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
[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 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
I. The State's Submittal
A. What rules did the State submit?
B. Are there other versions of these rules?
C. What is the purpose of the submitted rule revisions?
II. EPA's Evaluation and Action
A. How is EPA evaluating the rules?
B. Do the rules meet the evaluation criteria?
C. EPA recommendations to further improve the rules.
D. Public comment and final action.
III. Background Information
Why were these rules submitted?
IV. Administrative Requirements
I. The State's Submittal
A. 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
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
Local agency 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.
B. 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.
C. 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.
II. EPA's Evaluation and Action
A. 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.
B. 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.
C. 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.
D. 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.
III. 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.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
IV. 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
![[logo] US EPA](http://www.epa.gov/epafiles/images/logo_epaseal.gif){kind=logo}