Proposed Rule2023-18401
Air Quality Implementation Plan; California; Great Basin Unified Air Pollution Control District; Stationary Source Permits
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
August 28, 2023
Issuing agencies
Environmental Protection Agency
Abstract
The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is proposing to approve a revision to the Great Basin Unified Air Pollution Control District (GBUAPCD or "District") portion of the California State Implementation Plan (SIP). In this action, we are proposing to approve one rule governing the issuance of permits for new and modified major sources in nonattainment areas under part D of title I of the Clean Air Act (CAA or "the Act") in the District. We are also proposing to find that PM<INF>10</INF> precursors are not significant contributors to PM<INF>10</INF> levels in the Mono Basin, as the majority of direct PM emissions come from dry lake beds. We are taking comments on this proposal and a final action will follow.
Full Text
<html>
<head>
<title>Federal Register, Volume 88 Issue 165 (Monday, August 28, 2023)</title>
</head>
<body><pre>
[Federal Register Volume 88, Number 165 (Monday, August 28, 2023)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 58538-58540]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [<a href="http://www.gpo.gov">www.gpo.gov</a>]
[FR Doc No: 2023-18401]
=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
40 CFR Part 52
[EPA-R09-OAR-2022-0925; FRL-10943-01-R9]
Air Quality Implementation Plan; California; Great Basin Unified
Air Pollution Control District; Stationary Source Permits
AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).
ACTION: Proposed rule.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is proposing to
approve a revision to the Great Basin Unified Air Pollution Control
District (GBUAPCD or ``District'') portion of the California State
Implementation Plan (SIP). In this action, we are proposing to approve
one rule governing the issuance of permits for new and modified major
sources in nonattainment areas under part D of title I of the Clean Air
Act (CAA or ``the Act'') in the District. We are also proposing to find
that PM<INF>10</INF> precursors are not significant contributors to
PM<INF>10</INF> levels in the Mono Basin, as the majority of direct PM
emissions come from dry lake beds. We are taking comments on this
proposal and a final action will follow.
DATES: Written comments must be received on or before September 27,
2023.
ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, identified by Docket ID No. EPA-R09-
OAR-2022-0925 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 removed or edited from
<a href="http://Regulations.gov">Regulations.gov</a>. For either manner of submission, 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 the disclosure of which 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 and multimedia submissions, and general guidance
on making effective comments, please visit <a href="https://www2.epa.gov/dockets/commenting-epa-dockets">https://www2.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: Nidia Trejo, EPA Region IX, 75
Hawthorne St., San Francisco, CA 94105. By phone: (415) 972-3968, or by
email at <a href="/cdn-cgi/l/email-protection#740006111e1b5a1a1d101d15341104155a131b02"><span class="__cf_email__" data-cfemail="215553444b4e0f4f48454840614451400f464e57">[email protected]</span></a>.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Throughout this document, the terms ``we,''
``us,'' and ``our'' refer to the EPA.
Table of Contents
I. The State's Submittal
A. What rule did the State submit?
B. Is there another version of this rule?
C. What is the purpose of the submitted rule?
II. The EPA's Evaluation
A. What is the background for this proposal?
B. How is the EPA evaluating the rule?
C. Does the rule meet the evaluation criteria?
D. EPA Recommendations To Further Improve the Rule
III. Proposed Action and Public Comment
IV. Incorporation by Reference
V. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews
I. The State's Submittal
A. What rule did the State submit?
Table 1 lists the rule addressed by this proposal including the
date it was adopted by the District and the date on which it was
submitted to the EPA by the California Air Resources Board (CARB or
``the State'').
Table 1--Submitted Rule
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Rule No. Rule title Adopted Submitted
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Rule 222...................................... NSR Requirements for New and Modified 01/06/22 07/05/22
Major Sources in Nonattainment Areas.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
On January 5, 2023, the submittal for District Rule 222 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.
B. Is there another version of this rule?
There is no previous version of Rule 222 in the California SIP.
[[Page 58539]]
C. What is the purpose of the submitted rule?
Rule 222 is intended to address the CAA's statutory and regulatory
requirements for Nonattainment New Source Review (NNSR) permit programs
for major sources emitting nonattainment air pollutants and their
precursors.
II. The EPA's Evaluation
A. What is the background for this proposal?
Historically, the District had four designated PM<INF>10</INF>
nonattainment areas, including the Owens Valley and Coso Junction
Planning Areas in Inyo County, CA, and the Mono Basin and Mammoth Lake
Planning Areas in Mono County, CA. Currently, however, only the Mono
Basin and Owens Valley Planning Areas are designated nonattainment for
PM<INF>10</INF>. The designation of the Mono Basin and Owens Valley
Planning Areas as federal PM<INF>10</INF> nonattainment areas triggered
the requirement for the District to develop and submit an NNSR program
to the EPA for approval into the California SIP. The District's NNSR
program must satisfy the NNSR requirements applicable to a Moderate
PM<INF>10</INF> nonattainment area for the Mono Basin and a Serious
PM<INF>10</INF> nonattainment area for the Owens Valley.
Our Technical Support Document (TSD) for this action contains
additional information regarding the history of the District's
PM<INF>10</INF> nonattainment areas. The District is designated
attainment/unclassifiable for all other NAAQS.
B. How is the EPA evaluating the rule?
The EPA reviewed Rule 222 for compliance with CAA requirements for:
(1) stationary source preconstruction permitting programs as set forth
in CAA part D, including CAA sections 172(c)(5) and 173; (2) the review
and modification of major sources in accordance with 40 CFR 51.160-
51.165 as applicable in Moderate and Serious PM<INF>10</INF>
nonattainment areas; (3) the review of new major stationary sources or
major modifications in a designated nonattainment area that may have an
impact on visibility in any mandatory Class I Federal area in
accordance with 40 CFR 51.307; (4) SIPs in general as set forth in CAA
sections 110(a)(2), including 110(a)(2)(A) and 110(a)(2)(E)(i); \1\ and
(5) SIP revisions as set forth in CAA section 110(l) \2\ and 193.\3\
Our review evaluated the submittals for compliance with the NNSR
requirements applicable to nonattainment areas designated Moderate and
Serious, and ensured that the submittals addressed the NNSR
requirements for the 1987 PM<INF>10</INF> NAAQS.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ CAA section 110(a)(2)(A) requires that regulations submitted
to the EPA for SIP approval be clear and legally enforceable, and
CAA section 110(a)(2)(E)(i) requires that states have adequate
personnel, funding, and authority under state law to carry out their
proposed SIP revisions.
\2\ CAA section 110(l) requires SIP revisions to be subject to
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 CAA.
\3\ CAA section 193 prohibits the modification of any SIP-
approved control requirement in effect before November 15, 1990, in
a nonattainment area, unless the modification ensures equivalent or
greater emission reductions of the relevant pollutants.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
C. Does the rule meet the evaluation criteria?
With respect to procedural requirements, CAA sections 110(a)(2) and
110(l) require that revisions to a SIP be adopted by the state after
reasonable notice and public hearing. Based on our review of the public
process documentation included in the July 5, 2022 submittal of Rule
222, we find that the District has provided sufficient evidence of
public notice, opportunity for comment, and a public hearing prior to
adoption and submittal of this rule to the EPA.
With respect to the substantive requirements found in CAA sections
172(c)(5), 173, 189 and 40 CFR 51.160-51.165, we have evaluated Rule
222 in accordance with the applicable CAA and regulatory requirements
that apply to NNSR permit programs under part D of title I of the Act
for the 1987 PM<INF>10</INF> NAAQS. We find that Rule 222 satisfies
these requirements as they apply to sources subject to NNSR permit
program requirements applicable to Moderate and Serious PM<INF>10</INF>
nonattainment areas. As part of our determination, we relied on a
previous finding from our 2016 final action approving the Owens Valley
1987 PM<INF>10</INF> attainment plan that PM<INF>10</INF> precursors
are not significant contributors to PM<INF>10</INF> in the area,\4\ and
a comparative analysis of emission sources in the Mono Basin to
determine that PM<INF>10</INF> precursors are also not significant
contributors to PM<INF>10</INF> in the Mono Basin.\5\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\4\ 82 FR 13390, (March 13, 2017). See also 81 FR 89407,
(December 12, 2016).
\5\ See GBUAPCD 1995 PM<INF>10</INF> State Implementation Plan
for Mono Basin Planning Area, Table 4.1--PM<INF>10</INF> Emissions
Summary; see also 82 FR 13390 (Mar. 13, 2017).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
We have also determined that this rule satisfies the related
visibility requirements in 40 CFR 51.307. In addition, we find that
Rule 222 satisfies the requirement in CAA section 110(a)(2)(A) that
regulations submitted to the EPA for SIP approval be clear and legally
enforceable and that the submittal demonstrates in accordance with CAA
section 110(a)(2)(E)(i) that the Districts have adequate personnel,
funding, and authority under state law to carry out the proposed SIP
revision.
Regarding the additional substantive requirements of CAA sections
110(l) and 193, our action will result in a more stringent SIP, while
not relaxing any existing provision contained in the SIP. We have
concluded that our action would comply with section 110(l) because our
approval of Rule 222 will not interfere with any applicable requirement
concerning attainment and reasonable further progress, or any other CAA
applicable requirement. In addition, our approval of Rule 222 will not
relax any pre-November 15, 1990 requirement in the SIP, and therefore
changes to the SIP resulting from this action ensure greater or
equivalent emission reductions of PM<INF>10</INF> and its precursors in
the District; accordingly, our action is consistent with the
requirements of CAA section 193.
Our TSD, which can be found in the docket for this rule, contains a
more detailed discussion of our analysis of Rule 222.
D. EPA Recommendations To Further Improve the Rule
The TSD also includes recommendations for an additional clarifying
revision to consider for adoption when the District next modifies Rule
222.
III. Proposed Action and Public Comment
As authorized in sections 110(k)(3) and 301(a) of the Act, the EPA
is proposing approval of the submitted rule because it fulfills the
relevant CAA requirements and strengthens the SIP. We have concluded
that our approval of the submitted rule would comply with the relevant
provisions of CAA sections 110(a)(2), 110(l), 172(c)(5), 173, 189, and
193, and 40 CFR 51.160-51.165 and 40 CFR 51.307.
If we finalize this action as proposed, our action will be codified
through revisions to 40 CFR 52.220a (Identification of plan--in part).
This action would incorporate the submitted rule into the SIP. In
conjunction with the EPA's SIP approval of the District's visibility
provisions for sources subject to the NNSR program as meeting the
relevant requirements of 40 CFR 51.307, this action would also revise
the
[[Page 58540]]
regulatory provision at 40 CFR 52.281(d) concerning the applicability
of the visibility Federal Implementation Plan (FIP) at 40 CFR 52.28 as
it pertains to California, to provide that this FIP does not apply to
sources subject to review under the District's SIP-approved NNSR
program.
We will accept comments from the public on this proposal until
September 27, 2023.
IV. 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 GBUAPCD rule listed in Table 1 of this preamble, which
regulates the issuance of permits for new and modified major sources in
nonattainment areas in the District. The EPA has made, and will
continue to make, this document available electronically through
<a href="https://www.regulations.gov">https://www.regulations.gov</a> and in hard copy at the EPA Region IX
Office (please contact the person identified in the FOR FURTHER
INFORMATION CONTACT section of this preamble for more information).
V. 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 14094 (88 FR 21879, April 11, 2023);
<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 subject to Executive Order 13045 (62 FR 19885,
April 23, 1997) because it proposes to approve a state program;
<bullet> Is not a significant regulatory action subject to
Executive Order 13211 (66 FR 28355, May 22, 2001); and
<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.
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).
Executive Order 12898 (Federal Actions to Address Environmental
Justice in Minority Populations and Low-Income Populations, 59 FR 7629,
Feb. 16, 1994) directs Federal agencies to identify and address
``disproportionately high and adverse human health or environmental
effects'' of their actions on minority populations and low-income
populations to the greatest extent practicable and permitted by law.
The EPA defines environmental justice (EJ) as ``the fair treatment and
meaningful involvement of all people regardless of race, color,
national origin, or income with respect to the development,
implementation, and enforcement of environmental laws, regulations, and
policies.'' The EPA further defines the term fair treatment to mean
that ``no group of people should bear a disproportionate burden of
environmental harms and risks, including those resulting from the
negative environmental consequences of industrial, governmental, and
commercial operations or programs and policies.''
The District did not evaluate environmental justice considerations
as part of its SIP submittal; the CAA and applicable implementing
regulations neither prohibit nor require such an evaluation. The EPA
did not perform an EJ analysis and did not consider EJ in this action.
Consideration of EJ is not required as part of this action, and there
is no information in the record inconsistent with the stated goals of
E.O. 12898 of achieving environmental justice for people of color, low-
income populations, and indigenous peoples.
List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52
Environmental protection, Air pollution control, Incorporation by
reference, Intergovernmental relations, Particulate matter, Reporting
and recordkeeping requirements.
Authority: 42 U.S.C. 7401 et seq.
Dated: August 17, 2023.
Cheree Peterson,
Deputy Regional Administrator, Region IX.
[FR Doc. 2023-18401 Filed 8-25-23; 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 August 28, 2023.
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.