Proposed Rule2025-01220
Air Plan Revisions; California Air Plan Revisions; San Joaquin Valley 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
January 21, 2025
Issuing agencies
Environmental Protection Agency
Abstract
The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is proposing action on three permitting rules submitted as a revision to the San Joaquin Valley Unified Air Pollution Control District (SJVUAPCD or "District") portion of the California State Implementation Plan (SIP). These revisions concern the District's New Source Review (NSR) permitting program for new and modified sources of air pollution under section 110(a)(2)(C) and part D of title I of the Clean Air Act (CAA or "Act"). This action will update the California SIP with rules that the District has revised to address deficiencies identified in a previous limited disapproval action and to incorporate other revisions related to NSR requirements. We are taking comments on this proposal and plan to follow with a final action. Elsewhere in this Federal Register, we are making an interim final determination that will defer the imposition of CAA sanctions associated with our previous limited disapproval action. This action also proposes to revise regulatory text to clarify that the SJVUAPCD is not subject to the federal implementation plan related to protection of visibility.
Full Text
<html>
<head>
<title>Federal Register, Volume 90 Issue 12 (Tuesday, January 21, 2025)</title>
</head>
<body><pre>
[Federal Register Volume 90, Number 12 (Tuesday, January 21, 2025)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 6928-6932]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [<a href="http://www.gpo.gov">www.gpo.gov</a>]
[FR Doc No: 2025-01220]
=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
40 CFR Part 52
[EPA-R09-OAR-2024-0627; FRL-12536-01-R9]
Air Plan Revisions; California Air Plan Revisions; San Joaquin
Valley Unified Air Pollution Control District; Stationary Source
Permits
AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).
ACTION: Proposed rule.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is proposing action
on three permitting rules submitted as a revision to the San Joaquin
Valley Unified Air Pollution Control District (SJVUAPCD or
``District'') portion of the California State Implementation Plan
(SIP). These revisions concern the District's New Source Review (NSR)
permitting program for new and modified sources of air pollution under
section 110(a)(2)(C) and part D of title I of the Clean Air Act (CAA or
``Act''). This action will update the California SIP with rules that
the District has revised to address deficiencies identified in a
previous limited disapproval action and to incorporate other revisions
related to NSR requirements. We are taking comments on this proposal
and plan to follow with a final action. Elsewhere in this Federal
Register, we are making an interim final determination that will defer
the imposition of CAA sanctions associated with our previous limited
disapproval action. This action also proposes to revise regulatory text
to clarify that the SJVUAPCD is not subject to the federal
implementation plan related to protection of visibility.
DATES: WComments must be received on or before February 20, 2025.
ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, identified by Docket ID No. EPA-R09-
OAR-2024-0627 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 a disability
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: Doris Lo, EPA Region IX, 75 Hawthorne
St., San Francisco, CA 94105. By phone: (415) 972-3959, or by email at
<a href="/cdn-cgi/l/email-protection#274b48094348554e546742574609404851"><span class="__cf_email__" data-cfemail="365a59185259445f457653465718515940">[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 rules did the State submit?
B. Are there other versions of these rules?
C. What is the purpose of the submitted rules?
II. The EPA's Evaluation and Action
A. How is the EPA evaluating the rules?
B. Do the rules meet the evaluation criteria?
C. What are the rule deficiencies?
D. EPA Recommendations To Further Improve the Rules.
E. Proposed Action and Public Comment.
III. Incorporation by Reference
IV. 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 including the
date they were adopted by the District and submitted to the EPA by the
California
[[Page 6929]]
Air Resources Board (CARB), which is the governor's designee for
California SIP submittals.
Table 1--Submitted Rules
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Rule No. Rule title Adopted Submitted
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
1020.......................................... Definitions........................... 4/20/23 10/13/23
2020.......................................... Exemptions............................ 12/18/14 10/13/23
2201.......................................... New and Modified Stationary Source 4/20/23 10/13/23
Review Rule.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
On April 13, 2024, the submittal of each rule became complete by
operation of law.
B. Are there other versions of these rules?
The SIP-approved versions of the submitted rules are identified
below in Table 2.
Table 2--SIP-Approved Rules
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
SIP
Rule No. Rule title approval Federal Register citation
date
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
1020................................... Definitions.................... 10/02/14 79 FR 59433.
2020................................... Exemptions..................... 9/17/14 79 FR 55637.
2201................................... New and Modified Stationary 7/10/23 88 FR 43434.
Source Review Rule.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
If the EPA finalizes the action proposed herein, these rules will
be replaced in the SIP by the submitted set of rules listed in Table 1.
Additionally, as described below, the EPA's final approval of these
rules will resolve our previous limited disapproval of Rule 2201.
C. What is the purpose of the submitted rules?
The submitted rules constitute part of the District's program for
preconstruction review and permitting of new or modified stationary
sources under its jurisdiction. The rule revisions that are the subject
of this action update the District's preconstruction review and
permitting program and are intended to satisfy the NSR program
requirements under part D of title I of the Act (``nonattainment NSR''
or ``NNSR''), the general preconstruction review requirements under
section 110(a)(2)(C) of the Act (``minor NSR''), and related EPA
regulations. The submitted rules are also intended to resolve
deficiencies identified in our July 10, 2023 final action (``2023 NSR
Action''),\1\ which included a limited disapproval of a prior version
of Rule 2201. The rules also include other assorted revisions,
including new and revised definitions and applicability and compliance
provisions.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ 87 FR 45730.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The San Joaquin Valley is currently designated attainment for the
nitrogen dioxide, carbon monoxide, particulate matter equal to or less
than 10 micrometers (PM<INF>10</INF>), sulfur dioxide (SO<INF>2</INF>),
and lead National Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS). The San
Joaquin Valley is currently designated ``Extreme'' nonattainment for
the 1997, 2008, and 2015 ozone NAAQS and ``Serious'' nonattainment for
the 1997, 2006, and 2012 particulate matter equal to or less than 2.5
micrometers (PM<INF>2.5</INF>) NAAQS.\2\ Therefore, the District is
required to adopt and implement a SIP-approved NNSR permitting program
that applies to new or modified major stationary sources of ozone
precursors, PM<INF>2.5</INF>, and PM<INF>2.5</INF> precursors within
the San Joaquin Valley.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\2\ See 40 CFR 81.305 (describing geographic extent of San
Joaquin Valley nonattainment area for each NAAQS).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The SIP submittal evaluated in this action includes revisions to
Rule 1020, ``Definitions,'' Rule 2020, ``Exemptions,'' and Rule 2201,
``New and Modified Stationary Source Review Rule.'' Rule 1020 provides
definitions for certain key terms used throughout the District's
regulations. Rule 2020 specifies types of emissions units that are not
required to obtain an Authority to Construct (ATC) or Permit to Operate
(PTO). The rule also specifies the recordkeeping requirements to verify
a permit exemption and outlines the compliance schedule for existing
emissions units that lose their permit exemption. Rule 2201 is intended
to satisfy the requirements of the NNSR program under part D of title I
of the CAA that are applicable in ozone and PM<INF>2.5</INF>
nonattainment areas and the general NSR program permit requirements.
The EPA's technical support document (TSD) for this action, which
is included in the docket for our proposed rulemaking, has more
information about the purposes of the submitted rules and the
District's revisions.
II. The EPA's Evaluation and Action
A. How is the EPA evaluating the rules?
The EPA has evaluated the submitted rules to determine whether they
address the deficiencies identified in our 2023 NSR Action. We have
also evaluated all additional rule revisions for compliance with CAA
sections 172(c)(5), 173, 182(e), and 189(b), which establish the
requirements for stationary source preconstruction permitting programs,
including those specifically applicable for an Extreme ozone
nonattainment area and Serious PM<INF>2.5</INF> nonattainment area, as
well as the federal regulations applicable to stationary source
permitting at 40 CFR 51.160 through 51.165. Additionally, the EPA
reviewed the rules for consistency with other general CAA requirements
for SIP submittals, including requirements at CAA section 110(a)(2)(A)
regarding rule enforceability and requirements at CAA sections 110(l)
and 193 for SIP revisions. We have also considered whether the rules
meet the federal visibility requirements related to state NNSR programs
as described in 40 CFR 51.307.
[[Page 6930]]
B. Do the rules meet the evaluation criteria?
With the exceptions noted below, the EPA finds that Rules 1020,
2020, and 2201 generally satisfy the applicable CAA and regulatory
requirements for sources subject to NNSR permit program requirements.
Below, we discuss our evaluation of the submitted rules. The TSD for
this action contains a more detailed analysis.
The SJVUAPCD revised Rules 1020 and 2201 to address the
deficiencies identified in the 2023 NSR action. Specifically, the
District revised Rules 1020 and 2201 to address our findings that the
previous version of Rule 2201 (1) omitted certain definitions necessary
for application of the District's permitting program for new and
modified stationary sources; (2) included provisions allowing for
interprecursor trading (IPT) that are no longer permissible due to a
2021 D.C. Circuit Court of appeals decision; (3) allowed for
impermissible exemptions for relocated sources; (4) lacked public
notice requirements for certain minor sources; (5) included an offset
tracking system that failed to ensure equivalency with federal offset
requirements; (6) did not include certain required provisions for
temporary replacement units and routine replacement emission units; and
(7) included other more minor deficiencies. The District addressed all
these deficiencies in the SIP submission that is being evaluated in
this action. The TSD for this action provides further detail on these
deficiencies and how they were addressed by the District. While the
District addressed all the deficiencies identified in the 2023 NSR
action, pursuant to sections 110(k)(3) and 301(a) of the Act, we are
proposing a limited approval and limited disapproval of Rules 1020,
``Definitions,'' 2020, ``Exemptions,'' and 2201, ``New and Modified
Stationary Source Review Rule'' due to the newly identified
deficiencies found in each rule. These new deficiencies are described
in Section II.C of this action.
The submitted rules comply 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 rules, 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 these 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 rules 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 rules are approvable under section 193 of the Act
because they do not modify any control requirement in effect before
November 15, 1990, without ensuring equivalent or greater emission
reductions. The submitted rules are otherwise consistent with criteria
for the EPA's approval of regulations submitted for inclusion in the
SIP, including the requirement at CAA section 110(c)(2)(A) that
submitted regulations be clear and legally enforceable.
For the reasons stated above and explained further in the TSD for
this action, we find that the submitted rules generally satisfy the
applicable CAA and regulatory requirements for NSR permit programs
under CAA section 110(a)(2)(A) and part D of title I of the Act and
other applicable requirements, subject to the exceptions noted below
where the EPA has identified deficiencies. This submittal also corrects
the deficiencies described in our 2023 NSR Action. If we finalize this
action as proposed, our action will resolve the limited disapproval of
Rule 2201 and will be codified through revisions to 40 CFR 52.220
(Identification of plan--in part). Because Rules 1020, 2020, and 2201
are not fully consistent with these requirements, we are proposing a
limited approval and limited disapproval of the rules under CAA
sections 110(k)(3) and 301(a). The specific rule provisions that do not
meet the evaluation criteria are summarized in the following section
and described in more detail in the TSD included in the docket for this
proposed action.
We are concurrently making an interim final determination to defer
CAA section 179 sanctions associated with the 2023 NSR Action's limited
disapproval of Rule 2201. Consistent with our order of sanction
regulations,\3\ this determination is based on this proposal to approve
SIP revisions from the District that resolve the deficiencies that were
the basis of our prior limited disapproval that triggered sanctions
under section 179 of the CAA.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\3\ 40 CFR 52.31.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
C. What are the rule deficiencies?
The following provisions of Rules 1020, 2020, and 2201 do not
satisfy the requirements of section 110 and/or part D of title I of the
Act and prevent full approval of the rules. The District must correct
the deficiencies identified in this section and resubmit the rules for
the EPA's approval in a subsequent action. The EPA has identified three
deficiencies in the submitted rules.
1. Rule 1020--Definitions
The definition of VOC in Rule 1020 is deficient because it does not
include trans-1,1,1,4,4,4-hexafluorobut-2-ene (also known as HFO-
1336mzz(E)), which is an exempt compound listed in the definition of
VOC as found in 40 CFR 51.100(s)(1). In addition, on November 12, 2024,
the EPA proposed to add (Z)-1-chloro-2,3,3,3-tetrafluoropropene (also
known as HCFO-1224yd(Z)) to the definition of VOC as an exempt
compound. The District must revise the Rule 1020 definition of VOC to
match the federal definition at 40 CFR 51.100(s), including the
exemptions listed at 40 CFR 51.100(s)(1).
2. Rule 2020--Exemptions
Several American Society for Testing and Materials (ASTM) test
method citations provided in Rule 2020 are deficient because they do
not include the revision or reissuance date of the specific ASTM
methods.
3. Rule 2201--New and Modified Stationary Source Review Rule
The term ``Emission Reduction Credit'' is used in Rule 2201, but
the term is not defined in the rule or in Rule 1020, ``Definitions.''
We note that the term is defined in Rule 2301--Emission Reduction
Credit Banking, but this rule has not been submitted for SIP approval.
Therefore, we find Rule 2201 deficient because it does not provide a
definition for the term Emission Reduction Credit, and the term is a
necessary component of an approvable NNSR program.
D. EPA Recommendations To Further Improve the Rules
The TSD for this action includes recommendations for the next time
the District revises Rule 2201.
E. Proposed Action and Public Comment
As authorized in sections 110(k)(3) and 301(a) of the Act, the EPA
is proposing a limited approval and limited disapproval of Rules 1020,
2020, and 2201. We will accept comments from the public on this
proposal until February 20, 2025. If we finalize this action as
proposed, this action will incorporate the submitted rules into the
SIP, including those provisions identified as deficient. This approval
is limited because the EPA is
[[Page 6931]]
simultaneously proposing a limited disapproval of the rules under
section 110(k)(3). If finalized as proposed, our limited disapproval
action would trigger an obligation on the EPA to promulgate a federal
implementation plan (FIP) unless the State corrects the deficiencies,
and the EPA approves the related plan revisions, within two years of
the final action. Additionally, because the deficiency relates to NNSR
requirements under part D of title I of the Act, the offset sanction in
CAA section 179(b)(2) would apply in the San Joaquin Valley 18 months
after the effective date of a final limited disapproval, and the
highway funding sanctions in CAA section 179(b)(1) would apply in the
area six months after the offset sanction is imposed. Neither sanction
will be imposed under the CAA if the State submits and we approve,
prior to the implementation of the sanctions, a SIP revision that
corrects the deficiencies we identify in our final action. The EPA
intends to work with the District to correct the deficiencies in a
timely manner.
This action would also revise the regulatory provisions at 40 CFR
52.281(d) concerning the applicability of the visibility 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. As described in more detail in the TSD for this action,
we are proposing to find that Rule 2201 satisfies the visibility
provisions for sources subject to the NNSR program at 40 CFR 51.307.
Note that the submitted rules have been adopted by the District,
and the EPA's final limited disapproval would not prevent the local
agency from enforcing them. The limited disapproval would also not
prevent any portion of the rules from being incorporated by reference
into the federally enforceable SIP.\4\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\4\ Memorandum dated July 9, 1992, from John Calcagni, Director,
Air Quality Management Division, Office of Air Quality Planning and
Standards, U.S. EPA, to EPA Regional Air Directors, Regions I-X,
Subject: ``Processing of State Implementation Plan (SIP)
Submittals.''
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
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 listed in Table 1 of this preamble. These rules
implement the District's nonattainment NSR program. 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 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 CAA, 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 review state choices
and approve those choices if they meet the minimum criteria of the Act.
Accordingly, this proposed action is proposing a limited approval and
limited disapproval of state law as meeting federal requirements and
does not impose additional requirements beyond those imposed by state
law.
Additional information about these statutes and Executive Orders
can be found at <a href="https://www.epa.gov/laws-regulations/laws-and-executive-orders">https://www.epa.gov/laws-regulations/laws-and-executive-orders</a>.
A. Executive Order 12866: Regulatory Planning and Review and Executive
Order 13563: Improving Regulation and Regulatory Review
This action is not a significant regulatory action and was
therefore not submitted to the Office of Management and Budget (OMB)
for review.
B. Paperwork Reduction Act (PRA)
This action does not impose an information collection burden under
the PRA because this action does not impose additional requirements
beyond those imposed by state law.
C. Regulatory Flexibility Act (RFA)
I certify that this action will not have a significant economic
impact on a substantial number of small entities under the RFA. This
action will not impose any requirements on small entities beyond those
imposed by state law.
D. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act (UMRA)
This action does not contain any unfunded mandate as described in
UMRA, 2 U.S.C. 1531-1538, and does not significantly or uniquely affect
small governments. This action does not impose additional requirements
beyond those imposed by state law. Accordingly, no additional costs to
state, local, or tribal governments, or to the private sector, will
result from this action.
E. Executive Order 13132: Federalism
This action does not have federalism implications. It will not have
substantial direct effects on the states, on the relationship between
the national government and the states, or on the distribution of power
and responsibilities among the various levels of government.
F. Executive Order 13175: Coordination With Indian Tribal Governments
This action does not have tribal implications, as specified in
Executive Order 13175, because 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, and will not
impose substantial direct costs on tribal governments or preempt tribal
law. Thus, Executive Order 13175 does not apply to this action.
G. Executive Order 13045: Protection of Children From Environmental
Health Risks and Safety Risks
The EPA interprets Executive Order 13045 as applying only to those
regulatory actions that concern environmental health or safety risks
that the EPA has reason to believe may disproportionately affect
children, per the definition of ``covered regulatory action'' in
section 2-202 of the Executive Order. Therefore, this action is not
subject to Executive Order 13045 because it is merely proposing a
limited approval and limited disapproval of state law as meeting
federal requirements. Furthermore, the EPA's Policy on Children's
Health does not apply to this action.
H. Executive Order 13211: Actions That Significantly Affect Energy
Supply, Distribution, or Use
This action is not subject to Executive Order 13211, because it is
not a significant regulatory action under Executive Order 12866.
I. National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act (NTTAA)
Section 12(d) of the NTTAA directs the EPA to use voluntary
consensus standards in its regulatory activities unless to do so would
be inconsistent with applicable law or otherwise impractical. The EPA
believes that this action is not subject to the requirements of section
12(d) of the NTTAA because application of those requirements would be
inconsistent with the CAA.
[[Page 6932]]
J. Executive Order 12898: Federal Actions To Address Environmental
Justice in Minority Populations and Low-Income Populations and
Executive Order 14096: Revitalizing Our Nation's Commitment to
Environmental Justice for All
Executive Order 12898 (Federal Actions To Address Environmental
Justice in Minority Populations and Low-Income Populations, 59 FR 7629,
February 16, 1994) directs Federal agencies to identify and address
``disproportionately high and adverse human health or environmental
effects'' of their actions on communities with environmental justice
(EJ) concerns to the greatest extent practicable and permitted by law.
Executive Order 14096 (Revitalizing Our Nation's Commitment to
Environmental Justice for All, 88 FR 25251, April 26, 2023) builds on
and supplements Executive Order 12898 and defines EJ as, among other
things, ``the just treatment and meaningful involvement of all people,
regardless of income, race, color, national origin, Tribal affiliation,
or disability, in agency decision-making and other Federal activities
that affect human health and the environment.''
The State did not evaluate EJ 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 Executive Orders 12898 and
14096 of achieving EJ for communities with EJ concerns.
List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52
Environmental protection, Administrative practice and procedure,
Air pollution control, Incorporation by reference, Intergovernmental
relations, Nitrogen dioxide, Ozone, Particulate matter, Reporting and
recordkeeping requirements, Sulfur dioxide, Volatile organic compounds.
Dated: January 13, 2025.
Martha Guzman Aceves,
Regional Administrator, Region IX.
[FR Doc. 2025-01220 Filed 1-17-25; 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 January 21, 2025.
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.