Voglio sapere a riguardo di…

11484

Federal Register / Vol. 86, No. 36 / Thursday, February 25, 2021 / Proposed Rules
requirements see CAA section 110l, and must not modify certain SIP control requirements in nonattainment areas without ensuring equivalent or greater emissions reductions see CAA section 193.
The San Joaquin Valley is currently designated and classified as an Extreme 1-hour ozone nonattainment area and an Extreme 8-hour ozone nonattainment area under the 1997, 2008, and 2015
standards 40 CFR 81.305. CAA section 172c1 requires ozone nonattainment areas to implement all reasonably available control measures RACM, including such reductions in emissions from existing sources in the area as may be obtained through the adoption, at a minimum, of reasonably available control technology RACT, as expeditiously as practicable. CAA
sections 182b2 and 182f specify that implementation of RACT under CAA
section 172c1 is required for all major stationary sources of NOX in the area.
Generally, SIP rules must implement Best Available Control Measures BACM, including Best Available Control Technology BACT, in Serious PM2.5 nonattainment areas see CAA
section 189b1B. The SJVUAPCD
regulates a PM2.5 nonattainment area classified as Serious for the PM2.5 for the 1997 annual and 24-hour PM2.5
standards and the 2006 24-hour PM2.5
standards 40 CFR 81.305. A BACM
and BACT evaluation is generally performed in context of a broader plan.
The area is currently designated attainment for PM10. Accordingly, SJVUAPCD is not required to implement BACM or BACT for PM10 and PM10
precursors.
Guidance and policy documents that we used to evaluate enforceability, revision/relaxation and rule stringency requirements for the applicable criteria pollutants include the following:
1. Issues Relating to VOC Regulation Cutpoints, Deficiencies, and Deviations, EPA, May 25, 1988 the Bluebook, revised January 11, 1990.
2. Guidance Document for Correcting Common VOC & Other Rule Deficiencies, EPA Region 9, August 21, 2001 the Little Bluebook.

B. Does the rule meet the evaluation criteria?
In our May 9, 2011 76 FR 26609
final rule approval of Rule 9510 into the SIP, we identified a number of concerns about the enforceability of the rules provisions, e.g., provisions that allow project developers to pay a fee instead of implementing on-site pollution mitigation plans, and noted that the State would need to resolve these
VerDate Sep<11>2014

16:43 Feb 24, 2021

Jkt 253001

enforceability issues before relying on this rule for credit in an attainment plan. The District has not addressed these concerns in the submitted rule, and we therefore continue to conclude that the rule does not qualify for emission reduction credit for the purpose of any attainment or progress demonstration in any area.
As described above, the District revised the rule applicability to include large development projects that are not currently subject to the rule and made editorial and clarifying changes. The revisions are generally clear and strengthen the rule. In addition to addressing the enforceability concerns outlined in our prior action, if the District plans to rely on emission reductions from this rule for attainment or progress demonstrations, the District should revise section 3.17 to further clarify which Grandfathered Large Development Projects are exempt from the rule by quantifying substantial loss and include other specific criteria that would allow for these provisions to be applied in a consistent and replicable manner.
With respect to rule stringency, we note that Rule 9510 is an ISR rule, and that EPA is prohibited by the CAA from requiring states and local air agencies to include ISR programs in SIPs.1 Because EPA cannot require a state or local air agency to adopt and implement an ISR
program, the EPA cannot require that such a program meet any particular level of stringency. Therefore, we are not evaluating amended Rule 9510 for compliance with the RACM/RACT or BACM/BACT requirements.
We conclude the rule is consistent with the relevant requirements, policy, and guidance regarding SIP relaxations since the rule revisions add further applicability and strengthen the current SIP-approved rule. However, we continue to conclude that the rule is not fully consistent with the relevant requirements, policy, and guidance on enforceability. While Rule 9510 does not meet all the evaluation criteria for enforceability, the EPA proposes to fully approve the submitted rule because it would strengthen the SIP compared to the current SIP-approved rule. In light of the deficiencies identified in our prior action and above, we continue to conclude that the rule should not be credited in any attainment and rate of progress/reasonable further progress demonstrations. The TSD has more information on our evaluation.
1 CAA

PO 00000

section 110a5Ai.

Frm 00012

Fmt 4702

Sfmt 4702

C. The EPAs Recommendations to Further Improve the Rule The TSD includes recommendations for the next time the local agency modifies the rule.
D. Public Comment and Proposed Action As authorized in section 110k3 of the Act, the EPA proposes to fully approve the submitted rule. We will accept comments from the public on this proposal until March 29, 2021. If we take final action to approve the submitted rule, our final action will incorporate this rule into the federally enforceable SIP.
III. Incorporation by Reference In this rulemaking, 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 San Joaquin Valley Unified Air Pollution Control District rule described in Table 1 of this preamble. The EPA has made, and will continue to make, these materials available through https
www.regulations.gov 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. 7410k;
40 CFR 52.02a. Thus, in reviewing SIP
submissions, the EPAs 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 Orders 12866 58 FR 51735, October 4, 1993 and 13563 76 FR 3821, January 21, 2011;
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.;

E:FRFM25FEP1.SGM

25FEP1