![[logo] US EPA](http://www.epa.gov/epafiles/images/logo_epaseal.gif){kind=logo}
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: April 23, 2002 (Volume 67, Number 78)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Page 19682-19684]
From the Federal Register Online via GPO Access [wais.access.gpo.gov]
[DOCID:fr23ap02-22]
=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
40 CFR Part 52
[CA 247-0322a; FRL-7158-4]
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 emission of volatile organic compounds (VOC) from the
transfer of gasoline into stationary storage containers and from
gasoline bulk plants and terminals. We are approving local rules that
regulates this emission source under the Clean Air Act as amended in
1990 (CAA or the Act).
DATES: This rule is effective on June 24, 2002, without further notice,
unless EPA receives adverse comments by May 23, 2002. If we receive
such comments, 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.
You can inspect copies of the submitted rule revisions and EPA's
technical support document (TSD) at our Region IX office during normal
business hours. You may also see copies of the submitted rule revisions
and TSD 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, 24580 Silver Cloud
Court, Monterey, CA 93940.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Al Petersen, Rulemaking Office (AIR-
4), U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Region IX; (415) 947-4118.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Throughout this document, ``we,'' ``us'' and
``our'' refer to EPA.
Table of Contents
I. The State's Submittal
[[Page 19683]]
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
A. 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 date that they
were adopted by the local air agency and submitted by the California
Air Resources Board (CARB).
Table 1.--Submitted Rules
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Local
agency Rule # Rule title Adopted Submitted
------------------------------------------------------------------------
MBUAPCD 418.................... Transfer 12/13/00 05/08/01
of
Gasoline
into
Stationary
Storage
Containers
MBUAPCD 419.................... Bulk 12/13/00 05/08/01
Gasoline
Plants and
Terminals
------------------------------------------------------------------------
On July 20, 2001, this 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 These Rules?
We approved into the SIP on February 15, 1995 (60 FR 8565) a
version of Rule 418, adopted on August 25, 1993. We approved into the
SIP on January 17, 1997 (62 FR 2597) a version of Rule 419, adopted on
November 23, 1994.
C. What Is the Purpose of the Submitted Rule Revisions?
The purpose of revisions to Rule 418 is to make the rule consistent
with the vapor recovery efficiency required by the CARB for
certification of vapor recovery equipment used for the transfer of
gasoline into stationary storage containers.
The purposes of revisions to Rule 419 ares to remove group I and II
definitions, to move the definition of VOC to Rule 101, and to remove
an obsolete compliance schedule.
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
CAA), 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
MBUAPCD regulates an ozone attainment area (see 40 CFR part 81),
therefore Rules 418 and 419 are not required to fulfill RACT
requirements.
Guidance and policy documents that we used to define specific
enforceability requirements include the following:
Requirements for Preparation, Adoption, and Submittal of
Implementation Plans, U.S. EPA, 40 CFR Part 51.
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.
Federal Attainment Plan for the Monterey Bay Region
(October 1994).
B. Do the Rules Meet the Evaluation Criteria?
We believe the rules are consistent with the relevant policy and
guidance regarding enforceability and SIP relaxations.
The TSD has more information on our evaluation.
C. EPA Recommendations to Further Improve the Rules
The TSD for Rule 419 describes 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 CAA, EPA is fully
approving the submitted rules because we believe they fulfill all
relevant requirements. We do not think anyone will object to this, so
we are finalizing the approval 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 May 23, 2002, 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 approvals will be effective
without further notice on June 24, 2002. 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
A. 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.
[[Page 19684]]
Table 2.--Ozone Nonattainment Milestones
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Date Event
------------------------------------------------------------------------
March 3, 1978................. EPA promulgated a list of ozone
nonattainment areas under the 1978
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 (Public Law 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 CAA.
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 CAA. 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 CAA. 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. 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 CAA, petitions for judicial review
of this action must be filed in the United States Court of Appeals for
the appropriate circuit by June 24, 2002. 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, Incorporation by
reference, Intergovernmental relations, Ozone, Reporting and
recordkeeping requirements, Volatile organic compounds.
Dated: April 5, 2002.
Laura Yoshii,
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)(284)(i)(A)(2)
to read as follows:
Sec. 52.220 Identification of plan.
* * * * *
(c) * * *
(284) * * *
(i) * * *
(A) * * *
(2) Rules 418 and 419, adopted on December 13, 2000.
* * * * *
[FR Doc. 02-9786 Filed 4-22-02; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P