Proposed Rule2021-27018
Air Plan Approval; Arizona, California, Nevada; Emissions Statements Requirements
Primary source
Metadata and text below are from the Federal Register, a public-domain U.S. government work. Always verify the official published version before relying on it for any legal matter.
Published
December 14, 2021
Issuing agencies
Environmental Protection Agency
Abstract
The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is proposing to approve revisions, under the Clean Air Act (CAA or "Act"), to portions of the Arizona, California, and Nevada State Implementation Plans (SIPs) regarding emissions statements (ES) requirements for the 2015 ozone national ambient air quality standards (NAAQS). We are also proposing to approve ES certifications ("certifications") adopted by various California air districts that existing SIP-approved rules are adequate to meet the ES requirements for the 2015 ozone NAAQS. In addition, we are proposing that the following Arizona, California, and Nevada nonattainment areas (NAAs) meet the ES requirements for the 2015 ozone NAAQS: Phoenix-Mesa, Yuma, Amador County, Butte County, Imperial County, Los Angeles-San Bernardino Counties (West Mojave Desert), Los Angeles-South Coast Air Basin, Nevada County (Western part), Riverside County (Coachella Valley), Sacramento Metro, San Diego County, San Francisco Bay Area, San Joaquin Valley, San Luis Obispo (Eastern part), Sutter Buttes, Tuolumne County, Ventura County, and Las Vegas. We are also proposing to approve that two NAAs meet requirements for prior ozone NAAQS. Finally, we are proposing that Maricopa County Air Quality District (MCAQD) Rule 100, section 503, which we proposed for approval into the SIP on February 23, 2021, meets the ES requirements for the 2015 ozone NAAQS. We are taking comments on this proposal and plan to follow with a final action.
Full Text
<html>
<head>
<title>Federal Register, Volume 86 Issue 237 (Tuesday, December 14, 2021)</title>
</head>
<body><pre>
[Federal Register Volume 86, Number 237 (Tuesday, December 14, 2021)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 70996-70999]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [<a href="http://www.gpo.gov">www.gpo.gov</a>]
[FR Doc No: 2021-27018]
[[Page 70996]]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
40 CFR Part 52
[EPA-R09-OAR-2021-0623; FRL-8997-01-R9]
Air Plan Approval; Arizona, California, Nevada; Emissions
Statements Requirements
AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).
ACTION: Proposed rule.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is proposing to
approve revisions, under the Clean Air Act (CAA or ``Act''), to
portions of the Arizona, California, and Nevada State Implementation
Plans (SIPs) regarding emissions statements (ES) requirements for the
2015 ozone national ambient air quality standards (NAAQS). We are also
proposing to approve ES certifications (``certifications'') adopted by
various California air districts that existing SIP-approved rules are
adequate to meet the ES requirements for the 2015 ozone NAAQS. In
addition, we are proposing that the following Arizona, California, and
Nevada nonattainment areas (NAAs) meet the ES requirements for the 2015
ozone NAAQS: Phoenix-Mesa, Yuma, Amador County, Butte County, Imperial
County, Los Angeles-San Bernardino Counties (West Mojave Desert), Los
Angeles-South Coast Air Basin, Nevada County (Western part), Riverside
County (Coachella Valley), Sacramento Metro, San Diego County, San
Francisco Bay Area, San Joaquin Valley, San Luis Obispo (Eastern part),
Sutter Buttes, Tuolumne County, Ventura County, and Las Vegas. We are
also proposing to approve that two NAAs meet requirements for prior
ozone NAAQS. Finally, we are proposing that Maricopa County Air Quality
District (MCAQD) Rule 100, section 503, which we proposed for approval
into the SIP on February 23, 2021, meets the ES requirements for the
2015 ozone NAAQS. We are taking comments on this proposal and plan to
follow with a final action.
DATES: Comments must be received on or before January 13, 2022.
ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, identified by Docket ID No. EPA-R09-
OAR-2021-0623 at <a href="https://www.regulations.gov">https://www.regulations.gov</a>. For comments submitted at
<a href="http://Regulations.gov">Regulations.gov</a>, follow the online instructions for submitting
comments. Once submitted, comments cannot be edited or removed from
<a href="http://Regulations.gov">Regulations.gov</a>. 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 <a href="https://www.epa.gov/dockets/commenting-epa-dockets">https://www.epa.gov/dockets/commenting-epa-dockets</a>. If you need assistance in a
language other than English or if you are a person with disabilities
who needs a reasonable accommodation at no cost to you, please contact
the person identified in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Nancy Levin, EPA Region IX, 75
Hawthorne St., San Francisco, CA 94105. By phone: (415) 972-3848 or by
email at <a href="/cdn-cgi/l/email-protection#5c10392a353272123d323f251c392c3d723b332a"><span class="__cf_email__" data-cfemail="d29eb7a4bbbcfc9cb3bcb1ab92b7a2b3fcb5bda4">[email protected]</span></a>.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Throughout this document, ``we,'' ``us,''
and ``our'' refer to the EPA.
Table of Contents
I. The State's Submittal
A. What rules or certifications did the states submit?
B. Are there other versions of these rules?
C. What is the purpose of the submitted rules or certifications?
II. The EPA's Evaluation and Action
A. How is the EPA evaluating the rules and certifications?
B. Do the rules and certifications meet the evaluation criteria?
C. The EPA's Recommendations To Further Improve the Rules or
Certifications
D. Public Comment and Proposed Action
III. Incorporation by Reference
IV. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews
I. The State's Submittal
A. What rules or certifications did the states submit?
The Arizona Department of Environmental Quality (ADEQ) submitted
rules for the Arizona Administrative Code (AAC) and Pinal County Air
Quality Control District (AQCD) portions of the SIP. The California Air
Resources Board submitted rules or certifications for the the Amador
Air District (AAD), Butte County Air Quality Management District
(AQMD), El Dorado County AQMD, Feather River AQMD, Imperial County Air
Pollution Control District (APCD), Placer County APCD, San Luis Obispo
County APCD, and Tuolumne County APCD portions of the California SIP.
The Nevada Division of Environmental Protection submitted a rule for
the Clark County Department of Air Quality (CCDAQ) portion of the
Nevada SIP.
Table 1 lists the rules submitted for approval into the SIP with
the dates that the rules were adopted or revised by the local or state
air agencies and submitted by the states to fulfill CAA section
182(a)(3)(B) Emissions Statements (``section 182(a)(3)(B)'')
requirements. Table 2 lists ES certifications with the dates the
certifications were adopted by the local air agencies and submitted by
the State of California to meet section 182(a)(3)(B) requirements.\1\
Tables 1 and 2 also list the dates that the EPA determined that the
submittals met the completeness criteria in 40 Code of Federal
Regulations (CFR) Part 51 Appendix V or were deemed by operation of law
to meet the completeness criteria in 40 CFR part 51 Appendix V
(``complete by operation of law'' or COL), which must be met before
formal EPA review.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ Neither Arizona nor Nevada submitted emissions
certifications for the 2015 ozone NAAQS.
[[Page 70997]]
Table 1--Submitted Rules
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Adopted/
Agency Rule No. Rule title revised Submitted Deemed complete
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
ADEQ......................... AAC R18-2-327.. Annual 12/4/2020 12/22/2020 COL, 6/22/2020.
Emissions
Inventory
Questionnaire
and Emissions
Statement.
Pinal County AQCD............ Rule 3-1-103... Annual 7/1/2020 7/21/2020 COL, 1/21/2021.
emissions
inventory
questionnaire
and emissions
statement.
Amador Air District.......... Rule 428....... Emissions 3/16/2021 6/10/2021 Letter, 9/25/
Statements. 2021.
Butte County AQMD............ Rule 434....... Emissions 6/25/2020 7/27/2020 COL, 1/27/2021.
Statements.
El Dorado County AQMD........ Rule 1000...... Emission 8/25/2020 9/22/2020 COL, 3/22/2021.
Statement.
El Dorado County AQMD........ Rule 1001.1.... Emission 8/25/2020 9/22/2020 COL, 3/22/2021.
Statement
Waiver.
Feather River AQMD........... Rule 4.8....... Further 8/3/2020 12/15/2020 COL, 6/15/2021.
Information.
Imperial County APCD......... Rule 116....... Emissions 11/3/2020 2/19/2021 COL, 8/19/2021.
Statement and
Certification.
Placer County APCD........... Rule 503....... Emission 10/8/2020 12/15/2020 COL, 6/15/2021.
Statement.
San Luis Obispo County AQMD.. Rule 222....... Federal 6/24/2020 7/27/2020 COL, 1/27/2021.
Emission
Statement.
Tuolumne County APCD......... Rule 428....... Emissions 7/21/2020 8/3/2020 COL, 2/3/2021.
Statements.
CCDAQ........................ Section 12.9.1. Annual 8/18/2020 10/15/2020 COL, 4/15/2021.
Emissions
Statement \a\.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
\a\ NDEP submitted Section 12.9 ``Annual Emissions Statement and Inventory Requirements,'' which includes 12.9.1
``Annual Emissions Statement'' and 12.9.2 ``Annual Emissions Inventory.'' However, we are only acting on
subsection 12.9.1 in this notice.
Table 2--Submitted Emissions Statements Certifications
[2015 ozone NAAQS] \2\
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Existing SIP
Local agency approved rule Rule title Adopted Submitted Deemed
No. complete
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Antelope Valley AQMD......... Rule 107 Certification 7/21/2020 8/3/2020 COL, 2/3/2021.
(2012); 78 FR of Submissions
21545 (April and Emission
11, 2013). Statements.
Mojave Desert AQMD........... Rule 107 Certification 10/28/2019 12/20/2019 COL, 6/20/2020.
(1992); 69 FR and Emission
29880 (May 26, Statements.
2004).
Northern Sierra AQMD......... Rule 513 Emissions 1/25/2021 3/23/2021 COL, 9/23/2021.
(2016); 82 FR Statements and
28240 (June Recordkeeping.
21, 2017).
Sacramento Metropolitan AQMD. Rule 105 (1996) Emission 7/23/2020 8/3/2020 COL, 2/3/2021.
73 FR 32240 Statement.
(June 6, 2008).
San Diego County APCD........ Rule 19.3 Emission 10/14/2020 1/12/2021 COL, 7/12/2021.
(1996); 65 FR Information.
12472 (March
9, 2000).
San Francisco Bay Area AQMD.. Reg 2-Permits 2- Federal 7/15/2020 8/3/2020 COL, 2/3/2021.
1-429 (2004); Emissions
83 FR 23372 Statement.
(May 21, 2018).
San Joaquin Valley APCD...... Rule 1160 Emission 6/18/2020 8/3/2020 COL, 2/3/2021.
(1992); 84 FR Statements
3302 (February (1992).
12, 2019).
South Coast AQMD \a\......... Rule 301 Permitting and 6/5/2020 8/3/2020 COL, 2/3/2021.
(2019); 84 FR Associated
52005 (October Fees
1, 2019). (paragraphs
(e)(1), except
(e)(1)(C),
(e)(2), (5),
and (8) only).
Ventura County APCD.......... Rule 24 (1992); Source 7/14/2020 7/29/2020 COL, 1/29/2021.
65 FR 76567 Recordkeeping,
(December 7, Reporting and
2000). Emission
Statements.
Yolo-Solano AQMD............. Rule 3.18 Emission 9/9/2020 11/2/2020 COL, 5/2/2021.
(1992); 69 FR Statements.
29880 (May 26,
2004).
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
\2\ All certifications in this table were submitted by the State of California. The ``Adopted'' and
``Submitted'' and ``Deemed Complete'' dates listed in Table 2 refer to those of the certifications.
\a\ South Coast AQMD has jurisdiction over Riverside (Coachella), and Rule 301 applies to both the South Coast
Air Basin and the Riverside (Coachella) nonattainment areas.
In addition to the certifications for the 2015 ozone NAAQS, the San
Francsico Bay Area is certifying that Reg 2-Permits 2-1-429 meets
section 182(a)(3)(B) requirements for the 1997 and 2008 ozone NAAQS,
and the San Diego County APCD is certifying that Rule 19.3 meets
section 182(a)(3)(B) requirements for the 2008 ozone NAAQS.
B. Are there other versions of these rules?
There are no previous versions of El Dorado County AQMD Rule
1000.1, Amador Air District Rule 428, Tuolumne County APCD Rule 428, or
CCDAQ Regulations section 12.9 in the SIP. Table 3 lists versions of
rules that we previously approved into the SIP. If we take final action
to approve the submitted versions of these rules, they will replace the
existing SIP-approved versions.
We approved an earlier version of MCAQD Rule 100, section 503 into
the SIP on April 5, 2019 (84 FR 13543). On February 23, 2021 (86 FR
10903), the EPA proposed approval on revised Rule 100, section 503,
which, if finalized, will replace the previously approved version of
this rule in the SIP. In this action, we are proposing that MCAQD Rule
100, section 503, if finalized as proposed for approval into the SIP,
will fulfill the 2015 ozone NAAQS requirement for emissions statements.
[[Page 70998]]
Table 3--Existing Sip-Approved Rules
------------------------------------------------------------------------
State Local agency Rule Final approval
------------------------------------------------------------------------
AZ............. ADEQ............. R18-2-327 Annual 77 FR 66405
Emissions (November 5,
Inventory 2012).
Questionnaire
and Emissions
Statement (1995).
AZ............. Pinal County Air Rule 3-1-103 61 FR 15717
Quality Control Annual emissions (April 9, 1996).
District inventory
(PCAQCD). questionnaire
(1995).
CA............. Butte County AQMD Rule 434 80 FR 33195 (June
Emissions 11, 2015).
Statements
(2013).
CA............. El Dorado County Rule 1000 69 FR 29880 (May
AQMD. Emission 26, 2004).
Statement.
CA............. Feather River Rule 4.8 Further 69 FR 29880 (May
AQMD. Information 26, 2004).
(1992).
CA............. Imperial County Rule 116 77 FR 72968
APCD. Emissions (December 7,
Statement and 2012).
Certification
(2010).
CA............. Placer County Rule 503 Emission 77 FR 72968
APCD. Statement (2010). (December 7,
2012).
CA............. San Luis Obispo Rule 222 Federal 80 FR 33195 (June
County AQMD. Emission 11, 2015).
Statement (2014).
------------------------------------------------------------------------
C. What is the purpose of the submitted rules or certifications?
Under the CAA, a SIP must require stationary sources in ozone NAAs
classified as ``Marginal'' or above to report annual emissions of
NO<INF>X</INF> and VOC. See CAA section 182(a)(3)(B). Whenever the EPA
promulgates a new ozone NAAQS, the state must submit a new or amended
rule to ensure that the section 182(a)(3)(B) requirements are met.
Section 182(a)(3)(B)(i) requires states to submit a SIP revision
that requires that owners or operators of stationary sources provide
the state with a statement of actual emissions of VOC and
NO<INF>X</INF> at least annually, containing a certification that the
information is accurate.\3\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\3\ Section 182(a)(3)(B)(ii) ``The State may waive the
application of clause (i) to any class or category of stationary
sources which emit less than 25 tons per year of volatile organic
compounds or oxides of nitrogen if the State, in its submissions
under subparagraphs (1) or (3)(A), provides an inventory of
emissions from such class or category of sources, based on the use
of the emission factors established by the Administrator or other
methods acceptable to the Administrator.''
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
In lieu of submitting a new or amended rule, the state may submit
for SIP approval a certification that the existing SIP-approved rule
satisfies the emissions statement requirements of CAA section
182(a)(3)(B) for the relevant ozone NAAQS. Specifically, the preamble
of the EPA's ``Implementation of the 2015 National Ambient Air Quality
Standards for Ozone: Nonattainment Area State Implementation Plan
Requirements'' states that ``[W]here an air agency determines that an
existing regulation is adequate to meet applicable nonattainment area
planning requirements of CAA section 182 . . . for a revised ozone
NAAQS, that air agency's SIP revision may provide a written statement
certifying that determination in lieu of submitting new revised
regulations.'' \4\ The EPA's technical support document (TSD), which is
in the docket for this rulemaking, has more information about these
rules and certifications.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\4\ ``Implementation of the 2015 National Ambient Air Quality
Standards for Ozone: Nonattainment Area State Implementation Plan
Requirements,'' 83 FR 62998 (December 6, 2018).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
II. The EPA's Evaluation and Action
A. How is the EPA evaluating the rules and certifications?
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). Areas classified as Marginal
nonattainment or higher are subject to the requirements of CAA section
182(a)(3)(B). Guidance and policy documents that we used to evaluate
enforceability, revision/relaxation, and CAA requirements for the
applicable criteria pollutants include the following:
1. ``Implementation of the 2015 National Ambient Air Quality
Standards for Ozone: Nonattainment Area State Implementation Plan
Requirements,'' 83 FR 62998 (December 6, 2018).
2. ``(Draft) Guidance on the Implementation of an Emission
Statement Program,'' EPA, July 1992.
3. ``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).
4. ``Issues Relating to VOC Regulation Cutpoints, Deficiencies,
and Deviations,'' EPA, May 25, 1988 (the Bluebook, revised January
11, 1990).
5. ``Guidance Document for Correcting Common VOC & Other Rule
Deficiencies,'' EPA Region 9, August 21, 2001 (the Little Bluebook).
B. Do the rules and certifications meet the evaluation criteria?
These rules and certifications meet CAA requirements and are
consistent with relevant guidance regarding enforceability, SIP
revisions, and emissions statement requirements. The TSD has more
information on our evaluation.
C. The EPA's Recommendations To Further Improve the Rules or
Certifications
The TSD includes recommendations for the next time local agencies
modify the rules or submit certifications.
D. Public Comment and Proposed Action
As authorized in section 110(k)(3) of the Act, the EPA proposes to
fully approve the submitted rules and certifications because they
fulfill all relevant requirements. We are also proposing that the
following 2015 ozone nonattainment areas have met CAA section
182(a)(3)(B) requirements: Phoenix-Mesa, AZ; Yuma, AZ; Amador County,
CA; Butte County, CA; Imperial County, CA; Los Angeles-San Bernardino
Counties, CA (West Mojave Desert); Los Angeles-South Coast Air Basin,
CA; Nevada County (Western part), CA; Riverside County (Coachella
Valley) CA; Sacramento Metro, CA; San Diego County, CA; San Francisco
Bay Area, CA; San Joaquin Valley, CA; San Luis Obispo (Eastern part),
CA; Sutter Buttes, CA; Tuolumne, County, CA; Ventura County, CA; and
Las Vegas, NV. We are also proposing to approve that the San Francisco
Bay Area NAA meets the emissions statements requirements for the 1997
and 2008 ozone NAAQS, and the San Diego County NAA meets these
requirements for the 2008 ozone NAAQS. Finally, we are proposing that
MCAQD Rule 100, section 503, proposed for approval in a separate action
on February 23, 2021, meets the
[[Page 70999]]
emissions statements requirements for the 2015 ozone NAAQS. We will
accept comments from the public on this proposal until January 13,
2022. 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 requirements of 1 CFR 51.5, the EPA is proposing to incorporate by
reference the rules described in Table 1 of this preamble. The EPA has
made, and will continue to make, these materials available through
<a href="https://www.regulations.gov">https://www.regulations.gov</a> 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:
<bullet> 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);
<bullet> Does not impose an information collection burden under the
provisions of the Paperwork Reduction Act (44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.);
<bullet> 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.);
<bullet> 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);
<bullet> Does not have federalism implications as specified in
Executive Order 13132 (64 FR 43255, August 10, 1999);
<bullet> Is not an economically significant regulatory action based
on health or safety risks subject to Executive Order 13045 (62 FR
19885, April 23, 1997);
<bullet> Is not a significant regulatory action subject to
Executive Order 13211 (66 FR 28355, May 22, 2001);
<bullet> 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
<bullet> 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, Nitrogen dioxide, Ozone,
Particulate matter, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements, Volatile
organic compounds.
Authority: 42 U.S.C. 7401 et seq.
Dated: December 7, 2021.
Deborah Jordan,
Acting Regional Administrator, Region IX.
[FR Doc. 2021-27018 Filed 12-13-21; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P
</pre><script data-cfasync="false" src="/cdn-cgi/scripts/5c5dd728/cloudflare-static/email-decode.min.js"></script></body>
</html>Indexed from Federal Register on December 14, 2021.
This is legal information, not legal advice. Laws vary by jurisdiction and change frequently. Always verify current law with official sources and consult a licensed attorney in your jurisdiction for advice on your specific situation.