Air Plan Approval; California; Placer County Air Pollution Control District, Antelope Valley Air Quality Management District, Mariposa County Air Pollution Control District, and Eastern Kern Air Pollution Control District
| Published date | 06 October 2020 |
| Citation | 85 FR 63064 |
| Record Number | 2020-21322 |
| Section | Proposed rules |
| Court | Environmental Protection Agency |
Federal Register, Volume 85 Issue 194 (Tuesday, October 6, 2020)
[Federal Register Volume 85, Number 194 (Tuesday, October 6, 2020)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 63064-63066]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2020-21322]
=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
40 CFR Part 52
[EPA-R09-OAR-2020-0435; FRL-10014-95-Region 9]
Air Plan Approval; California; Placer County Air Pollution
Control District, Antelope Valley Air Quality Management District,
Mariposa County Air Pollution Control District, and Eastern Kern Air
Pollution Control District
AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).
ACTION: Proposed rule.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is proposing to
approve revisions to the Placer County Air Pollution Control District
(PCAPCD), Antelope Valley Air Quality Management District (AVAQMD),
Mariposa County Air Pollution Control District (MCAPCD), and Eastern
Kern Air Pollution Control District (EKAPCD) portions of the California
State Implementation Plan (SIP). These revisions concern negative
declarations for the Control Techniques Guidelines (CTG) for the Oil
and Natural Gas Industry (Oil and Natural Gas CTG). We are taking
comments on this proposal to approve the PCAPCD, AVAQMD, MCAPCD, and
EKAPCD negative declarations into the California SIP. We plan to follow
with a final action.
DATES: Comments must be received on or before November 5, 2020.
ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, identified by Docket ID No. EPA-R09-
OAR-2020-0435 at https://www.regulations.gov. For comments submitted at
Regulations.gov, follow the online instructions for submitting
comments. Once submitted, comments cannot be edited or removed from
Regulations.gov. 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 https://www.epa.gov/dockets/commenting-epa-dockets. 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: Sina Schwenk-Mueller, EPA Region IX,
75 Hawthorne St., San Francisco, CA 94105 by phone: (415) 947-4100 or
email at [email protected] or Rebecca Newhouse, EPA Region
IX, 75 Hawthorne St., San Francisco, CA 94105 by phone: (415) 972-3004
or email at [email protected].
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Throughout this document, ``we,'' ``us'' and
``our'' refer to the EPA.
[[Page 63065]]
Table of Contents
I. The State's Submittal
A. What documents did the State submit?
B. Are there other versions of these documents?
C. What is the purpose of the submitted negative declarations?
II. The EPA's Evaluation and Action
A. How is the EPA evaluating the negative declarations?
B. Do the negative declarations meet the evaluation criteria?
C. Public Comment and Proposed Action
III. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews
I. The State's Submittal
A. What documents did the State submit?
Table 1 lists the documents addressed by this proposal with the
dates that they were adopted by the local air agencies and submitted by
the California Air Resources Board (CARB).
Table 1--Submitted Documents
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Local agency Document title Adopted Submitted
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
PCAPCD........................................ Negative Declaration for the 12/12/19 \1\ 01/23/20
Control Techniques Guidelines
for the Oil and Natural Gas
Industry Source Category.
AVAQMD........................................ Federal Negative Declaration for 01/21/20 \2\ 05/01/20
Control Techniques Guidelines
(CTG) for the Oil and Natural
Gas Industry Source Category.
MCAPCD........................................ Negative Declaration for the 03/10/20 \3\ 05/01/20
Control Techniques Guidelines
for the Oil and Natural Gas
Industry Source Category.
EKAPCD........................................ Reasonably Available Control 05/11/17 08/09/17
Technology (RACT) State
Implementation Plan (SIP)
Revision for the 2008 Ozone
National Ambient Air Quality
Standards--Negative Declaration
for Oil and Natural Gas CTG \4\.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ This submittal was transmitted to the EPA by a letter from CARB dated January 21, 2020.
\2\ This submittal was transmitted to the EPA by a letter from CARB dated April 30, 2020.
\3\ This submittal was transmitted to the EPA by a letter from CARB dated April 30, 2020.
\4\ The EPA is only acting on the negative declaration for the Oil and Natural Gas CTG in Table 6--CTG
Categories with No Applicable Source (Negative Declarations) of the EKAPCD RACT SIP Submittal. At this time,
the EPA is not proposing any action on the remainder of the EKAPCD RACT SIP that was submitted on August 9,
2017. The EPA will propose a separate action on the remainder of the EKAPCD RACT SIP at a future date.
On June 9, 2020, the EPA determined that the submittals for AVAQMD
and MCAPCD negative declarations for the Oil and Natural Gas CTG met
the completeness criteria in 40 CFR part 51 Appendix V, which must be
met before formal EPA review.
The submittals for the EKAPCD and PCAPCD negative declarations for
the Oil and Natural Gas CTG were deemed by operation of law to meet the
completeness criteria in 40 CFR part 51 Appendix V on February 9, 2018,
and July 23, 2020, respectively.
B. Are there other versions of these documents?
There are no previous versions of the PCAPCD, AVAQMD, MCAPCD, or
EKAPCD negative declarations for the Oil and Natural Gas CTG in the
California SIP.
C. What is the purpose of the submitted negative declarations?
Emissions of volatile organic compounds (VOCs) contribute to the
production of ground-level ozone, smog and particulate matter (PM),
which harm human health and the environment. Section 110(a) of the CAA
requires states to submit regulations that control VOC emissions.
CAA section 182(b)(2) requires states to submit SIP revisions to
implement RACT for each category of VOC sources in the nonattainment
area covered by a CTG. On October 27, 2016, (81 FR 74798), the EPA
announced the availability of the Oil and Natural Gas CTG. In lieu of
adopting local regulations to implement the CTG, air agencies may adopt
a negative declaration if the nonattainment area has no sources covered
by the 2016 Oil and Natural Gas CTG.\1\ The PCAPCD, AVAQMD, MCAPCD, and
EKAPCD's negative declaration submittals are the districts'
certifications that there are no sources covered by the 2016 Oil and
Natural Gas CTG in their respective ozone nonattainment areas.\2\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ Memorandum dated October 20, 2016, from Anna Marie Wood,
Director, Air Quality Policy Division, U.S. EPA, to Regional Air
Division Directors 1--10, Subject: ``Implementing Reasonably
Available Control Technology Requirements for Sources Covered by the
2016 Control Techniques Guidelines for the Oil and Natural Gas
Industry,'' Question #8.
\2\ The Placer County APCD, Antelope Valley AQMD, Mariposa
County APCD and Eastern Kern APCD are subject to CAA section
182(b)(2) RACT. PCAPCD has jurisdiction over all of Placer County
and is classified as Severe nonattainment for the 2008 ozone
national ambient air quality standards (NAAQS). AVAQMD's
jurisdiction includes the portion of the South Coast Air Quality
Management District (SCAQMD) that is not within the South Coast Air
Basin (SCAB) and is classified as Severe nonattainment for the 2008
ozone NAAQS. MCAPCD has jurisdiction over all of Mariposa County,
which is classified as Moderate nonattainment for the 2008 ozone
NAAQS. EKAPCD's jurisdiction includes the eastern portion of Kern
County, which is classified as Serious nonattainment for the 2008
ozone NAAQS.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The EPA's technical support documents (TSDs) for this action have
more information about the PCAPCD, AVAQMD, MCAPCD, and EKAPCD negative
declarations, and the EPA's evaluation thereof.
II. The EPA's Evaluation and Action
A. How is the EPA evaluating the negative declarations?
Generally, CAA section 110(a)(2)(A) requires SIPs to ``include
enforceable emission limitations and other control measures, means, or
techniques . . . as may be necessary or appropriate to meet the
applicable requirements of [the CAA],'' and SIPs must be consistent
with the requirements of CAA sections 110(l) and 193.
SIPs must also require RACT for each category of sources covered by
a CTG document as well as each major source in ozone nonattainment
areas classified as Moderate or above (see CAA sections 182(b)(2) and
(f)). States relying on negative declarations for CTG source categories
for which the states have not adopted CTG-based regulations because
they have no sources above the CTG-recommended applicability threshold
must submit them for SIP approval, regardless of whether such negative
declarations were made for an earlier SIP.\3\ To do so, the submittal
should provide reasonable assurance that no sources subject to the
CTG's requirements currently exist in the relevant ozone nonattainment
area.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\3\ This submittal was transmitted to the EPA by a letter from
CARB dated April 30, 2020.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Guidance and policy documents that we used to evaluate
enforceability,
[[Page 63066]]
revision/relaxation and rule stringency requirements for the applicable
criteria pollutants include the following:
1. ``State Implementation Plans; General Preamble for the
Implementation of Title I of the Clean Air Act Amendments of 1990,'' 57
FR 13498 (April 16, 1992); 57 FR 18070 (April 28, 1992).
2. EPA 453/B-16-001, Control Techniques Guidelines for the Oil and
Natural Gas Industry.
B. Do the negative declarations meet the evaluation criteria?
With respect to the PCAPCD, AVAQMD, MCAPCD, and EKAPCD negative
declarations for the Oil and Natural Gas CTG, the submittals contain
the air districts' certifications that there are no sources within the
ozone nonattainment areas under the air districts' jurisdiction that
are subject to the Oil and Natural Gas CTG for the 2008 8-hour ozone
national ambient air quality standards (NAAQS). The PCAPCD, AVAQMD,
MCAPCD, and EKAPCD based their certifications on reviews of their
permit files and emission inventories. We accessed California's
Department of Conservation Geologic Energy Management Division's
(CalGEM) Well Finder website, CARB's pollution mapping tool, and a 2017
archived map of the California Natural Gas Pipelines \4\ and did not
find indications of operations that would be subject to the Oil and
Natural Gas CTG in the ozone nonattainment areas. For EKAPCD, we
additionally used a geographic information system (GIS) mapping tool to
ensure that there were no oil and gas operations within EKAPCD's
jurisdiction covered by the Oil and Natural Gas CTG. Based on our
review, we agree with the PCAPCD, AVAQMD, MCAPCD, and EKAPCD negative
declarations for the Oil and Natural Gas CTG. Our TSDs for each of the
air districts' negative declarations have more information on our
evaluation.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\4\ The California Energy Commission (CEC) map of natural gas
pipelines and compressor stations in California we accessed and
reviewed is an archived version from 2017 and can be found here:
https://web.archive.org/web/20200217015846/https:/ww2.energy.ca.gov/maps/infrastructure/Natural_Gas_Pipelines.pdf. More current and/or
non-archived versions of this information from CEC are not
available, because CEC has discontinued maintenance on the natural
gas pipeline and station GIS datasets and related maps and removed
them from their website. Email dated August 7, 2020, from Travis
David (CEC) to Sina Schwenk-Mueller (EPA), Subject: ``RE: California
Natural Gas Pipelines.''
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
C. Public Comment and Proposed Action
As authorized in section 110(k)(3) of the Act, the EPA proposes to
fully approve the PCAPCD, AVAQMD, MCAPCD, and EKAPCD negative
declarations for the Oil and Natural Gas CTG because they fulfill the
relevant requirements in CAA sections 110(a), 110(l), 182(b)(2), and
193. We will accept comments from the public on this proposal until
November 5, 2020. If we take final action to approve the submitted
documents, our final action will incorporate these documents into the
federally enforceable SIP.
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 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 CAA. 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 Orders
12866 (58 FR 51735, October 4, 1993) and 13563 (76 FR 3821, January 21,
2011);
Is not an Executive Order 13771 (82 FR 9339, February 3,
2017) regulatory action because SIP approvals are exempted under
Executive Order 12866;
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 the 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, 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).
List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52
Environmental protection, Air pollution control, Incorporation by
reference, Intergovernmental relations, Volatile organic compounds.
Authority: 42 U.S.C. 7401 et seq.
Dated: September 22, 2020.
John Busterud,
Regional Administrator, Region IX.
[FR Doc. 2020-21322 Filed 10-5-20; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P
