[Federal Register Volume 77, Number 216 (Wednesday, November 7, 2012)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 66780-66781]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2012-27226]
=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
40 CFR Part 52
[EPA-R09-OAR-2012-0827; FRL-9749-5]
Revisions to the California State Implementation Plan, South
Coast Air Quality Management District
AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).
ACTION: Proposed rule.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: EPA is proposing to approve revisions to the South Coast Air
Quality Management District (SCAQMD) portion of the California State
Implementation Plan (SIP). These revisions concern volatile organic
compound (VOC) emissions from architectural coatings. We are approving
a local rule that regulates these emission sources under the Clean Air
Act (CAA or the Act). We are taking comments on this proposal and plan
to follow with a final action.
DATES: Any comments must arrive by December 7, 2012.
ADDRESSES: Submit comments, identified by docket number EPA-R09-OAR-
2012-0827, by one of the following methods:
1. Federal eRulemaking Portal: www.regulations.gov. Follow the
online instructions.
2. Email: [email protected].
3. Mail or deliver: Andrew Steckel (Air-4), U.S. Environmental
Protection Agency Region IX, 75 Hawthorne Street, San Francisco, CA
94105-3901.
Instructions: All comments will be included in the public docket
without change and may be made available online at www.regulations.gov,
including any personal information provided, unless the comment
includes Confidential Business Information (CBI) or other information
whose disclosure is restricted by statute. Information that you
consider CBI or otherwise protected should be clearly identified as
such and should not be submitted through www.regulations.gov or email.
www.regulations.gov is an ``anonymous access'' system, and EPA will not
know your identity or contact information unless you provide it in the
body of your comment. If you send email directly to EPA, your email
address will be automatically captured and included as part of the
public comment. If EPA cannot read your comment due to technical
difficulties and cannot contact you for clarification, EPA may not be
able to consider your comment.
Docket: Generally, documents in the docket for this action are
available electronically at www.regulations.gov and in hard copy at EPA
Region IX, 75 Hawthorne Street, San Francisco, California. While all
documents in the docket are listed at www.regulations.gov, some
information may be publicly available only at the hard copy location
(e.g., copyrighted material, large maps), and some may not be publicly
available in either location (e.g., CBI). To inspect the hard copy
materials, please schedule an appointment during normal business hours
with the contact listed in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Nicole Law, EPA Region IX, (415) 947-
4126, [email protected].
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Throughout this document, ``we,'' ``us'' and
``our'' refer to EPA.
Table of Contents
I. The State's Submittal
A. What rule did the State submit?
B. Are there other versions of this rule?
C. What is the purpose of the submitted rule revisions?
II. EPA's Evaluation and Action
A. How is EPA evaluating the rule?
B. Does the rule meet the evaluation criteria?
C. EPA Recommendations To Further Improve the Rule
D. Public Comment and Final Action
III. 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
that it was adopted by the local air agency and submitted by the
California Air Resources Board (CARB).
Table 1--Submitted Rules
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Local agency Rule No. Rule title Amended Submitted
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
SCAQMD.................................. 1113 Architectural Coatings......... 06/03/11 09/27/11
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
[[Page 66781]]
On October 24, 2011, EPA determined that the submittal for SCAQMD
Rule 1113 met the completeness criteria in 40 CFR part 51 Appendix V,
which must be met before formal EPA review.
B. Are there other versions of this rule?
We approved an earlier version of Rule 1113 into the SIP on August
17, 2011 (76 FR 50891). The SCAQMD adopted revisions to the SIP-
approved version on June 3, 2011 and CARB submitted them to us on
September 27, 2011.
C. What is the purpose of the submitted rule revision?
VOCs help produce ground-level ozone and smog, which harm human
health and the environment. Section 110(a) of the CAA requires States
to submit regulations that control VOC emissions. Rule 1113 provides
VOC limits for architectural coatings. The major revisions to the rule
include limiting and phasing out the averaging compliance option and
introducing VOC limits for previously unregulated colorants. EPA's
technical support document (TSD) has more information about these
rules.
II. EPA's Evaluation and Action
A. How is EPA evaluating the rule?
Generally, SIP rules must be enforceable (see section 110(a) of the
Act), must require Reasonably Available Control Technology (RACT) for
each category of sources covered by a Control Techniques Guidelines
(CTG) document as well as each major source in nonattainment areas (see
sections 182(a)(2) and (b)(2)), and must not relax existing
requirements (see sections 110(l) and 193).
Guidance and policy documents that we use to evaluate requirements
consistently include the following:
1. ``Issues Relating to VOC Regulation Cutpoints, Deficiencies, and
Deviations,'' EPA, May 25, 1988 (the Bluebook).
2. ``Guidance Document for Correcting Common VOC & Other Rule
Deficiencies,'' EPA Region 9, August 21, 2001 (the Little Bluebook).
3. ``Suggested Control Measure for Architectural Coatings,'' CARB,
October 2007.
4. ``Improving Air Quality with Economic Incentive Programs,'' EPA,
January 2001.
B. Does the rule meet the evaluation criteria?
We believe this rule is consistent with the relevant policy and
guidance regarding enforceability and SIP relaxations. The TSD has more
information on our evaluation.
C. EPA Recommendations To Further Improve the Rule
The TSD describes additional rule revisions that we recommend for
the next time the local agency modifies the rule but are not currently
the basis for rule disapproval.
D. Public Comment and Final Action
Because EPA believes the submitted rule fulfills all relevant
requirements, we are proposing to fully approve it as described in
section 110(k)(3) of the Act. We will accept comments from the public
on this proposal for the next 30 days. Unless we receive convincing new
information during the comment period, we intend to publish a final
approval action that will incorporate this rule into the federally
enforceable SIP.
III. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews
Under the Clean Air Act, the Administrator is required to approve a
SIP submission that complies with the provisions of the Act and
applicable Federal regulations. 42 U.S.C. 7410(k); 40 CFR 52.02(a).
Thus, in reviewing SIP submissions, EPA's role is to approve State
choices, provided that they meet the criteria of the Clean Air Act.
Accordingly, this proposed action merely proposes to approve State law
as meeting Federal requirements and does not impose additional
requirements beyond those imposed by State law. For that reason, this
proposed action:
Is not a ``significant regulatory action'' subject to
review by the Office of Management and Budget under Executive Order
12866 (58 FR 51735, October 4, 1993);
does not impose an information collection burden under the
provisions of the Paperwork Reduction Act (44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.);
is certified as not having a significant economic impact
on a substantial number of small entities under the Regulatory
Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 601 et seq.);
does not contain any unfunded mandate or significantly or
uniquely affect small governments, as described in the Unfunded
Mandates Reform Act of 1995 (Pub. L. 104-4);
does not have Federalism implications as specified in
Executive Order 13132 (64 FR 43255, August 10, 1999);
is not an economically significant regulatory action based
on health or safety risks subject to Executive Order 13045 (62 FR
19885, April 23, 1997);
is not a significant regulatory action subject to
Executive Order 13211 (66 FR 28355, May 22, 2001);
is not subject to requirements of Section 12(d) of the
National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act of 1995 (15 U.S.C. 272
note) because application of those requirements would be inconsistent
with the Clean Air Act; and
does not provide EPA with the discretionary authority to
address disproportionate human health or environmental effects with
practical, appropriate, and legally permissible methods under Executive
Order 12898 (59 FR 7629, February 16, 1994).
In addition, this proposed action does not have tribal implications as
specified by Executive Order 13175 (65 FR 67249, November 9, 2000),
because the SIP is not approved to apply in Indian country located in
the State, and EPA notes that it will not impose substantial direct
costs on tribal governments or preempt tribal law.
List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52
Environmental protection, Air pollution control, Incorporation by
reference, Intergovernmental relations, Ozone, Reporting and
recordkeeping requirements, Volatile organic compounds.
Authority: 42 U.S.C. 7401 et seq.
Dated: October 26, 2012.
Jared Blumenfeld,
Regional Administrator, Region IX.
[FR Doc. 2012-27226 Filed 11-6-12; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P