![[logo] US EPA](http://www.epa.gov/epafiles/images/logo_epaseal.gif){kind=logo}
Revisions to the California State Implementation Plan, Ventura County Air Pollution Control District, Yolo-Solano Air Quality Management District
Note: EPA no longer updates this information, but it may be useful as a reference or resource.
[Federal Register: February 1, 2006 (Volume 71, Number 21)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Page 5172-5174]
From the Federal Register Online via GPO Access [wais.access.gpo.gov]
[DOCID:fr01fe06-7]
=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
40 CFR Part 52
[EPA-R09-OAR-2005-0557a; FRL-8025-2]
Revisions to the California State Implementation Plan, Ventura
County Air Pollution Control District, Yolo-Solano Air Quality
Management District
AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).
ACTION: Direct final rule.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: EPA is taking direct final action to approve revisions to the
Ventura County Air Pollution Control District (VCAPCD) and Yolo-Solano
Air Quality Management District (YSAQMD) portion of the California
State Implementation Plan (SIP). These revisions concern volatile
organic compound (VOC) emissions from polyester resin material use
operations and organic liquid chemical storage and transfer 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 April 3, 2006 without further notice,
unless EPA receives adverse comments by March 3, 2006. If we receive
such comments, we will publish a timely withdrawal in the Federal
Register to notify the public that this direct final rule will not take
effect.
ADDRESSES: Submit comments, identified by docket number [DOCKET
NUMBER], by one of the following methods:
1. Federal eRulemaking Portal: http://www.regulations.gov. 
Follow the on-line instructions.
2. E-mail: steckel.andrew@epa.gov.
3. Mail or deliver: Andrew Steckel (Air-4), U.S. Environmental
Protection Agency Region IX, 75 Hawthorne Street, San Francisco, CA
94105-3901.
Instructions: All comments will be included in the public docket
without change and may be made available online at http://
www.regulations.gov, including any personal information provided,
unless the comment includes Confidential Business Information (CBI) or
other information whose disclosure is restricted by statute.
Information that you consider CBI or otherwise protected should be
clearly identified as such and should not be submitted through http://
www.regulations.gov or e-mail. http://www.regulations.gov
is an ``anonymous access'' system, and EPA will not know your identity or
contact information unless you provide it in the body of your comment.
If you send e-mail directly to EPA, your e-mail address will be
automatically captured and included as part of the public comment. If
EPA cannot read your comment due to technical difficulties and cannot
contact you for clarification, EPA may not be able to consider your
comment.
Docket: The index to the docket for this action is available
electronically at http://www.regulations.gov and in hard copy
at EPA Region IX, 75 Hawthorne Street, San Francisco, California. While
all documents in the docket are listed in the index, some information may
be publicly available only at the hard copy location (e.g., copyrighted
material), and some may not be publicly available in either location
(e.g., CBI). To inspect the hard copy materials, please schedule an
appointment during normal business hours with the contact listed in the
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Jerald S. Wamsley, EPA Region IX, at
either (415) 947-4111, or wamsley.jerry@epa.gov.
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. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews
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 5173]]
Table 1.--Submitted Rules
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
Local agency Rule No. Rule title Adopted Submitted
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
VCAPCD...... 74.14 Polyester Resin Material 04/12/05 07/15/05
Operations.
YSAQMD...... 2.21 Organic Liquid Storage & 09/14/05 10/20/05
Transfer.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
On August 18, 2005 and November 22, 2005, respectively, EPA found
that VCAPCD Rule 74.14 and YSAQMD Rule 2.21 met the completeness
criteria in 40 CFR part 51, appendix V. The state's submittal must meet
these criteria before EPA's formal review can begin.
B. Are there other versions of these rules?
We approved previous versions of both rules into the SIP. VCAPCD
Rule 74.14 was approved and incorporated into the SIP on July 25, 1996
(see 61 Federal Register (FR) 38571). We gave a limited approval and
limited disapproval to YSAQMD Rule 2.21 when incorporating it into the
SIP on January 22, 2004 (see 69 FR 3012). There have been no intervening
submittals of these rules since we acted on these prior versions.
C. What is the purpose of the submitted rule revisions?
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. VCAPCD Rule 74.14
sets emission, formulation, work practice requirements for operations
using polyester resins to fabricate, rework, repair or touch-up
products for commercial, industrial, or military use. YSAQMD Rule 2.21
sets vapor pressure containment and control requirements for operations
that store and transfer organic liquid chemicals. EPA's technical
support document (TSD) has more information about these rules.
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 VCAPCD and YSAQMD regulate a 1-hour ozone nonattainment area (see
40 CFR part 81), so each rule must fulfill RACT.
Guidance and policy documents that we use 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,'' EPA, May 25, 1988 (the Bluebook);
3. ``Guidance Document for Correcting Common VOC & Other Rule
Deficiencies,'' EPA Region 9, August 21, 2001 (the Little Bluebook);
4. ``Control of Volatile Organic Emissions from Petroleum Liquid
Storage in External Floating Roof Tanks,'' EPA-450/2-78-047, USEPA,
December 1978;
5. ``Control of Volatile Organic Emissions from Storage of
Petroleum Liquids in Fixed-Roof Tanks,'' EPA-450/2-77-036, USEPA,
December 1977; and,
6. ``Control of Volatile Organic Compound Leaks from Gasoline Tank
Trucks and Vapor Collection Systems,'' EPA-450/2-78-051, USEPA,
December 1978.
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. On
January 22, 2004, we gave YSAQMD Rule 2.21 a limited approval and
limited disapproval because it violated EPA's excess emissions policy
and contained elements of executive officer's discretion, an
enforceability issue. The present submittal corrected these
deficiencies by incorporating new provisions consistent with EPA's
excess emissions policy during preventative maintenance activities and
by deleting the provisions of the rule allowing executive officer
discretion. The TSDs have more information on our evaluation of each rule.
C. EPA Recommendations To Further Improve the Rules
The TSD for VCAPCD 74.14 and YSAQMD Rule 2.21 describe rule
revisions that do not affect EPA's current action but are recommended
for the next time the local agencies modify 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 proposing approval of the same submitted rules. If we
receive adverse comments by March 3, 2006, 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 April 3, 2006. 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. 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
[[Page 5174]]
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
(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 submittals, EPA's role is to approve state
choices, provided that they meet the criteria of the Clean Air Act.
Given this role, absent a prior existing requirement for the State to
use voluntary consensus standards (VCS), EPA has no authority to
disapprove a SIP submittal for failure to use VCS. It would thus be
inconsistent with applicable law for EPA, when it reviews a SIP
submittal, 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 3, 2006. 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: December 22, 2005.
Jane Diamond,
Acting for 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)(337)(i)(B) and
(c)(342) to read as follows:
Sec. 52.220 Identification of plan.
* * * * *
(c) * * *
(337) * * *
(i) * * *
(B) Ventura County Air Pollution Control District.
(1) Rule 74.14, adopted on November 24, 1987 and revised on April
12, 2005.
* * * * *
(c) * * *
(342) New and amended regulations for the following APCDs were
submitted on October 20, 2005, by the Governor's designee.
(i) Incorporation by reference.
(A) Yolo-Solano Air Quality Management District.
(1) Rule 2.21, adopted on March 23, 1994 and revised on September
14, 2005.
* * * * *
[FR Doc. 06-894 Filed 1-31-06; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P