Jump to main content.

Revisions to the California State Implementation Plan, Great Basin Unified Air Pollution Control District and Ventura County Air Pollution Control District

Note: EPA no longer updates this information, but it may be useful as a reference or resource.

  [Federal Register: February 22, 2005 (Volume 70, Number 34)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Page 8516-8518]
From the Federal Register Online via GPO Access [wais.access.gpo.gov]
[DOCID:fr22fe05-10]

=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
40 CFR Part 52
[CA 309-0474; FRL-7872-4]

Revisions to the California State Implementation Plan, Great 
Basin Unified Air Pollution Control District and Ventura County Air 
Pollution Control District

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).
ACTION: Final rule.

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

SUMMARY: EPA is finalizing approval of revisions to the Great Basin 
Unified Air Pollution Control District (GBUAPCD) and Ventura County Air 
Pollution

[[Page 8517]]

Control District (VCAPCD) portions of the California State 
Implementation Plan (SIP). These revisions were proposed in the Federal 
Register on June 7, 2004 and concern the emission of particulate matter 
(PM-10) from open burning and incinerator burning. We are approving 
local rules that regulate these emission sources under the Clean Air 
Act as amended in 1990 (CAA or the Act).

DATES: Effective Date: This rule is effective on March 24, 2005.

ADDRESSES: You can inspect copies of the submitted rule 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 rule 
revisions and TSDs 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.
Great Basin Unified Air Pollution Control District, 157 Short 
Street, Suite 6, Bishop, CA 93514.
Ventura County Air Pollution Control District, 669 Country Square 
Drive, Ventura, CA 93003.

    A copy of the rule may also be available via the Internet at 
http://www.arb.ca.gov/drdb/drdbltxt.htm. Exit Disclaimer Please be advised that 
this is not an EPA website and may not contain the same version of the 
rule that was submitted to EPA.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Al Petersen, Rulemaking Office (AIR-
4), U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Region IX, (415) 947-4118, 
petersen.alfred@epa.gov.

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

I. Proposed Action

    On June 7, 2004 (69 FR 31782), EPA proposed to approve the 
following rules into the California SIP.

                           Table 1.--Submitted Rules
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
Local agency   Rule #     Rule Title        Revised or amended   Submitted
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
GBUAPCD.....    406  Open Outdoor Fires...  09/24/03, Revised.... 11/04/03
GBUAPCD.....    407  Incinerator and Burn   09/24/03, Revised.... 11/04/03
                      Barrel-Burning.
VCAPCD......    56  Open Burning..........  011/11/03, Amended... 01/15/04
--------------------------------------------------------------------------

    We proposed to approve these rules because we determined that they 
complied with the relevant CAA requirements. Our proposed action 
contains more information on the rules and our evaluation.

II. Public Comments and EPA Responses

    EPA's proposed action provided a 30-day public comment period. 
During this period, we received a comment from the following party.
    ? Randy Gullickson, Camarillo, California, e-mail dated June 
7, 2004 and received June 7, 2004.
    As a result of this comment, we published a withdrawal of the 
direct final approval of these rules that was published on July 15, 
2004 (69 FR 42340). The comment and our response is summarized below.
    Comment: Mr. Gullickson, a resident and homeowner in Ventura 
County, is concerned about the proposed exemption ``to limit the 
burning of household waste at single-or two-family dwellings to only 
dry non-glossy paper and cardboard and dry natural vegetation.'' His 
concern relates to the costs and problems, such as damage to local 
farms and fields, that are associated with implementation of this 
limited exemption. He urges EPA to reconsider the approval after a 
thorough study of these issues.
    Response: The cited limited exemption is contained in GBUAPCD Rule 
407, Incinerator and Burn Barrel Burning, pursuant to California Code 
of Regulations, title 17, section 93113(e). The exemption is restricted 
to areas with population density of less or equal to 3.0 persons per 
square mile. The District may request that the exemption also apply to 
areas with greater than 3.0 but less or equal to 10.0 persons per 
square mile for a renewable 10-year period. The low population density 
assures that very little burning would occur and then only materials 
that burn relatively clean would be burned. Further restrictions are 
that burning must occur only on Burn Days as determined by the 
California Air Resources Board and that a valid burn permit be obtained 
from the GBUAPCD. We believe that incinerator burning under the cited 
requirements significantly limits any incinerator burning and that 
negligible contamination from PM-10 emissions will occur in the remote, 
low-population density areas where the exemption is allowed.
    VCAPCD Rule 56, Open Burning, which regulates open burning in 
Ventura County, does not include this limited exemption and does not 
allow burning of any household waste at single-or two-family dwellings. 
Thus, the potential environmental problems and environmental costs 
associated with this limited exemption would not occur in Ventura County.

III. EPA Action

    No comments were submitted that change our assessment that the 
submitted rules comply with the relevant CAA requirements. Therefore, 
as authorized in section 110(k)(3) of the Act, EPA is fully approving 
these rules into the California SIP.

IV. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews

    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 (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

[[Page 8518]]

Federal Government and Indian tribes, as specified by Executive Order 
13175 (59 FR 22951, 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 April 25, 2005. 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, Particulate matter, Reporting 
and recordkeeping requirements.

    Dated: January 12, 2005.
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 paragraphs (c)(321)(i)(C)(2) and 
(3) and (328)(i)(A)(2) to read as follows:

Sec.  52.220  Identification of plan.

* * * * *
    (c) * * *
    (321) * * *
    (i) * * *
    (C) * * *
    (2) Rule 406, adopted on January 21, 1976 and revised on September 
24, 2003.
    (3) Rule 407, adopted on September 5, 1974 and revised on September 
24, 2003.
* * * * *
    (328) * * *
    (i) * * *
    (A) * * *
    (2) Rule 56, adopted on October 22, 1968 and amended on November 
11, 2003.
* * * * *
[FR Doc. 05-3183 Filed 2-18-05; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P

 
 

Local Navigation

Jump to main content.