[Federal Register Volume 64, Number 8 (Wednesday, January 13, 1999)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 2141-2144]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 99-15]


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

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

40 CFR Part 52

[CA 211-0116a; FRL-6214-1]


Approval and Promulgation of Implementation Plans; California 
State Implementation Plan Revision, Antelope Valley Air Pollution 
Control District

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).


[[Page 2142]]


ACTION: Direct final rule.

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

SUMMARY: EPA is taking direct final action on revisions to the 
California State Implementation Plan. The revisions concern the 
recission of three rules for the Antelope Valley Air Pollution Control 
District (AVAPCD). The intended effect of this action is to bring the 
AVAPCD SIP up to date in accordance with the requirements of the Clean 
Air Act, as amended in 1990 (CAA or the Act). EPA is finalizing the 
approval of these recissions from the California 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.

DATES: This rule is effective on March 15, 1999 without further notice, 
unless EPA receives adverse comments by February 12, 1999. If EPA 
receives such comment, it will publish a timely withdrawal in the 
Federal Register informing the public that this rule will not take 
effect.

ADDRESSES: Written comments must be submitted to Andrew Steckel, Chief, 
Rulemaking Office at the Region IX office listed below. Copies of the 
rule revisions and EPA's evaluation report 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, 
S.W., Washington, D.C. 20460
California Air Resources Board, Stationary Source Division, Rule 
Evaluation Section, 2020 ``L'' Street, Sacramento, CA 95812
Antelope Valley Air Pollution Control District, 43301 Division Street, 
Suite 206, Lancaster, CA 93539-4409

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Julie A. Rose, Rulemaking Office, AIR-
4, Air Division, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Region IX, 75 
Hawthorne Street, San Francisco, CA 94105, Telephone: (415) 744-1184

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

I. Applicability

    The rules being approved for recission from the Antelope Valley Air 
Pollution Control District (AVAPCD) portion of the California SIP 
include: Rule 1106, Marine Coating Operations; Rule 1142, Marine Tank 
Vessel Operations; and Rule 1148, Thermally Enhanced Oil Recovery 
Wells. These rule recissions were submitted by the California Air 
Resources Board to EPA on June 23, 1998.

II. Background

    On March 3, 1978, EPA promulgated a list of ozone nonattainment 
areas under the provisions of the Clean Air Act, as amended in 1977 
(1977 Act or pre-amended Act), that included the Southeast Desert 
Modified Air Quality Maintenance Area and the Los Angeles-South Coast 
Air Basin Area. 43 FR 8964, 40 CFR 81.305. On May 26, 1988, EPA 
notified the Governor of California, pursuant to section 110(a)(2)(H) 
of the 1977 Act, that the above district's portion of the California 
SIP was inadequate to attain and maintain the ozone standard and 
requested that deficiencies in the existing SIP be corrected (EPA's 
SIP-Call). On November 15, 1990, the Clean Air Act Amendments of 1990 
were enacted. Pub. L. 101-549, 104 Stat. 2399, codified at 42 U.S.C. 
7401-7671q. In amended section 182(a)(2)(A) of the CAA, Congress 
statutorily adopted the requirement that nonattainment areas fix their 
deficient reasonably available control technology (RACT) rules for 
ozone and established a deadline of May 15, 1991 for states to submit 
corrections of those deficiencies.
    Section 182(a)(2)(A) applies to areas designated as nonattainment 
prior to enactment of the amendments and classified as marginal or 
above as of the date of enactment. It requires such areas to adopt and 
correct RACT rules pursuant to pre-amended section 172(b) as 
interpreted in pre-amendment guidance.1 EPA's SIP-Call used 
that guidance to indicate the necessary corrections for specific 
nonattainment areas. The Southeast Desert Modified Air Quality 
Maintenance Area is classified as Severe-17, therefore, this area was 
subject to the RACT fix-up requirement and the May 15, 1991 deadline. 
The Los Angeles-South Coast Air Basin Area is classified as Extreme and 
was also subject to the RACT fix-up requirements and the May 15, 1991 
deadline.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ Among other things, the pre-amendment guidance consists of 
those portions of the proposed Post-1987 ozone and carbon monoxide 
policy that concern RACT, 52 FR 45044 (November 24, 1987); ``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 was published in the 
Federal Register on May 25, 1988); and the existing control 
technique guidelines (CTGs).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Antelope Valley Air Pollution Control District (AVAPCD) was 
created pursuant to California Health and Safety Code (CHSC) section 
40106 and assumed all air pollution control responsibilities of the 
South Coast Air Quality Management District (SCAQMD) in the Antelope 
Valley region of Los Angeles County,2 effective July 1, 
1997. AVAPCD is the successor agency to SCAQMD in the Antelope Valley 
portion of the Southeast Desert Modified Air Quality Maintenance Area. 
The AVAPCD remains subject to the RACT requirements. The AVAPCD has 
rescinded Rules 1106, 1142, and 1148 and has submitted negative 
declarations to certify that there are no sources covered by these 
rules within the jurisdiction of the AVAPCD.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \2\ The Antelope Valley region of Los Angeles County is 
contained within the Federal area known as the Southeast Desert 
Modified Air Quality Management Area and the region identified by 
the State of California as the Mojave Desert Air Basin.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The State of California submitted these rule recissions for 
incorporation into its SIP on June 23, 1998. This document addresses 
EPA's direct-final action for the recission of AVAPCD Rule 1106, Marine 
Coating Operations; Rule 1142, Marine Tank Vessel Operations; and Rule 
1148, Thermally Enhanced Oil Recovery Wells. AVAPCD adopted these rule 
recissions on January 20, 1998. These submitted rule recissions were 
found to be complete on August 25, 1998 pursuant to EPA's completeness 
criteria that are set forth in 40 CFR part 51 Appendix V 3 
and is being finalized for approval into the SIP.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \3\ EPA adopted the completeness criteria on February 16, 1990 
(55 FR 5830) and, pursuant to section 110(k)(1)(A) of the CAA, 
revised the criteria on August 26, 1991 (56 FR 42216).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Rules 1106 and 1142 establish limits on volatile organic compound 
(VOC) emissions produced by marine coating operations and marine tank 
vessel operations, respectively. Rule 1148 establishes limits on VOC 
emissions produced by thermally enhanced oil recovery wells. These 
rules were originally adopted as part of SCAQMD's effort to achieve the 
National Ambient Air Quality Standard (NAAQS) for ozone and in response 
to EPA's SIP-Call and the section 182(a)(2)(A) CAA requirement. The 
following is EPA's evaluation and final action for these rule 
recissions.

III. EPA Evaluation and Action

    EPA has evaluated all the appropriate background and submittal 
documentation and has determined that the recission of Rules 1106, 
1142, and 1148 is approvable. The AVAPCD has certified with Negative 
Declarations that the sources regulated by these rules are not present 
in the AVAPCD. Further, the

[[Page 2143]]

AVAPCD also stated that they do not anticipate these types of sources 
in the future.
    The rule recissions are consistent with the CAA, EPA regulations, 
and EPA policy. Therefore, the recission of AVAPCD Rule 1106, Marine 
Coating Operations; Rule 1142, Marine Tank Vessel Operations; and Rule 
1148, Thermally Enhanced Oil Recovery Wells is being approved under 
section 110(k)(3) of the CAA as meeting the requirements of section 
110(a) and part D.
    EPA is publishing this rule without prior proposal because the 
Agency views this as a noncontroversial amendment and anticipates no 
adverse comments. However, in the proposed rules section of this 
Federal Register publication, EPA is publishing a separate document 
that will serve as the proposal to approve the SIP revision should 
adverse comments be filed. This rule will be effective March 15, 1999 
without further notice unless the Agency receives adverse comments by 
February 12, 1999.
    If the EPA receives such comments, then EPA will publish a timely 
withdrawal in the Federal Register informing the public that the rule 
will not take effect. All public comments received will then be 
addressed in a subsequent final rule based on the proposed rule. The 
EPA will not institute a second comment period on this rule. Any 
parties interested in commenting on this rule should do so at this 
time. If no such comments are received, the public is advised that this 
rule will be effective on March 15, 1999 and no further action will be 
taken on the proposed rule.

IV. Administrative Requirements

A. Executive Order 12866

    The Office of Management and Budget (OMB) has exempted this 
regulatory action from Executive Order (E.O.) 12866, entitled 
``Regulatory Planning and Review.''

B. Executive Order 12875

    Under E.O. 12875, EPA may not issue a regulation that is not 
required by statute and that creates a mandate upon a state, local, or 
tribal government, unless the Federal government provides the funds 
necessary to pay the direct compliance costs incurred by those 
governments. If the mandate is unfunded, EPA must provide to the Office 
of Management and Budget a description of the extent of EPA's prior 
consultation with representatives of affected state, local, and tribal 
governments, the nature of their concerns, copies of written 
communications from the governments, and a statement supporting the 
need to issue the regulation. In addition, E.O. 12875 requires EPA to 
develop an effective process permitting elected officials and other 
representatives of state, local, and tribal governments ``to provide 
meaningful and timely input in the development of regulatory proposals 
containing significant unfunded mandates.''
    Today's rule does not create a mandate on state, local or tribal 
governments. The rule does not impose any enforceable duties on these 
entities. Accordingly, the requirements of section 1(a) of E.O. 12875 
do not apply to this rule.

C. Executive Order 13045

    Protection of Children from Environmental Health Risks and Safety 
Risks (62 FR 19885, April 23, 1997), applies to any rule that: (1) is 
determined to be ``economically significant'' as defined under E.O. 
12866, and (2) concerns an environmental health or safety risk that EPA 
has reason to believe may have a disproportionate effect on children. 
If the regulatory action meets both criteria, the Agency must evaluate 
the environmental health or safety effects of the planned rule on 
children, and explain why the planned regulation is preferable to other 
potentially effective and reasonably feasible alternatives considered 
by the Agency.
    This rule is not subject to E.O. 13045 because it does not involve 
decisions intended to mitigate environmental health or safety risks.

D. Executive Order 13084

    Under E.O. 13084, EPA may not issue a regulation that is not 
required by statute, that significantly affects or uniquely affects the 
communities of Indian tribal governments, and that imposes substantial 
direct compliance costs on those communities, unless the Federal 
government provides the funds necessary to pay the direct compliance 
costs incurred by the tribal governments. If the mandate is unfunded, 
EPA must provide to the Office of Management and Budget, in a 
separately identified section of the preamble to the rule, a 
description of the extent of EPA's prior consultation with 
representatives of affected tribal governments, a summary of the nature 
of their concerns, and a statement supporting the need to issue the 
regulation. In addition, Executive Order 13084 requires EPA to develop 
an effective process permitting elected and other representatives of 
Indian tribal governments ``to provide meaningful and timely input in 
the development of regulatory policies on matters that significantly or 
uniquely affect their communities.''
    Today's rule does not significantly or uniquely affect the 
communities of Indian tribal governments. This action does not involve 
or impose any requirements that affect Indian Tribes. Accordingly, the 
requirements of section 3(b) of E.O. 13084 do not apply to this rule.

E. Regulatory Flexibility Act

    The Regulatory Flexibility Act (RFA) generally requires an agency 
to conduct a regulatory flexibility analysis of any rule subject to 
notice and comment rulemaking requirements unless the agency certifies 
that the rule will not have a significant economic impact on a 
substantial number of small entities. Small entities include small 
businesses, small not-for-profit enterprises, and small governmental 
jurisdictions. This final rule will not have a significant impact on a 
substantial number of small entities because 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 
create any new requirements, I certify that this action will not have a 
significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities. 
Moreover, due to the nature of the Federal-State relationship under the 
Clean Air Act, preparation of 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).

F. 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 
annual 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

[[Page 2144]]

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 annual 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 
requirements. Accordingly, no additional costs to State, local, or 
tribal governments, or to the private sector, result from this action.

G. Submission to Congress and the Comptroller General

    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. This rule is not a 
``major'' rule as defined by 5 U.S.C. 804(2).

H. 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 March 15, 1999. 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: December 17, 1998.
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)(127)(vii)(E), 
(187)(i)(C)(3), and (215)(i)(A)(5) to read as follows:


Sec. 52.220  Identification of plan.

* * * * *
    (c) * * *
    (127) * * *
    (vii) * * *
    (E) Previously approved on October 19, 1984 and now deleted without 
replacement for implementation in the Antelope Valley Air Pollution 
Control District Rule 1148.
* * * * *
    (187) * * *
    (i) * * *
    (C) * * *
    (3) Previously approved on December 13, 1994 and now deleted 
without replacement for implementation in the Antelope Valley Air 
Pollution Control District Rule 1142.
* * * * *
    (215) * * *
    (i) * * *
    (A) * * *
    (6) Previously approved on July 14, 1995 and now deleted without 
replacement for implementation in the Antelope Valley Air Pollution 
Control District Rule 1106.
* * * * *
[FR Doc. 99-15 Filed 1-12-99; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P