Air quality implementation plans; approval and promulgation; various States: California,

[Federal Register: August 26, 2003 (Volume 68, Number 165)]

[Rules and Regulations]

[Page 51185-51187]

From the Federal Register Online via GPO Access [wais.access.gpo.gov]

[DOCID:fr26au03-12]

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

40 CFR Part 52

[CA 245-0403a; FRL-7535-2]

Revisions to the California State Implementation Plan, San Diego County Air Pollution Control District

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Direct final rule.

SUMMARY: EPA is taking direct final action to approve a revision to the San Diego County Air Pollution Control District (SDCAPCD) portion of the California State Implementation Plan (SIP). This revision concerns volatile organic compound (VOC) emissions from the transfer of organic compounds to mobile transport tanks. We are approving a local rule that regulates this emission source under the Clean Air Act as amended in 1990 (CAA or the Act). We are approving local rules that regulate these emission sources under the Clean Air Act as amended in 1990 (CAA or the Act).

DATES: This rule is effective on October 27, 2003 without further notice, unless EPA receives adverse comments by September 25, 2003. If we receive such comment, we will publish a timely withdrawal in the Federal Register to notify the public that this rule will not take effect.

ADDRESSES: Mail comments to Andy Steckel, Rulemaking Office Chief (AIR- 4), U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Region IX, 75 Hawthorne Street, San Francisco, CA 94105, steckel.andrew@epa.gov. You can inspect copies of the submitted SIP revision and EPA's technical support document (TSD) at our Region IX office during normal business hours. You may also see copies of the submitted SIP revision at the following locations:

Environmental Protection Agency, Air Docket (6102), Ariel Rios Building, 1200 Pennsylvania Avenue NW., Washington, DC 20460. California Air Resources Board, Stationary Source Division, Rule Evaluation Section, 1001 ``I'' Street, Sacramento, CA 95814. San Diego County Air Pollution Control District, 9150 Chesapeake Drive, San Diego, CA 92123.

A copy of the rule may also be available via the Internet at http://www.arb.ca.gov/drdb/drdbltxt.htm. Please be advised that this is not an EPA Web site and may not contain the same version of the rule that was submitted to EPA.

[[Page 51186]]

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Al Petersen, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Region IX, (415) 947-4118.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Throughout this document, ``we,'' ``us'' and ``our'' refer to EPA.

Table of Contents

1. The State's Submittal

   1. What rule did the State submit?

   2. Are there other versions of this rule?

   3. What is the purpose of the submitted rule revisions? II. EPA's Evaluation and Action

   1. How is EPA evaluating the rule?

   2. Does the rule meet the evaluation criteria?

   3. EPA recommendation to further improve the rule

   4. Proposed action and public comment III. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews

1. The State's Submittal

   1. What Rule Did the State Submit?

      Table 1 lists the rule we are approving with the date that it was amended by the local air agency and submitted by the California Air Resources Board (CARB).

      Table 1.--Submitted Rule

      Local agency

      Rule No.

      Rule title

      Amended Submitted

      SDCAPCD...............................

      61.2 Transfer of Organic Compounds 7/26/00 12/11/00 into Mobile Transport Tanks.

      On February 8, 2001, this rule submittal was found to meet the completeness criteria in 40 CFR part 51 appendix V, which must be met before formal EPA review.

   2. Are There Other Versions of This Rule?

      We approved a version of Rule 61.2 into the SIP on June 30, 1993 (58 FR 34906).

   3. What Is the Purpose of the Submitted Rule Revisions?

      The purpose is to make the following revisions:

      [sbull] 61.2(b)(2): Decreased is the threshold of 5,000,000 gallons per year or less to 500,000 gallons per year or less for bulk plants existing before March 1, 1984 for exemption from the requirement to use a vapor recovery unit or vapor disposal unit. The exemption only applies to vapors emitted during transfer of organic liquids, not subject to this rule, into a mobile transport tank that previously transported volatile organic compounds (VOCs).

      [sbull] 61.2(b)(6): Added is a threshold of 21,000 gallons per year or less for the exemption of U.S. military ships from the requirements for no fugitive liquid leaks, for vapor concentration not exceeding 500 parts per million by volume (ppmv) measured as propane or 1,375 ppmv measured as methane, and for the liquid to enter less than six inches from the bottom of a mobile transport truck.

      [sbull] 61.2(d): Revised and specified in detail are test procedures on mobile transport tanks and vapor emission control systems. Added are tests for vapor fugitive emissions. The TSD has more information about this rule.

2. EPA's Evaluation and Action

   1. 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 major sources in nonattainment areas (see section 182(a)(2)(A)), and must not relax existing requirements (see sections 110(l) and 193). The SDCAPCD regulates a severe ozone nonattainment area and must fulfill RACT. See 40 CFR part 81. Guidance and policy documents that we used to define specific enforceability and RACT requirements include the following:

      [sbull] Requirements for Preparation, Adoption, and Submittal of Implementation Plans, U.S. EPA, 40 CFR part 51.

      [sbull] Portions of the proposed post-1987 ozone and carbon monoxide policy that concern RACT, 52 FR 45044 (November 24, 1987).

      [sbull] Issues Relating to VOC Regulation Cutpoints, Deficiencies, and Deviations, EPA (May 25, 1988) (the Bluebook).

      [sbull] Guidance Document for Correcting Common VOC & Other Rule Deficiencies, EPA Region 9 (August 21, 2001) (the Little Bluebook).

   2. Does the Rule Meet the Evaluation Criteria?

      The rule is improved, enforceable, on balance more stringent than the SIP Rule and does not relax the SIP. The requirements section of the rule fulfills RACT. The rule should be given full approval.

   3. EPA Recommendation to Further Improve the Rule

      The TSD describes an additional rule revision that does not affect EPA's current action but is recommended for the next time the local agency modifies the rule.

   4. Public Comment and Final Action

      As authorized in section 110(k)(3) of the CAA, EPA is fully approving the submitted rules because we believe they fulfill 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 rules. If we receive adverse comments by September 25, 2003, 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 27, 2003. This will incorporate these rules into the federally enforceable SIP.

3. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews

   Under Executive Order 12866 (58 FR 51735, October 4, 1993), this action is not a ``significant regulatory action'' and therefore is not subject to review by the Office of Management and Budget. For this reason, this action is also not subject to Executive Order 13211, ``Actions Concerning Regulations That Significantly Affect Energy Supply, Distribution, or Use'' (66 FR 28355, May 22, 2001). This action merely approves state law as meeting Federal requirements and imposes no additional requirements beyond those imposed by state law. Accordingly, the Administrator certifies that this rule will not have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities under the Regulatory Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 601 et seq.). Because this rule approves pre-existing requirements under state law and does not impose any additional enforceable duty beyond that required by state law, it does not contain any unfunded mandate or significantly or uniquely affect small governments, as described in the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995 (Public Law 104-4).

   [[Page 51187]]

   This rule also does not have tribal implications because it will not have a substantial direct effect on one or more Indian tribes, on the relationship between the Federal Government and Indian tribes, or on the distribution of power and responsibilities between the Federal government and Indian tribes, as specified by Executive Order 13175 (65 FR 67249, November 9, 2000). This action also does not have Federalism implications because it does not have substantial direct effects on the States, on the relationship between the national government and the States, or on the distribution of power and responsibilities among the various levels of government, as specified in Executive Order 13132 (64 FR 43255, August 10, 1999). This action merely approves a state rule implementing a Federal standard, and does not alter the relationship or the distribution of power and responsibilities established in the Clean Air Act. This rule also is not subject to Executive Order 13045 ``Protection of Children from Environmental Health Risks and Safety Risks'' (62 FR 19885, April 23, 1997), because it is not economically significant.

   In reviewing SIP submissions, EPA's role is to approve state choices, provided that they meet the criteria of the Clean Air Act. In this context, in the absence of a prior existing requirement for the State to use voluntary consensus standards (VCS), EPA has no authority to disapprove a SIP submission for failure to use VCS. It would thus be inconsistent with applicable law for EPA, when it reviews a SIP submission, to use VCS in place of a SIP submission that otherwise satisfies the provisions of the Clean Air Act. Thus, the requirements of section 12(d) of the National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act of 1995 (15 U.S.C. 272 note) do not apply. This rule does not impose an information collection burden under the provisions of the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.).

   The Congressional Review Act, 5 U.S.C. section 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 rule 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. section 804(2).

   Under section 307(b)(1) of the Clean Air Act, petitions for judicial review of this action must be filed in the United States Court of Appeals for the appropriate circuit by October 27, 2003. Filing a petition for reconsideration by the Administrator of this final rule does not affect the finality of this rule 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. 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 compound.

   Dated: July 8, 2003. Wayne Nastri, Regional Administrator, Region IX.

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

   PART 52--[AMENDED]

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

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

   Subpart F--California

   0 2. Section 52.220 is amended by adding paragraph (c)(285)(i)(E) to read as follows:

   Sec. 52.220 Identification of plan.

   * * * * *

   (c) * * *

   (285) * * *

   (i) * * *

   (E) San Diego County Air Pollution Control District.

   (1) Rule 61.2, amended on July 26, 2000. * * * * *

   [FR Doc. 03-21586 Filed 8-25-03; 8:45 am]

   BILLING CODE 6560-50-P