[Federal Register Volume 64, Number 109 (Tuesday, June 8, 1999)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 30396-30398]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 99-14222]


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

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

40 CFR Part 52

[CA 011-0146; FRL-6353-1]


Approval and Promulgation of Implementation Plans; California 
State Implementation Plan Revision, South Coast Air Quality Management 
District, San Joaquin Valley Unified Air Pollution Control District, 
Siskiyou County Air Pollution Control District, and Bay Area Air 
Quality Management District

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Final rule.

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

SUMMARY: EPA is finalizing limited approvals of revisions to the 
California State Implementation Plan (SIP) proposed in the Federal 
Register on March 18, 1999. This final action will incorporate these 
rules into the federally approved SIP. The intended effect of 
finalizing this action is to regulate emissions of sulfur dioxide 
(SO2) in accordance with the requirements of the Clean Air 
Act, as amended in 1990 (CAA or the Act). The rules control the sulfur 
content of fuels within the South Coast Air Quality Management District 
and the Siskiyou County Air Pollution Control District, emissions of 
sulfuric acid mist within the San Joaquin Valley Unified Air Pollution 
Control District and emissions of sulfur dioxide in the Bay Area Air 
Quality Management District. Thus, EPA is finalizing a limited approval 
under CAA provisions regarding EPA action on SIP submittals and general 
rulemaking authority because these revisions, while strengthening the 
SIP, also do not fully meet the CAA provisions regarding plan 
submissions. There will be no sanctions clock as South Coast Air 
Quality Management District, San Joaquin Valley Unified Air Pollution 
Control District, Siskiyou County Air Pollution Control District, and 
Bay Area Air Quality Management District are in attainment for 
SO2.

EFFECTIVE DATE: This action is effective on July 8, 1999.

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 also 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
California Air Resources Board, Stationary Source Division, Rule 
Evaluation Section, 2020 ``L'' Street, Sacramento, CA 95814
Bay Area Air Quality Management District, 939 Ellis Street, San 
Francisco, CA 94109-7714.
San Joaquin Valley Unified Air Pollution Control District, 1990 E. 
Gettysburg Ave., Fresno, CA 93726.
Siskiyou County Air Pollution Control District, 525 South Foothill Dr., 
Yreka, CA 96097
South Coast Air Quality Management District, 21865 E. Copley Dr., 
Diamond Bar, CA 91765-4182.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Stanley Tong, Rulemaking Office, (AIR-
4), Air Division, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Region IX, 75 
Hawthorne Street, San Francisco, CA 94105, Telephone: (415) 744-1191.


[[Page 30397]]


SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

I. Applicability

    The rules being approved into the California SIP include: South 
Coast Air Quality Management District (SCAQMD) Rule 431.2, Sulfur 
Content of Liquid Fuels, San Joaquin Valley Unified Air Pollution 
Control District (SJVUAPCD) Rule 4802, Sulfuric Acid Mist, Siskiyou 
County Air Pollution Control District (SCAPCD) Rule 4.14, Sulfur 
Content of Fuels and Bay Area Air Quality Management District (BAAQMD) 
Regulation 9 Rule 1, Sulfur Dioxide. SCAQMD Rule 431.2 and SCAPCD Rule 
4.14 were submitted by the California Air Resources Board (CARB) to EPA 
on December 31, 1990, BAAQMD Regulation 9 Rule 1 was submitted by CARB 
to EPA on September 14, 1992, and SJVUAPCD Rule 4802 was submitted by 
CARB to EPA on November 18, 1993.

II. Background

    On March 18, 1999 in 64 FR 13379, EPA proposed granting limited 
approval of the following rules into the California SIP: SCAQMD Rule 
431.2, SJVUAPCD Rule 4802, SCAPCD Rule 4.14, and BAAQMD Regulation 9 
Rule 1. SCAQMD Rule 431.2 was adopted by SCAQMD on May 4, 1990 and 
SCAPCD Rule 4.14 was adopted by SCAPCD on July 11, 1989. These rules 
were submitted by the CARB to EPA on December 31, 1990. SJVUAPCD Rule 
4802 was adopted by SJVUAPCD on December 17, 1992 and was submitted by 
the CARB to EPA on November 18, 1993. BAAQMD Regulation 9 Rule 1 was 
adopted on May 20, 1992 and was submitted by the CARB to EPA on 
September 14, 1992. A detailed discussion of the proposed action for 
each of the above rules is provided in the proposed rule 1 
(PR).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ The proposed rule was published on March 18, 1999 in 64 FR 
13379.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    EPA has evaluated all of the above rules for consistency with the 
requirements of the CAA and EPA regulations and EPA's interpretation of 
these requirements as expressed in the various EPA policy guidance 
documents referenced in the PR. EPA is finalizing the limited approval 
of these rules in order to strengthen the SIP. The PR identified the 
following rule deficiencies which should be corrected.
    SCAQMD's Rule 431.2 should be corrected to remove Executive Officer 
discretion in approving alternate test methods. EPA also recommends 
that a reference to a CARB specification for motor vehicle diesel fuel 
be updated.
    SJVUAPCD's Rule 4802 should be corrected to incorporate 
recordkeeping requirements. EPA also recommends correction of a 
typographical error found in the rule.
    SCAPCD's Rule 4.14 should be corrected to incorporate recordkeeping 
requirements and test methods to determine compliance.
    BAAQMD's Regulation 9 Rule 1 should be corrected to incorporate 
recordkeeping requirements, update the ground level sulfur dioxide 
limits and to update a cited test method which has been deleted.
    SCAQMD, SJVUAPCD and SCAPCD should also include information on the 
length of time records are to be retained. A detailed discussion of the 
rule provisions and evaluations has been provided in the PR and in 
technical support documents (TSDs) available at EPA's Region IX office 
(TSD dated 2/12/99 for SCAQMD Rule 431.2 and TSD dated 2/19/99 for 
SJVUAPCD Rule 4802, SCAPCD Rule 4.14 and BAAQMD Regulation 9 Rule 1.)

III. Response to Public Comments

    A 30-day public comment period was provided in 64 FR 13379. EPA 
received one comment letter on the PR from the South Coast Air Quality 
Management District. The comment has been evaluated by EPA and EPA's 
response is set forth below.
    Comment: SCAQMD indicated that staff will address EPA's comments 
and consider the suggestions for strengthening the rule.
    Response: EPA will work with SCAQMD in response to EPA's comments.

IV. EPA Action

    EPA is finalizing a limited approval of the above-referenced rules. 
The limited approval of these rules is being finalized under section 
110(k)(3) in light of EPA's authority pursuant to section 301(a) to 
adopt regulations necessary to further air quality by strengthening the 
SIP. The approval is limited in the sense that the rules strengthen the 
SIP. However, the rules do not meet the section 182(a)(2)(A) CAA 
requirement because of the rule deficiencies which were discussed in 
the PR. Thus, in order to strengthen the SIP, EPA is granting limited 
approval of these rules under sections 110(k)(3) and 301(a) of the CAA. 
This action approves the rules into the SIP as federally enforceable 
rules.
    As stated in the proposed rule, there is no sanctions clock as 
SCAQMD, SJVUAPCD, SCAPCD, and BAAQMD are in attainment for 
SO2. It should be noted that the rules covered by this FR 
have been adopted by the SCAQMD, SJVUAPCD, SCAPCD, and BAAQMD and are 
currently in effect in those districts. EPA's limited approval action 
will not prevent SCAQMD, SJVUAPCD, SCAPCD, BAAQMD or EPA from enforcing 
these rules.

V. Administrative Requirements

A. Executive Order 12866

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

B. Executive Order 12875

    Under Executive Order 12875, Enhancing the Intergovernmental 
Partnership, 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, or 
EPA consults with those governments. If EPA complies by consulting, 
Executive Order 12875 requires EPA to 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 any written 
communications from the governments, and a statement supporting the 
need to issue the regulation. In addition, Executive Order 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

[[Page 30398]]

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 Executive Order 13084, Consultation and Coordination with 
Indian Tribal Governments, EPA may not issue a regulation that is not 
required by statute, that significantly 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, or EPA consults with those 
governments. If EPA complies by consulting, Executive Order 13084 
requires EPA to 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 officials 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. 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 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 August 9, 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).)

    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.
Laura K. 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 paragraph (c)(182)(i)(A)(5) 
and (c)(182)(i)(G), (c)(189)(i)(C)(2), and (c)(194)(i)(C)(3) to read as 
follows:


Sec. 52.220  Identification of plan.

* * * * *
    (c) * * *
    (182) * * *
    (i) * * *
    (A) * * *
    (5) Rule 431.2, amended on May 4, 1990.
* * * * *
    (G) Siskiyou County Air Pollution Control District.
    (1) Rule 4.14, adopted on July 11, 1989.
* * * * *
    (189) * * *
    (i) * * *
    (C) * * *
    (2) Regulation 9 Rule 1, amended on May 20, 1992.
* * * * *
    (194) * * *
    (i) * * *
    (C) * * *
    (3) Rule 4802, adopted on May 21, 1992, and amended on December 17, 
1992.
* * * * *
[FR Doc. 99-14222 Filed 6-7-99; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P