![[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, and Ventura 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: May 23, 2002 (Volume 67, Number 100)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Page 36105-36108]
From the Federal Register Online via GPO Access [wais.access.gpo.gov]
[DOCID:fr23my02-13]
=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
40 CFR Part 52
[CA247-0325a; FRL-7201-6]
Revisions to the California State Implementation Plan, South
Coast Air Quality Management District, and Ventura 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
South Coast Air Quality Management District (SCAQMD) and Ventura County
Air Pollution Control District (VCAPCD) portions of the California
State Implementation Plan (SIP). These revisions concern volatile
organic compound (VOC) emissions from solvent usage and graphic arts
operations. 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 July 22, 2002 without further notice,
unless EPA receives adverse comments by June 24, 2002. If we receive
adverse 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 94105-3901.
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 D.C. 20460;
California Air Resources Board, Stationary Source Division, Rule
Evaluation Section, 1001 ``I'' Street, Sacramento, CA 95814;
South Coast Air Quality Management District, 21865 East Copley
Drive, Diamond Bar, CA 91765-4182; and,
Ventura County Air Pollution Control District, 669 County Square
Drive, Ventura, CA 93003.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Jerald S. Wamsley, Rulemaking Office
(AIR-4), U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Region IX, (415) 947-
4111.
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 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).
[[Page 36106]]
Table 1--Submitted Rules
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Rule i
Local agency Rule title Adopted Submitted
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
SCAQMD.................................... 442 Usage of Solvents............ 12/15/00 05/08/01
VCAPCD.................................... 74.19 Graphic Arts................. 4/10/01 10/30/01
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
EPA found these rule submittals met the completeness criteria in 40
CFR part 51, appendix V on the following dates: on July 20, 2001 for
SCAQMD Rule 442; and on January 18, 2002 for VCAPCD Rule 74.19. These
completeness criteria must be met before formal EPA review may begin.
B. Are there Other Versions of These Rules?
We approved a version of SCAQMD Rule 442 into the SIP on November
16, 1983. We approved a version of VCAPCD Rule 74.19 into the SIP on
April 19, 2001. Between these dates and today's action, California has
not made an intervening submittal of these rules.
C. What Is the Purpose of the Rule Revisions?
SCAQMD Rule 442 specifies emission limits for organic materials
used in operations not governed by SCAQMD Regulation 11 rules. These
emission limits take the form of daily and monthly facility wide
emission caps. A facility may meet these caps by installing emission
control equipment, changing product formulation, or modifying
manufacturing operations.
SCAQMD's December 15, 2000 amendments to Rule 442 revised the 1983
version within the SIP. Now, Rule 442 is formatted similar to other
SCAQMD prohibitory rules. Consequently, the rule now incorporates the
following sections: purpose, applicability, definitions, requirements,
control equipment, test methods, recordkeeping, storage and disposal of
VOC containing materials, and exemptions. Most of the 1983 rule
language has been incorporated within this new format. The most
significant addition to Rule 442 is the emission requirements that
apply upon January 1, 2003. Here, daily VOC emission caps are replaced
by a monthly emission cap of 833 pounds per facility.
VCAPCD Rule 74.19 is a rule designed to reduce volatile organic
compound (VOC) emissions at industrial sites engaged in graphics arts
operations such as flexographic printing, gravure printing, and
lithographic printing. VOCs are emitted during the surface preparation,
cleaning, printing, and drying phases of these processes.
VCAPCD's September 10, 1996 version of Rule 74.19 was amended as
follows:
--The required ROC (reactive organic compound) content of adhesives
used for printing operations was lowered;
--The required ROC content of flexographic inks on porous substrates
was lowered;
--The required ROC content of fountain solutions used by lithographic
printing operations was lowered;
--The required ROC content or vapor pressure of cleaning solvents used
for printing operations was reduced; and
--The exemption limit of the rule was lowered from 175 pounds of ROC
emissions per month to 200 pounds of ROC emissions per year.
Each rule's TSD has more information on these changes.
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).
Both the SCAQMD and VCAPCD regulate an ozone nonattainment area (see 40
CFR part 81), so both Rule 442 and Rule 74.19 must fulfill RACT.
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; 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 VIII: Graphic Arts--Rotogravure and Flexography,''
USEPA, December 1978, EPA-450/2-78-033.
A second draft CTG was published along with a companion Alternative
Control Technique (ACT) document:
4. ``Guideline Series, Control of Volatile Organic Compound
Emissions from Offset Lithographic Printing,'' Draft, USEPA, OAQPS,
September 1993; and,
5. ``Alternative Control Techniques Document: Offset Lithographic
Printing,'' USEPA, OAQPS, June 1994, EPA 453/R-94-054.
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.
Within SCAQMD Rule 442, daily VOC emission caps are replaced by a
monthly emission cap of 833 pounds per facility. This monthly emissions
cap of 833 pounds per month is approximately equivalent to the daily
cap for photochemically reactive solvents assuming 22 working days a
month. Furthermore, the 833 pound monthly limit is more stringent than
the 600 pound daily emissions cap for non-photochemically reactive
organic solvents that will be removed. As a result, the submitted Rule
442 does not interfere with reasonable further progress or attainment.
VCAPCD Rule 74.19's coating limits and exemption limit have been
made more stringent. VCAPCD staff estimate that the April 10, 2001
changes to Rule 74.19 will reduce ROC emissions from graphics arts
operations by 20 tons per year. In sum, the SIP is not weakened by the
April 2001 changes to Rule 74.19.
The TSD for each rule has more information on our evaluation.
C. EPA Recommendations To Further Improve the Rules
The TSD for VCAPCD Rule 74.19 describes additional rule revisions
that do not affect EPA's current action but are recommended for the
next time 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 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
[[Page 36107]]
proposing approval of the same submitted rules. If we receive adverse
comments by June 24, 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 approval will be effective without further
notice on July 22, 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
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 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 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 July 22, 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: March 29, 2002.
Laura Yoshii,
Deputy 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.
[[Page 36108]]
Subpart F--California
2. Section 52.220 is amended by adding paragraphs (c)(284)(i)(B)(3)
and (c)(288)(i)(C) to read as follows:
Sec. 52.220 Identification of plan.
* * * * *
(c) *-*-*
(284) *-*-*
(i) *-*-*
(B) *-*-*
(3) Rule 442 adopted on May 7, 1976 and amended on December 15,
2000.
* * * * *
(288) *-*-*
(i) *-*-*
(C) Ventura County Air Pollution Control District.
(1) Rule 74.19 adopted on August 11, 1992 and amended on April 10,
2001.
* * * * *
[FR Doc. 02-12839 Filed 5-22-02; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P