Jump to main content.

Revisions to the California State Implementation Plan, Monterey Bay Unified 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: June 12, 2001 (Volume 66, Number 113)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Page 31554-31556]
From the Federal Register Online via GPO Access [wais.access.gpo.gov]
[DOCID:fr12jn01-10]

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
40 CFR Part 52
[CA 242-0280a; FRL-6990-9]
 
Revisions to the California State Implementation Plan, 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 a revision to the 
Monterey Bay Unified Air Pollution Control District (MBUAPCD) portion 
of the California State Implementation Plan (SIP). This revision 
concerns the control of emissions from Oxides of Nitrogen ( 
NOX) and sulfur compounds. We are approving a local rule 
that regulates these emissions under the Clean Air Act as amended in 
1990 (CAA or the Act).

DATES: This rule is effective on August 13, 2001 without further 
notice, unless EPA receives adverse comments by July 12, 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 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.
Monterey Bay Unified Air Pollution Control District, Rule Development, 
24580 Silver Cloud Ct., Monterey, CA 93940-6536.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Christine Vineyard, Rulemaking Office 
(AIR-4), U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Region IX, (415) 744-
1197.

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

Table of Contents

I. The State's Submittal
    A. What rule did the State submit?
    B. Are there other versions of this rule?
    C. What is the purpose of the submitted rule revision?
II. EPA's Evaluation and Action.
    A. How is EPA evaluating the rule?
    B. Does the rule meet the evaluation criteria?
    C. Public comment and final action.
III. Background information.
A. Why was this rule submitted?
I. The State's Submittal

A. What Rule Did the State Submit?

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

                                             Table 1--Submitted Rule
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
              Local agency                    Rule                Rule title              Adopted     Submitted
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
MBUAPCD.................................          404  Sulfur Compounds and Nitrogen       03/22/00     05/26/00
                                                        Oxides.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    On October 6, 2000, 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.

B. Are There Other Versions of this Rule?

    We approved a version of Rule 404 into the SIP on August 11, 1998.

C. What Is the Purpose of the Submitted Rule Revision?

    MBUAPCD submitted Rule 404, Sulfur Compounds and Nitrogen Oxides, 
includes the following administrative changes from the current SIP-
approved rule:

[[Page 31555]]

     Clarification of existing exemption for electric power 
boilers.
     Incorporation of existing exemptions for certain types of 
open burning and agricultural operations from District Rule 405, 
Exceptions.
     Update of the reference section to incorporate related 
District Rules.
    The TSD has more information about this rule.

II. EPA's Evaluation and Action

A. How Is EPA Evaluating the Rule?

    Generally, SIP rules for SO2 and NO2 must be 
enforceable (see section 110(a) of the Act) and must not relax existing 
requirements (see sections 110(l) and 193). MBUAPCD is listed as being 
attainment for the national ambient air quality standards (see 40 CFR 
81) for SO2 and NO2. Therefore, for purposes of 
controlling SO2 and NO2, Rule 404 needs only 
comply with the general provisions of Section 110 of the Act.
    Guidance and policy documents that we used to define specific 
enforceability requirements include the following:
    1. ``State Implementation Plans; Nitrogen Oxides Supplement to the 
General Preamble; Clean Air Act Amendments of 1990 Implementation of 
Title I; Proposed Rule,'' (the NOX Supplement), 57 FR 55620, 
November 25, 1992.
    2. ``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.
    3. ``SO2 Guideline Document,'' EPA-452/R-94-008.

B. Does the Rule Meet the Evaluation Criteria?

    We believe this rule is consistent with the relevant policy and 
guidance regarding enforceability and SIP relaxations.

C. Public Comment and Final Action

    As authorized in section 110(k)(3) of the Act, EPA is fully 
approving the submitted rule because we believe it fulfills 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 rule. If we 
receive adverse comments by July 12, 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 August 13, 2001. This will incorporate this 
rule into the federally enforceable SIP.

III. Background Information

A. Why Was This Rule Submitted?

    NOX helps produce ground-level ozone, smog and 
particulate matter, which harm human health and the environment. Sulfur 
dioxide is formed by the combustion of fuels containing sulfur 
compounds and causes harm to human health and the environment. This 
rule is designed to reduce SO2 and NO2 emissions.

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. 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). 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 (65 
FR 67249, 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. 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 August 13, 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

[[Page 31556]]

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, Nitrogen dioxide, Ozone, 
Reporting and recordkeeping requirements, Sulfur oxides.

    Dated: May 8, 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 paragraph (c)(279)(i)(B) to 
read as follows:

Sec. 52.220  Identification of plan.

* * * * *
    (c) * * *
    (279) * * *
    (i) * * *
    (B) Monterey Bay Unified Air Pollution Control District.
    (1) Rule 404, Monterey Bay Unified APCD, adopted on March 22, 2000.
* * * * *
[FR Doc. 01-14606 Filed 6-11-01; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-60-P

 
 

Local Navigation

Jump to main content.