![[logo] US EPA](http://www.epa.gov/epafiles/images/logo_epaseal.gif){kind=logo}
Revisions to the California State Implementation Plan, Kern County Air Pollution Control District and Imperial County Air Pollution Control District
Related Material
Note: EPA no longer updates this information, but it may be useful as a reference or resource.
[Federal Register: August 10, 2001 (Volume 66, Number 155)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Page 42126-42128]
From the Federal Register Online via GPO Access [wais.access.gpo.gov]
[DOCID:fr10au01-11]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
40 CFR Part 52
[CA179-0243a; FRL-7022-5]
Revisions to the California State Implementation Plan, Kern
County Air Pollution Control District and Imperial County 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
Kern County Air Pollution Control District (KCAPCD) and the Imperial
County Air Pollution Control District (ICAPCD) portion of the
California State Implementation Plan (SIP). Under authority of the
Clean Air Act as amended in 1990 (CAA or the Act), we are approving
local rules that address general requirements for source sampling and
continuous monitoring systems.
DATES: This rule is effective on October 9, 2001 without further
notice, unless EPA receives adverse comments by September 10, 2001. 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:
Environmental Protection Agency, Air Docket (6102), Ariel Rios
Building, 1200 Pennsylvania Avenue, N.W., Washington D.C. 20460.
California Air Resources Board, Stationary Source Division, Rule
Evaluation Section, 1001 ``I'' Street, Sacramento, CA 95814.
Kern County Air Pollution Control District, 2700 ``M'' Street,
Suite 302, Bakersfield, CA 93301-2370.
[[Page 42127]]
Imperial County Air Pollution Control District, 150 South 9th
Street, El Centro, CA 92243-2801.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Stanley Tong, Rulemaking Office (AIR-
4), U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Region IX, (415) 744-1191.
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
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Completeness
Local agency Rule No. Rule title Adopted Submitted ltr.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
KCAPCD............................. 108 Stack Monitoring..... 05/02/96 07/23/96 10/30/96
KCAPCD............................. 108.1 Source Sampling...... 05/02/96 07/23/96 10/30/96
ICAPCD............................. 109 Source Sampling...... 09/14/99 05/26/00 10/06/00
ICAPCD............................. 110 Stack Monitoring..... 09/14/99 05/26/00 10/06/00
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Table 1 also provides the dates 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?
We approved a version of KCAPCD Rules 108 and 108.1 into the SIP
for the Kern County Air Pollution Control District on July 6, 1982, and
August 22, 1977, respectively. The KCAPCD adopted revisions to the SIP-
approved version of Rule 108.1 on May 6, 1991 and CARB submitted them
to us on May 30, 1991. The KCAPCD adopted additional revisions to Rule
108.1 on May 2, 1996 and CARB submitted them to us on July 23, 1996.
While we can only act on the most recently submitted version, we have
reviewed materials provided with previous submittals.
The previous version of ICAPCD Rules 109 and 110 were approved into
the SIP for the Imperial County Air Pollution Control District on
August 11, 1978 and February 3, 1989, respectively.
C. What Is the Purpose of the Submitted Rule Revisions?
KCAPCD Rule 108 contains general requirements on the types of
sources required to install continuous monitoring systems, the
standards of performance, and the reporting and recordkeeping
requirements for those systems. KCAPCD Rule 108.1 contains general
requirements for preparing and performing stack sampling. ICAPCD Rule
109 contains general requirements for preparing to perform stack
sampling. ICAPCD Rule 110 contains general requirements on the types of
sources required to install continuous monitoring systems, the
standards of performance, and the reporting and recordkeeping
requirements for those systems. The TSDs have more information about
these rules.
II. EPA's Evaluation and Action
A. How Is EPA Evaluating the Rules?
These rules describe general provisions that support emission
monitoring and testing found in other local agency requirements.
Generally, SIP rules must be enforceable (see section 110(a) of the
Act) and must not relax existing requirements (see sections 110(l) and
193). Guidance and policy documents that we used to define specific
enforceability requirements include, ``Issues Relating to VOC
Regulation Cutpoints, Deficiencies, and Deviations; Clarification to
Appendix D of November 24, 1987 Federal Register Notice,'' (Blue Book),
notice of availability published in the May 25, 1988 Federal Register.
B. Do the Rules Meet the Evaluation Criteria?
We believe these rules are consistent with the relevant policy and
guidance regarding enforceability and SIP relaxations. The TSDs have
more information on our evaluation.
C. EPA Recommendations to Further Improve the Rules
The TSDs describe additional rule revisions that do not affect
EPA's current action but are recommended for the next time the local
agency modifies the rules.
D. Public Comment and Final Action
As authorized in section 110(k)(3) of the Act, 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 10, 2001, 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 9, 2001. This will
incorporate these rules into the federally enforceable SIP.
III. Background Information
Why Were These Rules Submitted?
Section 110(a) of the CAA requires states to submit regulations
that control volatile organic compounds, oxides of nitrogen,
particulate matter, and other air pollutants which harm human health
and the environment. These rules were developed as part of the local
agency's program to control these pollutants.
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 32111,
``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
[[Page 42128]]
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). This rule also does 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 (59 FR 22951, November 9, 2000), nor will it 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),
because it 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 (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. As required by section 3
of Executive Order 12988 (61 FR 4729, February 7, 1996), in issuing
this rule, EPA has taken the necessary steps to eliminate drafting
errors and ambiguity, minimize potential litigation, and provide a
clear legal standard for affected conduct. EPA has complied with
Executive Order 12630 (53 FR 8859, March 15, 1988) by examining the
takings implications of the rule in accordance with the ``Attorney
General's Supplemental Guidelines for the Evaluation of Risk and
Avoidance of Unanticipated Takings' issued under the executive order.
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 October 9, 2001. 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, Hydrocarbons,
Incorporation by reference, Intergovernmental relations, Oxides of
nitrogen, Ozone, Particulate matter, Reporting and recordkeeping
requirements, Sulfur oxides, Volatile organic compound.
Dated: July 17, 2001.
Jane Diamond,
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)(239)(i)(C)(2)
and (279)(i)(A)(4) to read as follows:
Sec. 52.220 Identification of plan.
* * * * *
(c) * * *
(239) * * *
(i) * * *
(C) * * *
(2) Rules 108 and 108.1 adopted on May 2, 1996.
* * * * *
(279) * * *
(i) * * *
(A) * * *
(4) Rules 109 and 110 adopted on September 14, 1999.
* * * * *
[FR Doc. 01-20139 Filed 8-9-01; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P