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

[Federal Register: March 7, 2003 (Volume 68, Number 45)]

[Rules and Regulations]

[Page 10966-10969]

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

[DOCID:fr07mr03-8]

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

40 CFR Part 52

[CA 245-0375a; FRL-7446-1]

Revisions to the California State Implementation Plan, Antelope Valley Air Pollution Control District, Imperial County Air Pollution Control District, and Monterey Bay Unified Air Pollution Control District

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Direct final rule.

SUMMARY: EPA is taking direct final action to approve revisions to the Antelope Valley Air Pollution Control District (AVAPCD), Imperial County Air Pollution Control District (ICAPCD), and Monterey Bay Unified Air Pollution Control District (MBUAPCD) portions of the California State Implementation Plan (SIP). These revisions concern definitions, circumvention, emergency episode and volatile organic compound (VOC) emissions from organic solvents. 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 May 6, 2003, without further notice, unless EPA receives adverse comments by April 7, 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 94105-3901.

You can inspect copies of the submitted SIP revisions and EPA's technical support documents (TSDs) at our Region IX office during normal business hours. You may also see copies of the submitted SIP revisions at the following locations:

Air and Radiation Docket and Information Center, U.S.

[[Page 10967]]

Environmental Protection Agency, Room B-102, 1301 Constitution Avenue, NW., (Mail Code 6102T), Washington, DC 20460. California Air Resources Board, Stationary Source Division, Rule Evaluation Section, 1001 ``I'' Street, Sacramento, CA 95814. Antelope Valley Air Pollution Control District 43301 Division Street, Ste. 206, Lancaster, CA 93535-4649. Imperial County Air Pollution Control District, 150 South 9th Street, El Centro, CA 92243-2801. Monterey Bay Unified Air Pollution Control District, 24580 Silver Cloud Ct., Monterey, CA 93940-6536.

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

/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.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Cynthia G. Allen, EPA Region IX, (415) 947-4120.

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

Table of Contents

1. The State's Submittal

   1. What rules did the State submit?

   2. Are there other versions of these rules?

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

   1. How is EPA evaluating the rules?

   2. Do the rules meet the evaluation criteria?

   3. EPA recommendations to further improve the rules.

   4. Public comment and final action. III. Background Information

   Why were these rules submitted?

4. Administrative Requirements

1. The State's Submittal

   1. What Rules Did the State Submit?

      Table 1 lists the rules we are approving with the dates that they were adopted by the local air agencies and submitted by the California Air Resources Board (CARB).

      Table 1.--Submitted Rules

      Rule Rule title

      Adopted Submitted

      AVAPCD....................................

      701 Air Pollution Emergency

      07/18/00 12/11/00 Contingency Actions. ICAPCD....................................

      101 Definitions.................. 08/13/02 10/16/02 MBUAPCD...................................

      415 Circumvention................ 08/21/02 10/16/02 MBUAPCD...................................

      433 Organic Solvent Cleaning..... 02/17/01 05/08/01

      On February 8, 2001 (AVAPCD), June 20, 2001 (MBUAPCD Rule 433), December 3, 2002 (ICAPCD and MBUAPCD Rule 415), these rule submittals were 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 These Rules?

      AVAPCD adopted a version of Rule 701 on January 2, 1998, which EPA approved into the SIP on March 18, 1998. ICAPCD adopted a version of Rule 101 on December 11, 2001, which EPA approved into the SIP on July 8, 2002. MBUAPCD adopted a version of Rule 415 on September 1, 1974 (amended on December 13, 1984) and Rule 433 on March 26, 1986, which EPA approved into the SIP on July 13, 1987 and April 2, 1999, respectively.

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

      AVAPCD Rule 701 has been revised to add several new definitions; replace the obsolete reference to rescinded Rule 2202; and update and rename the pollutant Standard Index to Air Quality Index.

      ICAPCD Rule 101 has been revised to add a new definition of a ``rainy period'' as a clarification to Rule 420, Livestock Feed Yards.

      MBUAPCD Rule 415 is revised to update the rule to District format. An exemption has been added for equipment installed to minimize offsite concentrations of Toxic Air Contaminants.

      MBUAPCD Rule 433 is revised to distinguish applicable test methods used for water-based solvents and non-water-based solvents. Bay Area Air Quality Management District Method 31 is used to determine the quantity of exempt compounds, water and VOCs in water-based solvents subject to the rule. The rule contains applicable monitoring, recordkeeping, reporting and requirements, and specifies test methods to determine compliance. The TSD has more information about these rules.

2. EPA's Evaluation and Action

   1. How Is EPA Evaluating the Rules?

      Generally, SIP rules must be enforceable (see section 110(a) of the Act), 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).

      Guidance and policy documents that we used to help evaluate specific enforceability and RACT requirements consistently include the following:

      1. Portions of the proposed post-1987 ozone and carbon monoxide policy that concern RACT, 52 FR 45044, November 24, 1987.

      2. ``Issues Relating to VOC Regulation Cutpoints, Deficiencies, and Deviations,'' EPA, May 25, 1988 (the Bluebook).

      3. ``Guidance Document for Correcting Common VOC & Other Rule Deficiencies,'' EPA Region 9, August 21, 2001 (the Little Bluebook).

      4. Control of Volatile Organic Emissions from Solvent Metal Cleaning. EPA-450/2-77-022, November 1977.

      5. Determination of Volatile Organic Compounds in Paint Strippers, Solvent Cleaners and Low Solids Coatings. BAAQMD Method 31.

      6. Determination of Reasonably Available Control Technology and Best Available Retrofit Control Technology For Organic Solvent Cleaning and Degreasing Operations. California Air Resources Board Guidance Document, July 18, 1991.

   2. Do the Rules Meet the Evaluation Criteria?

      We believe these rules are consistent with the relevant policy and guidance regarding enforceability, RACT, and SIP relaxations. The TSDs have more information on our evaluation.

   3. EPA Recommendations to Further Improve the Rules

      The TSD for MBUAPCD Rule 433 describes additional rule revisions that do not affect EPA's current action but are recommended for the next time that the local agency modifies the rule.

   4. Public Comment and Final Action

      As authorized in section 110(k)(3) of the Act, EPA is fully approving the

      [[Page 10968]]

      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 April 7, 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 May 6, 2003. This will incorporate these rules 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.

3. Background Information

   Why Were These Rules Submitted?

   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. Table 2 lists some of the national milestones leading to the submittal of these local agency VOC rules.

   Table 2.--Ozone Nonattainment Milestones

   Date

   Event

   March 3, 1978..................... EPA promulgated a list of ozone nonattainment areas under the Clean Air Act as amended in 1977. 43 FR 8964; 40 CFR 81.305. May 26, 1988...................... EPA notified Governors that parts of their SIPs were inadequate to attain and maintain the ozone standard and requested that they correct the deficiencies (EPA's SIP- Call). See section 110(a)(2)(H) of the pre-amended Act. November 15, 1990................. Clean Air Act Amendments of 1990 were enacted. Pub. L. 101-549, 104 Stat. 2399, codified at 42 U.S.C. 7401-7671q. May 15, 1991...................... Section 182(a)(2)(A) requires that ozone nonattainment areas correct deficient RACT rules by this date.

4. Administrative Requirements

   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 (Pub. L. 104-4).

   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. 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. 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 May 6, 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

   [[Page 10969]]

   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: December 12, 2002. Keith Takata, Acting 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 paragraphs (c)(284)(i)(A)(4), (285)(i)(D), (302)(i)(A)(2), and (302)(i)(B)(2) to read as follows:

      Sec. 52.220 Identification of plan.

      * * * * *

      (c) * * *

      (284) * * *

      (i) * * *

      (A) * * *

      (4) Rule 433, adopted on January 17, 2001. * * * * *

      (285) * * *

      (i) * * *

      (D) Antelope Valley Air Pollution Control District.

      (1) Rule 701, adopted on July 18, 2000. * * * * *

      (302) * * *

      (i) * * *

      (A) * * *

      (2) Rule 101, adopted on August 13, 2002.

      (B) * * *

      (2) Rule 415, adopted on August 21, 2002. * * * * *

      [FR Doc. 03-5326 Filed 3-6-03; 8:45 am]

      BILLING CODE 6560-50-P