[Federal Register Volume 63, Number 26 (Monday, February 9, 1998)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 6489-6491]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 98-3022]


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

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

40 CFR Part 52

[AZ 017-0007; FRL-5956-8]


Approval and Promulgation of Implementation Plans; Arizona State 
Implementation Plan Revision, Maricopa County

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Final rule.

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

SUMMARY: EPA is finalizing the approval of revisions to the Arizona 
State Implementation Plan (SIP) proposed in the Federal Register on 
December 17, 1997. The revisions concern rules from the Maricopa County 
Environmental Services Department, Technical Services Division (MCESD). 
This approval action will incorporate these rules into the federally 
approved SIP. The intended effect of approving these rules is to 
regulate emissions of volatile organic compounds (VOCs) in accordance 
with the requirements of the Clean Air Act, as amended in 1990 (CAA or 
the Act). The revised rules control VOC emissions from solvent 
cleaning, petroleum solvent dry cleaning, rubber sports ball 
manufacturing, graphic arts, semiconductor manufacturing, vegetable oil 
extraction processes, wood furniture and fixture coating, wood millwork 
coating, and loading of organic liquids. Thus, EPA is finalizing the 
approval of these revisions into the Arizona SIP under provisions of 
the CAA regarding EPA action on SIP submittals, SIPs for national 
primary and secondary ambient air quality standards and plan 
requirements for nonattainment areas.

EFFECTIVE DATE: This action is effective on March 11, 1998.

ADDRESSES: Copies of the rule revisions and EPA's evaluation report for 
each rule are available for public inspection at EPA's Region IX office 
during normal business hours. Copies of the submitted rule revisions 
are available for inspection at the following locations:

    Rulemaking Office (AIR-4), Air Division, U.S. Environmental 
Protection Agency, Region IX, 75 Hawthorne Street, San Francisco, CA 
94105.
    Environmental Protection Agency, Air Docket (6102), 401 ``M'' 
Street, SW., Washington, DC 20460.
    Arizona Department of Environmental Quality, 3003 North Central 
Avenue, Phoenix, AZ 85012.
    Maricopa County Environmental Services Department, 2406 S. 24th 
Street, suite E-214, Phoenix, AZ 85034.


[[Page 6490]]


FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Andrew Steckel, Rulemaking Office, 
(AIR-4), Air Division, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Region IX, 
75 Hawthorne Street, San Francisco, CA 94105, Telephone: (415) 744-
1185.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

I. Applicability

    The rules being approved into the Arizona SIP include: MCESD's 
Rules 331-Solvent Cleaning, 333-Petroleum Solvent Dry Cleaning, 334-
Rubber Sports Ball Manufacturing, 337-Graphic Arts, 338-Semiconductor 
Manufacturing, 339-Vegetable Oil Extraction Processes, 342-Coating Wood 
Furniture and Fixture, 346-Coating Wood Millwork, and 351-Loading of 
Organic Liquids. These rules were submitted by the Arizona Department 
of Environmental Quality (ADEQ) to EPA on February 4, 1993 (Rule 339), 
August 31, 1995 (Rule 351), February 26, 1997 (Rules 331, 333, 334, 
336, and 338) and March 4, 1997 (Rules 342, 337, and 346) respectively.

II. Background

    On December 17, 1997 in 62 FR 66043, EPA proposed to approve the 
following rules into the Arizona SIP: MCESD's Rules 331-Solvent 
Cleaning, 333-Petroleum Solvent Dry Cleaning, 334-Rubber Sports Ball 
Manufacturing, 337-Graphic Arts, 338-Semiconductor Manufacturing, 339-
Vegetable Oil Extraction Processes, 342-Coating Wood Furniture and 
Fixture, 346-Coating Wood Millwork, and 351-Loading of Organic Liquids. 
Rules 331, 333, 334, 338, were adopted by MCESD on June 19, 1996, Rule 
339 on November 16, 1992, Rules 337, 342 and 346 on November 20, 1996, 
and Rule 351 on February 15, 1995. These rules were submitted by ADEQ 
to EPA on February 4, 1993 (Rule 339), August 31, 1995 (Rule 351), 
February 26, 1997 (Rules 331, 333, 334, 336, and 338) and March 4, 1997 
(Rules 342, 337, and 346) respectively. These rules were submitted in 
response to EPA's 1988 SIP-Call and the CAA section 182(a)(2)(A) 
requirement that nonattainment areas fix their reasonably available 
control technology (RACT) rules for ozone in accordance with EPA 
guidance that interpreted the requirements of the pre-amendment Act. A 
detailed discussion of the background for each of the above rules and 
nonattainment areas is provided in the NPRM cited above.
    EPA has evaluated all of the above rules for consistency with the 
requirements of the CAA and EPA regulations and EPA interpretation of 
these requirements as expressed in the various EPA policy guidance 
documents referenced in the NPRM cited above. EPA has found that the 
rules meet the applicable EPA requirements. A detailed discussion of 
the rule provisions and evaluations has been provided in 62 FR 66043 
and in technical support documents (TSDs) available at EPA's Region IX 
office (TSDs dated September 1997 (Rules 333 and 351), October 1997 
(Rules 334, 338, 339, 342, 346), and November 1997 (Rules 331 and 337).

III. Response to Public Comments

    A 30-day public comment period was provided in 62 FR 66043. EPA did 
not receive any comments.

IV. EPA Action

    EPA is finalizing action to approve the above rules for inclusion 
into the Arizona SIP. EPA is approving the submittal under section 
110(k)(3) as meeting the requirements of section 110(a) and part D of 
the CAA. This approval action will incorporate these rules into the 
federally approved SIP. The intended effect of approving these rules is 
to regulate emissions of VOCs in accordance with the requirements of 
the CAA.
    Nothing in this action should be construed as permitting or 
allowing or establishing a precedent for any future request for 
revision to any state implementation plan. Each request for revision to 
the state implementation plan shall be considered separately in light 
of specific technical, economic, and environmental factors and in 
relation to relevant statutory and regulatory requirements.

V. Administrative Requirements

A. Executive Order 12866

    The Office of Management and Budget (OMB) has exempted this 
regulatory action from E.O. 12866 review.

B. Regulatory Flexibility Act

    Under the Regulatory Flexibility Act, 5 U.S.C. 600 et seq., EPA 
must prepare a regulatory flexibility analysis assessing the impact of 
any proposed or final rule on small entities. 5 U.S.C. 603 and 604. 
Alternatively, EPA may certify that the rule will not have a 
significant impact on a substantial number of small entities. Small 
entities include small businesses, small not-for-profit enterprises, 
and government entities with jurisdiction over populations of less than 
50,000.
    SIP approvals under section 110 and subchapter I, part D of the 
Clean Air Act do not create any new requirements but simply approve 
requirements that the State is already imposing. Therefore, because the 
Federal SIP approval does not impose any new requirements, the 
Administrator certifies that it does not have a significant impact on 
any small entities affected. Moreover, due to the nature of the 
Federal-State relationship under the CAA, preparation of a flexibility 
analysis would constitute Federal inquiry into the economic 
reasonableness of state action. The Clean Air Act forbids EPA to base 
its actions concerning SIPs on such grounds. Union Electric Co. v. U.S. 
EPA, 427 U.S. 246, 255-66 (1976); 42 U.S.C. 7410(a)(2).

C. Unfunded Mandates

    Under section 202 of the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995 
(``Unfunded Mandates Act''), signed into law on March 22, 1995, EPA 
must prepare a budgetary impact statement to accompany any proposed or 
final rule that includes a Federal mandate that may result in estimated 
costs to State, local, or tribal governments in the aggregate; or to 
private sector, of $100 million or more. Under section 205, EPA must 
select the most cost-effective and least burdensome alternative that 
achieves the objectives of the rule and is consistent with statutory 
requirements. Section 203 requires EPA to establish a plan for 
informing and advising any small governments that may be significantly 
or uniquely impacted by the rule.
    EPA has determined that the approval action promulgated does not 
include a Federal mandate that may result in estimated costs of $100 
million or more to either State, local, or tribal governments in the 
aggregate, or to the private sector. This Federal action approves pre-
existing requirements under State or local law, and imposes no new 
Federal requirements. Accordingly, no additional costs to State, local, 
or tribal governments, or to the private sector, result from this 
action.

D. Submission to Congress and the General Accounting Office

    Under 5 U.S.C. 801(a)(1)(A) as added by the Small Business 
Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act of 1996, EPA submitted 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 
General Accounting Office prior to publication of the rule in today's 
Federal Register. This rule is not a ``major'' as defined by 5 U.S.C. 
804(2).

[[Page 6491]]

E. Petitions for Judicial Review

    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 10, 1998. 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, Hydrocarbons, 
Incorporation by reference, Intergovernmental relations, Ozone, 
Reporting and recordkeeping requirements, Volatile organic compounds.

    Note: Incorporation by reference of the State Implementation 
Plan for the State of California was approved by the Director of the 
Federal Register on July 1, 1982.

    Dated: January 15, 1998.
David P. Howekamp,
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 D--Arizona

    2. Section 52.120 is amended by adding paragraphs (c)(78)(i)(C), 
(c)(82)(i)(C), (c)(83) and (c)(85) to read as follows:


Sec. 52.120  Identification of plan.

* * * * *
    (c) * * *
    (78) * * *
    (i) * * *
    (C) Rule 339, adopted on November 16, 1992.
* * * * *
    (82) * * *
    (i) * * *
    (C) Rule 351, revised on February 15, 1995.
* * * * *
    (83) New and revised rules and regulations for the Maricopa County 
Environmental Services Department-Air Pollution Control were submitted 
on February 26, 1997, by the Governor's designee.
    (i) Incorporation by reference.
    (A) Rules 331, 333, and 334, revised on June 19, 1996, and Rule 
338, adopted on June 19, 1996.
* * * * *
    (85) New and revised rules and regulations for the Maricopa County 
Environmental Services Department-Air Pollution Control were submitted 
on March 4, 1997, by the Governor's designee.
    (i) Incorporation by reference.
    (A) Rule 337, revised on November 20, 1996, and Rules 342, and 346, 
adopted on November 20, 1996.
* * * * *
[FR Doc. 98-3022 Filed 2-6-98; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-F