2011-19390. Revision to the California State Implementation Plan; South Coast Air Quality Management District

AGENCY:

Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION:

Direct final rule.

SUMMARY:

EPA is taking direct final action to approve a revision to the South Coast Air Quality Management District portion of the California State Implementation Plan (SIP). This revision concerns volatile organic compound (VOC) emissions from polymeric foam manufacturing operations. We are approving a local rule that regulates these emission sources under the Clean Air Act as amended in 1990 (CAA).

DATES:

This rule is effective on October 3, 2011 without further notice, unless EPA receives adverse comments by September 6, 2011. If we receive such comments, we will publish a timely withdrawal in the Federal Register to notify the public that this direct final rule will not take effect.

ADDRESSES:

Submit comments, identified by docket number EPA-R09-OAR-2011-0462, by one of the following methods:

1. Federal eRulemaking Portal: http://www.regulations.gov. Follow the on-line instructions.

2. E-mail: [e-mail].

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 http://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 http://www.regulations.gov or e-mail. http://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 e-mail directly to EPA, your e-mail 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. Electronic files should avoid the use of special characters, any form of encryption, and be free of any defects or viruses.

Docket: Generally, documents in the docket for this action are available electronically at http://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 http://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:

Mae Wang, EPA Region IX, [phone], [e-mail].

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?

II. EPA's Evaluation and Action

A. How is EPA evaluating the rule?

B. Does the rule meet the evaluation criteria?

C. Public Comment and Final Action

III. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews

I. The State's Submittal

A. What rule did the State submit?

We are approving South Coast Air Quality Management District (SCAQMD) Rule 1175, adopted on November 5, 2010, and submitted by the California Air Resources Board (CARB) on April 5, 2011. On May 6, 2011, EPA determined that the submittal for Rule 1175 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 1175 into the SIP on August 25, 1994 (see 59 FR 43751). The SCAQMD adopted revisions to the SIP-approved version on September 7, 2007, and CARB submitted them to us on March 7, 2008. We disapproved this version on May 10, 2010 (see 75 FR 25775).

C. What is the purpose of the submitted rule?

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 1175 was designed to control VOC emissions from the manufacturing, processing, and storage of polymeric foam products. The rule essentially prohibits the use of chlorofluorocarbons, VOC, and methylene chloride in polymeric cellular foam product operations except for expandable polystyrene molding and extrudable polystyrene foam operations. Expandable polystyrene molding and extrudable polystyrene foam operations are required to demonstrate that emissions do not exceed 2.4 pounds of VOC per 100 pounds of raw materials processed, or to install an approved emission control system. EPA's technical support document (TSD) has more information about this rule.

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 CAA), 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)), must not interfere with any applicable requirement concerning attainment and reasonable further progress or any other applicable requirement of the CAA (see section 110(l) of the CAA), and must not modify, in a nonattainment area, any SIP-approved control requirement in effect before November 15, 1990 (see section 193 of the CAA). The SCAQMD regulates an ozone nonattainment area (see 40 CFR part 81), so Rule 1175 must fulfill RACT as well as CAA section 110(l) requirements.

Guidance and policy documents that we use to evaluate enforceability and RACT 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. “Control of VOC Emissions from Polystyrene Foam Manufacturing” (EPA-450/3-90-020, September 1990).

B. Does the rule meet the evaluation criteria?

We believe this rule is consistent with the relevant policy and guidance regarding enforceability, RACT, and CAA section 110(l). The SIP revision would not interfere with the on-going process for ensuring that requirements for reasonable further progress and attainment of the National Ambient Air Quality Standards are met, and the submitted SIP revision is at least as stringent as the rule previously approved into the SIP.

The previous version of Rule 1175, amended on September 7, 2007, and submitted to EPA on March 7, 2008, was disapproved on May 10, 2010 (75 FR 25775). As discussed in more detail in EPA's TSD associated with that action, EPA disapproved the earlier version because it did not contain adequate provisions to ensure rule enforceability in the following areas:

(1) For sources choosing to comply with the new option for expanded polystyrene block molding operations, the rule needed to require demonstration through source testing that the 93% collection and reduction of emissions is being achieved.

(2) For sources choosing to comply with the new option for expanded polystyrene block molding operations, the rule needed to clarify and identify the operational techniques and parameters needed to achieve 93% control, and include those techniques and parameters in a federally enforceable permit.

(3) For sources with an emission control system designed to meet the 90% collection and 95% destruction requirements, the rule needed to clarify and identify the operational techniques and parameters needed for compliance and include those techniques and parameters in a federally enforceable permit.

The currently submitted version, amended on November 5, 2010, contains added language to require that techniques and parameters related to operation of emission control systems be incorporated in a federally enforceable permit. Source testing requirements were also added. These revisions address the previously identified deficiencies. Additional rule revisions address recommendations to improve the clarity of the rule. We find that the currently submitted version of Rule 1175 fulfills the relevant criteria summarized earlier. The TSD has more information on our evaluation.

C. Public Comment and Final Action

As authorized in section 110(k)(3) of the Act, EPA is fully approving the submitted rule because we believe it fulfills all relevant requirements. We do not think anyone will object to this approval, so we are finalizing it without proposing it in advance. However, in the Proposed Rules section of this Federal Register, we are simultaneously proposing approval of the same submitted rule. If we receive adverse comments by September 6, 2011, we will publish a timely withdrawal in the Federal Register to notify the public that the direct final approval will not take effect and we will address the comments in a subsequent final action based on the proposal. If we do not receive timely adverse comments, the direct final approval will be effective without further notice on October 3, 2011. This will incorporate the rule into the federally enforceable SIP.

Please note that if EPA receives adverse comment on an amendment, paragraph, or section of this rule and if that provision may be severed from the remainder of the rule, EPA may adopt as final those provisions of the rule that are not the subject of an adverse comment.

III. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews

Under the CAA, the Administrator is required to approve a SIP submission that complies with the provisions of the CAA 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 CAA. Accordingly, this action merely approves State law as meeting Federal requirements and does not impose additional requirements beyond those imposed by State law. For that reason, this 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 CAA; 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 rule 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.

The Congressional Review Act, 5 U.S.C. 801 et seq., as added by the Small Business Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act of 1996, generally provides that before a rule may take effect, the agency promulgating the rule must submit a rule report, which includes a copy of the rule, to each House of the Congress and to the Comptroller General of the United States. EPA will submit a report containing this action and other required information to the U.S. Senate, the U.S. House of Representatives, and the Comptroller General of the United States prior to publication of the rule in the Federal Register. A major rule cannot take effect until 60 days after it is published in the Federal Register. This action is not a “major rule” as defined by 5 U.S.C. 804(2).

Under section 307(b)(1) of the CAA, petitions for judicial review of this action must be filed in the United States Court of Appeals for the appropriate circuit by October 3, 2011. Filing a petition for reconsideration by the Administrator of this final rule does not affect the finality of this action for the purposes of judicial review nor does it extend the time within which a petition for judicial review may be filed, and shall not postpone the effectiveness of such rule or action. Parties with objections to this direct final rule are encouraged to file a comment in response to the parallel notice of proposed rulemaking for this action published in the Proposed Rules section of today's Federal Register, rather than file an immediate petition for judicial review of this direct final rule, so that EPA can withdraw this direct final rule and address the comment in the proposed rulemaking. This action may not be challenged later in proceedings to enforce its requirements (see section 307(b)(2)).

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

Dated: June 21, 2011.

Jared Blumenfeld,

Regional Administrator, Region IX.

Part 52, chapter I, title 40 of the Code of Federal Regulations is amended as follows:

PART 52—[AMENDED]

1. The authority citation for Part 52 continues to read as follows:

Authority: 42 U.S.C. 7401 et seq.

Subpart F—California

2. Section 52.220, is amended by adding paragraph (c)(388)(i)(A)( 3) to read as follows:

§ 52.220

Identification of plan.

* * * * *

(c) * * *

(388) * * *

(i) * * *

(A) * * *

(3) Rule 1175, “Control of Emissions from the Manufacture of Polymeric Cellular (Foam) Products,” amended November 5, 2010.

* * * * *