'' 57 FR 55620, November 25, 1992 (the 
NOX Supplement).
    2. ``Issues Relating to VOC Regulation Cutpoints, Deficiencies, and 
Deviations,'' EPA, May 25, 1988 (the Bluebook).

[[Page 24885]]

    3. ``Guidance Document for Correcting Common VOC & Other Rule 
Deficiencies,'' EPA Region 9, August 21, 2001 (the Little Bluebook).
    4. ``Determination of Reasonably Available Control Technology and 
Best Available Retrofit Control Technology for Industrial, 
Institutional, and Commercial Boilers, Steam Generators, and Process 
Heaters,'' CARB, July 18, 1991.
    5. ``Alternative Control Techniques Document--NOX 
Emissions from Industrial/Commercial/Institutional (ICI) Boilers,'' US 
EPA 453/R-94-022, March 1994.
    6. ``Alternative Control Techniques Document-- NOX 
Emissions from Utility Boilers,'' US EPA 452/R-93-008, March 1994.

B. Does the rule meet the evaluation criteria?

    We believe this rule is consistent with the relevant policy and 
guidance regarding enforceability, RACT, and SIP relaxations. The TSD 
has more information on our evaluation.
    On January 10, 2012, EPA partially approved and partially 
disapproved the RACT SIP submitted by California on June 18, 2009 for 
the SJV extreme ozone nonattainment area (2009 RACT SIP), based in part 
on our conclusion that the State had not fully satisfied CAA section 
182 RACT requirements for solid fuel fired boiler operations. See 77 FR 
1417, 1425 (January 10, 2012). Final approval of Rule 4352 would 
satisfy California's obligation to implement RACT under CAA section 182 
for this source category for the 1-hour ozone and 1997 8-hour ozone 
NAAQS and thereby terminate both the sanctions clocks and the Federal 
Implementation Plan (FIP) clock associated with this rule.

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.

III. EPA's Proposed Action

    Because EPA believes the submitted rule fulfills all applicable 
requirements and corrects all deficiencies identified in our October 1, 
2010 action, we are proposing to fully approve it under section 
110(k)(3) of the Act. We will accept comments from the public on this 
proposal for the next 30 days.

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, 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 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 proposed action 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.

List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52

    Environmental protection, Air pollution control, Intergovernmental 
relations, Nitrogen dioxide, Ozone, Particulate matter, Reporting and 
recordkeeping requirements.

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

    Dated: April 13, 2012.
Jared Blumenfeld,
Regional Administrator, Region IX.
[FR Doc. 2012-10076 Filed 4-25-12; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P


