[Federal Register Volume 75, Number 193 (Wednesday, October 6, 2010)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 61662-61664]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2010-25127]
=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
40 CFR Part 63
[EPA-R09-OAR-2010-0680; FRL-9209-7]
State of California; Request for Approval of Section 112(l)
Authority for Hazardous Air Pollutants; Perchloroethylene Air Emission
Standards From Dry Cleaning Facilities
AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).
ACTION: Proposed rule.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: EPA is proposing to approve California's Airborne Toxic
Control Measure for Emissions of Perchloroethylene from Dry Cleaning
and Water-Repelling Operations, Requirements for Perc Manufacturers,
and Requirements for Perc Distributors to be implemented and enforced
in place of the National Perchloroethylene Air Emission Standards for
Dry Cleaning Facilities. EPA is proposing this action under section
112(l) of the Clean Air Act (CAA). We are taking comments on this
proposal and plan to follow with a final action.
DATES: Comments on California's request for approval must be received
on or before November 5, 2010.
ADDRESSES: Submit comments, identified by docket number EPA-R09-OAR-
2010-0680, concurrently to EPA and the California Air Resources Board.
Comments submitted to the California Air Resources Board should be
mailed to the address below:
Dan Donohoue, Chief, Emissions Assessment Branch, Stationary Source
Division, California Air Resources Board, 1001 ``I'' Street, P.O. Box
2815, Sacramento, CA 95812.
Comments sent to EPA should be submitted by one of the following
methods:
1. Federal eRulemaking Portal: http:[sol][sol]www.regulations.gov.
Follow the on-line instructions.
2. E-mail: [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
http:[sol][sol]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:[sol][sol]www.regulations.gov or e-mail.
http:[sol][sol]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.
Docket: The index to the docket for this action is available
electronically at http:[sol][sol]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 in the index, some information
may be publicly available only at the hard copy location (e.g.,
copyrighted material), 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, (415) 947-
4124, [email protected].
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Throughout this document, ``we,'' ``us'' and
``our'' refer to EPA.
Table of ContentsI. Background
I. Background
II. California's Submittal
A. Amended Dry Cleaning ATCM
B. Major Dry Cleaning Sources
C. California District Rules
D. California's Authorities and Resources to Implement and
Enforce CAA Section 112 Standards
III. EPA's Evaluation
IV. Public Comment and Proposed Action
V. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews
I. Background
Under CAA section 112(l), EPA is authorized to delegate to State
agencies the authority to implement and enforce the National Emission
Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutants (NESHAPs). The Federal
regulations governing EPA's approval of State rules or programs under
section 112(l) are located at 40 CFR part 63, subpart E. Under these
regulations, a State has the option to request EPA's approval to
substitute a State rule for the comparable NESHAP. Under this ``rule
substitution'' option, EPA is required to make a detailed and thorough
evaluation of the State's submittal to ensure that it meets the
stringency and other requirements of 40 CFR 63.93. Upon approval the
State is given the authority to implement and enforce its rule in lieu
of the NESHAP.
On September 22, 1993, EPA promulgated the NESHAP for
perchloroethylene (perc) dry cleaning facilities, which has been
codified in 40 CFR part 63, subpart M, National Perchloroethylene Air
Emission Standards for Dry Cleaning Facilities (dry cleaning NESHAP)
(see 58 FR 49354). On May 21, 1996, EPA approved a request submitted by
the California Air Resources Board (CARB) for approval to implement and
enforce California's Airborne Toxic Control Measure for Emissions of
Perchloroethylene from Dry Cleaning Operations (original dry cleaning
ATCM) in lieu of the dry cleaning NESHAP (see 61 FR 25397).
On July 27, 2006, EPA amended the dry cleaning NESHAP (see 71 FR
42743). In 2007, CARB revised California's original dry cleaning ATCM.
II. California's Submittal
A. Amended Dry Cleaning ATCM
California's Airborne Toxic Control Measure for Emissions of
Perchloroethylene from Dry Cleaning and Water Repelling Operations,
Requirements for Perc Manufacturers, and Requirements for Perc
Distributors, sections 93109, 93109.1, and 93109.2, Title 17 of the
California Code of Regulations (amended dry cleaning ATCM), became
State law on December 27, 2007. On July 15, 2009, CARB submitted a
request to implement and enforce the amended dry cleaning ATCM in lieu
of the dry cleaning NESHAP and the previously approved original dry
cleaning ATCM. This request was submitted pursuant to the
[[Page 61663]]
provisions of 40 CFR 63.93 and found to be complete on August 13, 2009.
The amended dry cleaning ATCM is implementing a ban on the use of
perc in dry cleaning operations in California. Since January 1, 2008,
there has been a prohibition on the installation or use of any perc dry
cleaning machines at new facilities. Existing facilities must meet
equipment and operational requirements until the existing machines are
phased out in accordance with the time frames established in the
amended dry cleaning ATCM.
B. Major Dry Cleaning Sources
Under the dry cleaning NESHAP, dry cleaning facilities are divided
between major sources and area sources. CARB's request for approval
includes only those provisions of the dry cleaning NESHAP that apply to
area sources. Thus, dry cleaning facilities that are major sources, as
defined by the dry cleaning NESHAP, remain subject to the dry cleaning
NESHAP and the CAA Title V operating permit program.
C. California District Rules
After the May 21, 1996, approval of the original dry cleaning ATCM,
the following California District rules were approved in place of the
dry cleaning NESHAP:
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
District Rule Adoption date Approval date
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
San Luis Obispo County APCD............. 432: Perchloroethylene Dry 11/13/1996 12/10/1997
Cleaning Operations. (62 FR 65022)
South Coast AQMD........................ 1421: Control of 6/13/1997 5/13/1998
Perchloroethylene Emissions (63 FR 26463)
from Dry Cleaning Systems.
Yolo-Solano AQMD........................ 9.7: Perchloroethylene Dry 11/13/1998 1/28/1999
Cleaning Operations. (64 FR 4298)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
If the current submittal of the amended dry cleaning ATCM is
approved, then the amended dry cleaning ATCM will replace the above
rules from San Luis Obispo County Air Pollution Control District and
Yolo-Solano County Air Quality Management District as the federally-
enforceable regulation in those Districts for perc dry cleaning area
sources. In the future, a District may request approval for a local
rule under the provisions of 40 CFR Sec. 63.93. Until a request for
delegation of a local regulation is submitted and approved by EPA, the
amended dry cleaning ATCM would serve as the federally applicable
regulation, with the one exception discussed below.
In the South Coast Air Quality Management District (SCAQMD), the
previously approved version of Rule 1421 would remain in place as the
federally-enforceable regulation for perc dry cleaning area sources.
The SCAQMD has asked to be excluded from the CARB request for
delegation and intends to submit an amended version of Rule 1421 in a
separate delegation request in the future. Therefore, if the amended
dry cleaning ATCM is approved, then it will be the federally applicable
regulation for perc dry cleaning area sources in all Districts of
California except the SCAQMD.
D. California's Authorities and Resources To Implement and Enforce CAA
Section 112 Standards
Any request for approval under CAA section 112(l) must meet the
approval criteria in 112(l)(5) and 40 CFR part 63, subpart E. To
streamline the approval process for future applications, a State may
submit for approval a demonstration that it has adequate authorities
and resources to implement and enforce any CAA section 112 standards.
Approval of this demonstration will obviate the need for the State to
resubmit in each subsequent request for approval its prior
demonstration that it has adequate authorities and resources to
implement and enforce the section 112 standard.
As part of its original dry cleaning ATCM application, approved on
May 21, 1996, CARB also requested and received approval of California's
authorities and resources to implement and enforce all CAA section 112
programs and rules, with the exception of the accidental release
prevention program promulgated pursuant to CAA section 112(r) (see 61
FR 25397). Although approval of California's authorities and resources
did not result in delegation of the section 112 standards, it obviated
the need for California to resubmit a demonstration of these same
authorities and resources for every subsequent request for delegation
of section 112 standards, regardless of whether the State requests
approval of rules that are identical to or differ from the Federal
standards as promulgated.
In CARB's request for approval of the amended dry cleaning ATCM,
submitted on July 15, 2009, CARB satisfied the need to submit certain
demonstrations of legal authorities and resources by referencing the
demonstrations contained in its original application, approved on May
21, 1996 (see 61 FR 25397), and stating that those demonstrations are
still applicable. By reference, those original demonstrations are
considered a part of this current submittal. The approval of the
original application contained a more detailed discussion of EPA's
evaluation of these demonstrations of legal authorities and resources,
including a discussion of penalty authorities and variances. The May
21, 1996, action should be consulted for further information.
III. EPA's Evaluation
When a State requests EPA's approval to substitute a State rule for
the applicable CAA section 112 Federal rule, EPA is required to ``make
a detailed and thorough evaluation of the State's submittal to ensure
that it meets the stringency and other requirements'' of 40 CFR 63.93
(see 58 FR 62274). After reviewing CARB's request for approval of its
amended dry cleaning ATCM (see docket for more information), EPA has
determined that CARB's request meets all the requirements necessary to
qualify for approval under CAA section 112(l) and 40 CFR 63.91 and
63.93.
While EPA notes that there are differences between the dry cleaning
NESHAP and the amended dry cleaning ATCM because the regulations differ
in structure and approach, the amended dry cleaning ATCM is designed to
phase out the use of perc at dry cleaning facilities. For example, in
addition to California's previous prohibition of transfer, vented, and
self-service perc dry cleaning machines, the sale or new lease of perc
dry cleaning machines was prohibited as of January 1, 2008. The use of
perc dry cleaning machines or perc water-repelling operations at new
facilities was also prohibited, along with the use of drying cabinets
and dip tanks. As of July 1, 2010, existing perc converted machines and
perc dry cleaning machines at co-residential locations have been
prohibited. Other machines are being phased out according to the age of
the machine, and all remaining perc dry cleaning machines must be
removed from service
[[Page 61664]]
by January 1, 2023. In the final analysis, EPA believes that approval
of the amended dry cleaning ATCM will result in emission reductions
from each affected sources that are no less stringent than would result
from the dry cleaning NESHAP. Accordingly, EPA is proposing to grant
California the authority to implement and enforce its amended dry
cleaning ATCM in place of the dry cleaning NESHAP for area sources in
the State of California, with the exception of the SCAQMD.
IV. Public Comment and Proposed Action
Because EPA believes California's request meets all the
requirements necessary to qualify for approval under CAA section 112(l)
and 40 CFR 63.91 and 63.93, we are proposing approval of the amended
dry cleaning ATCM as a substitute for the dry cleaning NESHAP. We will
accept comments 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 establish the amended dry
cleaning ATCM as the federally-enforceable regulation in California,
with the exception of the SCAQMD, for perc dry cleaning area sources.
Although California would have primary implementation and enforcement
responsibility, EPA would retain the right, pursuant to CAA section
112(l)(7), to enforce any applicable emission standard or requirement
under CAA section 112. If this proposal is finalized, the amended dry
cleaning ATCM would be the federally-enforceable standard in California
and would be enforceable by the Administrator and citizens under the
CAA. However, any provision of the amended dry cleaning ATCM that
allows for the approval of alternative means of emission limitations
must also receive approval from EPA before such alternatives can be
used (e.g., Section 93109(d)(27) and (38), and (i)(3)(A)(2)).
Additionally, this delegation does not extend to the provisions
regarding California's enforcement authorities or its collection of
fees as described in Sections 93109.1(c) and 93109.2(c) and (d), Title
17 of the California Code of Regulations. Approval of the amended dry
cleaning ATCM does not in any way limit the enforcement authorities,
including the penalty authorities, of the Clean Air Act.
V. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews
Under the CAA, the Administrator is required to approve a State
delegation submission that complies with the provisions of the CAA and
applicable Federal regulations. 42 U.S.C. 7412(l); 40 CFR 63.90. Thus,
in reviewing delegation submissions, EPA's role is to approve State
choices, provided that they meet the criteria of the Clean Air Act.
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 Clean Air Act; and
Does not provide EPA with the discretionary authority to
address, as appropriate, disproportionate human health or environmental
effects, using practicable 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
submitted rule 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 63
Environmental protection, Administrative practice and procedure,
Air pollution control, Hazardous substances, Intergovernmental
relations, Incorporation by reference, Reporting and recordkeeping
requirements.
Authority: This action is issued under the authority of Title
III of the Clean Air Act as amended, 42 U.S.C. 2399.
Dated: August 30, 2010.
Jared Blumenfeld,
Regional Administrator, Region IX.
[FR Doc. 2010-25127 Filed 10-5-10; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P