Proposed Rule2024-09248
Air Quality Plans; California; San Diego County Air Pollution Control District; Permit Program
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
April 30, 2024
Issuing agencies
Environmental Protection Agency
Abstract
The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is proposing to approve a permitting rule which provides specific permit exemptions for sources otherwise requiring a permit, submitted as a revision to the San Diego County Air Pollution Control (APCD or "District") portion of the California State Implementation Plan (SIP). The proposed revisions would expand an existing provision that exempts tub grinders and trommel screens that process green material from permit requirements to include horizontal grinders and the processing of mixtures of green material and food material. The revisions also add a definition for "food material." This action is being taken pursuant to the Clean Air Act (CAA or "Act") and its implementing regulations. We are taking comments on this proposal and plan to follow with a final action.
Full Text
<html>
<head>
<title>Federal Register, Volume 89 Issue 84 (Tuesday, April 30, 2024)</title>
</head>
<body><pre>
[Federal Register Volume 89, Number 84 (Tuesday, April 30, 2024)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 34178-34180]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [<a href="http://www.gpo.gov">www.gpo.gov</a>]
[FR Doc No: 2024-09248]
=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
40 CFR Part 52
[EPA-R09-OAR-2024-0100; FRL-11790-01-R09]
Air Quality Plans; California; San Diego County Air Pollution
Control District; Permit Program
AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).
ACTION: Proposed rule.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is proposing to
approve a permitting rule which provides specific permit exemptions for
sources otherwise requiring a permit, submitted as a revision to the
San Diego County Air Pollution Control (APCD or ``District'') portion
of the California State Implementation Plan (SIP). The proposed
revisions would expand an existing provision that exempts tub grinders
and trommel screens that process green material from permit
requirements to include horizontal grinders and the processing of
mixtures of green material and food material. The revisions also add a
definition for ``food material.'' This action is being taken pursuant
to the Clean Air Act (CAA or ``Act'') and its implementing regulations.
We are taking comments on this proposal and plan to follow with a final
action.
DATES: Comments must be received on or before May 30, 2024.
ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, identified by Docket ID No. EPA-R09-
OAR-2024-0100 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
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 or multimedia submissions, and
general guidance on making effective comments, please visit <a href="http://www.epa.gov/dockets/commenting-epa-dockets">http://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: Camille Cassar, EPA Region IX, 75
Hawthorne St., San Francisco, CA 94105 or by email at
<a href="/cdn-cgi/l/email-protection#0c6f6d7f7f6d7e226f6d61656060694c697c6d226b637a"><span class="__cf_email__" data-cfemail="c4a7a5b7b7a5b6eaa7a5a9ada8a8a184a1b4a5eaa3abb2">[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 rule did the State submit?
B. Are there other versions of this rule?
C. What is the purpose of the submitted rule revision?
II. The EPA's Evaluation and Action
A. How is the EPA evaluating this rule?
B. Does the rule meet the evaluation criteria?
C. Proposed action and public comment
III. Incorporation by Reference
IV. 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 with the dates it
was amended
[[Page 34179]]
by the District and submitted by the California Air Resources Board
(CARB).
Table 1--Submitted Rule
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Rule No. Rule title Amended date Submitted date
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
11..................................... Exemptions From Rule 10 Permit 10/13/2022 05/11/2023
Requirements.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
On November 11, 2023, the submittal for Rule 11 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. Are there other versions of this rule?
The SIP-approved version of the submitted rule is identified in
Table 2.
Table 2--SIP Approved Rule
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Federal Register
Rule No. Rule title SIP approval date citation
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
11..................................... Exemptions from Rule 10 Permit 09/28/2022 87 FR 58729
Requirements.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
If the EPA finalizes the action proposed herein, this rule will be
replaced in the SIP by the submitted rule listed in Table 1.
C. What is the purpose of the submitted rule revision?
The rule revision expands the exemption for tub grinders and
trommel screens processing green material to include horizontal
grinders and the processing of mixtures of green material and food
material. A definition of the term ``food material'' has also been
added to the rule.
II. The EPA's Evaluation and Action
A. How is the EPA evaluating the rule?
Under 40 CFR 51.160(e), a permit program must identify the types
and sizes of facilities, buildings, structures, or installations that
will be subject to review. A new source review (NSR) permitting program
may exempt some new sources or modifications that are inconsequential
to attainment or maintenance of the national ambient air quality
standards (NAAQS), considering local air quality concerns.
Section 110(l) of the Act prohibits the EPA from approving SIP
revisions that would interfere with any applicable requirement
concerning attainment and reasonable further progress (RFP) or any
other applicable requirement of the CAA. Section 193 of the Act
prohibits the modification of a 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 pollutant(s). With respect to procedures, CAA sections 110(a)
and 110(l) require that a state conduct reasonable notice and public
hearing before adopting a SIP revision.
B. Does the rule meet the evaluation criteria?
Subsection (d)(10)(v) of Rule 11 currently exempts tub grinders and
trommel screens processing green material from permit requirements. As
a result of a recent California organic waste landfill diversion
mandate, State of California Senate Bill (SB) 1383, San Diego County
residents and businesses are now recycling food material along with
yard waste. Consequently, composting facilities are now receiving, and
processing, green material mixed with food material. Additionally, due
to technological advancements, tub grinders are being replaced with
more efficient horizontal grinders that are safer to operate. The rule
revisions expand the existing exemption to include horizontal grinders
and the processing of mixtures of green material and food material. A
definition of the term ``food material'' has also been added to the
rule.
The emissions from tub grinders and horizontal grinders are related
to the throughput of materials; therefore horizontal grinders do not
produce emissions that are measurably different from those from a tub
grinder. Therefore, we find this expanded exemption provision
acceptable. The definition for the term ``food material'' is clear and
provides clarification of the type of materials that can be processed
in the exempt equipment. Therefore, we find this new definition
acceptable.
The submitted rule complies with the substantive and procedural
requirements of CAA section 110(l). With respect to the procedural
requirements, based on our review of the public process documentation
included with the submitted rule, we find that the District has
provided sufficient evidence of public notice and opportunity for
comment and public hearings prior to submittal of this SIP revision and
has satisfied the procedural requirements under CAA section 110(l).
With respect to the substantive requirements of CAA section 110(l),
we have determined that our approval of the submitted rule would not
interfere with the area's ability to attain or maintain the NAAQS or
with any other applicable requirements of the CAA. Similarly, we find
that the submitted rule is approvable under section 193 of the Act
because it does not modify any control requirement in effect before
November 15, 1990, without ensuring equivalent or greater emission
reductions.
For the reasons stated above and explained further in our technical
support document, we find that the submitted San Diego County APCD Rule
11 satisfies the applicable CAA and regulatory requirements for
nonattainment NSR permit programs at 40 CFR 51.160 through 51.165 and
other applicable requirements.
C. Proposed Action and Public Comment
As authorized in section 110(k)(3) of the Act, the EPA is proposing
approval of San Diego County APCD Rule 11. We are proposing this action
based on our determination that the submitted rule satisfies the
applicable statutory and regulatory provisions governing regulation of
stationary sources at 40 CFR 51.160 through 51.165. In support of our
proposed action, we have concluded that our approval would comply with
sections 110(l) and 193 of the Act because the amended rule will not
interfere with continued attainment
[[Page 34180]]
of the NAAQS in San Diego County and does not relax control technology
and offset requirements.
We will accept comments from the public on this proposal until May
30, 2024. If finalized, this action would incorporate the submitted
rule into the SIP and our action would be codified through revisions to
40 CFR 52.220, ``Identification of plan--in part.''
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 San Diego County APCD Rule 11, ``Exemptions From Rule 10
Permit Requirements,'' amended October 13, 2022, which provides
specific permit exemptions for sources otherwise requiring a permit.
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 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 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 rules do 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 air agency 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 goal 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, Administrative practice and procedure,
Air pollution control, Carbon oxides, Incorporation by reference,
Intergovernmental relations, Nitrogen oxides, Ozone, Particulate
matter, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements, Sulfur oxides,
Volatile organic compounds.
Dated: April 22, 2024.
Martha Guzman Aceves,
Regional Administrator, Region IX.
[FR Doc. 2024-09248 Filed 4-29-24; 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 April 30, 2024.
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.