![[logo] US EPA](http://www.epa.gov/epafiles/images/logo_epaseal.gif){kind=logo}
Revisions to the California State Implementation Plan, South Coast Air Quality Management District
Related Material
Note: EPA no longer updates this information, but it may be useful as a reference or resource.
[Federal Register: September 20, 2001 (Volume 66, Number 183)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Page 48399-48401]
From the Federal Register Online via GPO Access [wais.access.gpo.gov]
[DOCID:fr20se01-28]
=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
40 CFR Part 52
[CA246-0286; FRL-7058-4]
Revisions to the California State Implementation Plan, South
Coast Air Quality Management District
AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).
ACTION: Proposed rule.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: EPA is proposing to approve revisions to the South Coast Air
Quality Management District portion of the California State
Implementation Plan (SIP). These revisions concern recordkeeping
requirements as well as volatile organic compound (VOC) emissions from
spray coating operations, metal parts and products coating operations,
coating and ink manufacturing, surfactant manufacturing, and polyester
resin operations. We are proposing to approve local rules that regulate
these emission sources under the Clean Air Act as amended in 1990 (CAA
or the Act). We are taking comments on this proposal and plan to follow
with a final action.
DATES: Any comments must arrive by October 22, 2001.
ADDRESSES: Mail comments to Andrew 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, NW., Washington DC 20460;
California Air Resources Board, Stationary Source Division, Rule
Evaluation Section, 1001 ``I'' Street, Sacramento, CA 95814; and,
South Coast Air Quality Management District, 21865 East Copley Drive,
Diamond Bar, CA 91765.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Andrew Steckel, Rulemaking Office
(AIR-4), U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Region IX, (415) 744-
1185.
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 addressed by this proposal with the dates
that they were adopted by the SCAQMD and submitted by the California
Air Resources Board (CARB).
Table 1.--Submitted Rules
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Local agency Rule # Rule title Adopted Submitted
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
SCAQMD.................................. 109 Record Keeping for Volatile.... 11/17/00 3/14/01
Organic Compound Emissions.....
SCAQMD.................................. 481 Spray Coating Operations....... 11/17/00 3/14/01
SCAQMD.................................. 1107 Coating of Metal Parts & 11/17/00 3/14/01
Products.
SCAQMD.................................. 1141.1 Coating and Ink Manufacturing.. 11/17/00 3/14/01
SCAQMD.................................. 1141.2 Surfactant Manufacturing....... 11/17/00 3/14/01
SCAQMD.................................. 1162 Polyester Resin Operations..... 11/17/00 3/14/01
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
[[Page 48400]]
On May 25, 2001, EPA found these rule submittals met the
completeness criteria in 40 CFR part 51, appendix V. These criteria
must be met before formal EPA review may begin.
B. Are There Other Versions of These Rules?
We approved versions of the following rules into the SIP on the
dates listed: Rule 109, April 13, 1995; Rule 481, January 21, 1981;
Rule 1107, August 19, 1999; Rule 1141.1, May 4, 1999; Rule 1141.2,
January 15, 1987; and, Rule 1162, August 25, 1994. Between these SIP
incorporations and today, CARB has made no intervening submittals of
these rules.
C. What Is the Purpose of the Submitted Rule Revisions?
The submitted rule revisions amend the record keeping requirements
allowing monthly recordkeeping when sources use coatings that comply
with their relevant SCAQMD Regulation XI rule. In some cases, this
allowance for monthly recordkeeping is related to an exemption based on
monthly coating use rather than daily coating use. Sources subject to
daily use or VOC limits in any applicable SCAQMD rule may not use a
monthly recordkeeping option. SCAQMD made other minor rule changes such
as adding new definitions to Rule 109, deleting definitions from the
subject rules if they are defined in Rule 102--Definitions, and
deleting obsolete exemptions. The TSD for each rule explains its
revisions in more detail.
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). The
SCAQMD regulates an ozone nonattainment area (see 40 CFR part 81), so
these rules must fulfill RACT.
Guidance and policy documents that we used to define specific
enforceability and RACT requirements 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; Clarification to Appendix D of November 24, 1987 Federal
Register Document,'' (Blue Book), notice of availability published in
the May 25, 1988 Federal Register.
3. ``Control of Volatile Organic Emissions from Existing Stationary
Sources Volume VI: Surface Coating of Miscellaneous Metal Parts and
Products,'' USEPA, June 1978, EPA-450/2-78-015.
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. SCAQMD
did several studies to examine the probable effects of changing the
recordkeeping threshold from a daily to a monthly threshold. These
studies looked at the overall effects and rule specific effects of
changing the recordkeeping requirements. The concern was whether or not
a facility would change its daily activities and resulting emission
patterns when allowed an option for a monthly recordkeeping regime as
opposed to a daily requirement. From the results, it appeared that
average daily usage did not change under either recordkeeping regime.
Regarding rule specific emission increases, SCAQMD found that there
would be little or no change to overall or daily VOC emissions for the
subject rules. For further information, the TSD for each rule reviews
the emissions analysis specific to that rule.
C. EPA Recommendations To Further Improve the Rules
The TSDs for Rules 1107 and 1162 describe additional rule revisions
concerning capture and control efficiency test methods 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
Because EPA believes the submitted rules fulfill all relevant
requirements, we are proposing to fully approve them as described in
section 110(k)(3) of the Act. We will accept comments from the public
on this proposal for the next 30 days. Unless we receive convincing new
information during the comment period, we intend to publish a final
approval action that will incorporate these rules into the federally
enforceable SIP.
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
proposed 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 proposed 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 proposed 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 proposed 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 proposes to
approve 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
[[Page 48401]]
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 proposed 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 proposed 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 proposed 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.).
List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52
Environmental protection, Air pollution control, Hydrocarbons,
Incorporation by reference, Intergovernmental relations, Ozone,
Reporting and recordkeeping requirements, Volatile organic compounds.
Dated: August 27, 2001.
Sally Seymour,
Acting Regional Administrator, Region IX.
[FR Doc. 01-23478 Filed 9-19-01; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P