[Federal Register Volume 64, Number 141 (Friday, July 23, 1999)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 39923-39927]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 99-18719]


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

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

40 CFR Part 52

[CA-227-151; FRL-6378-2]


Approval and Promulgation of State Implementation Plans; 
California--South Coast

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Final rule.

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

SUMMARY: EPA is concluding the Public Consultative Process (PCP) on 
mobile source emission reductions needed for attainment of the 1-hour 
ozone national ambient air quality standard (NAAQS) in the Los Angeles-
South Coast Air Basin Area (South Coast). EPA is also approving the 
State's update to the state implementation plan (SIP) for ozone in the 
South Coast to reflect the outcome of this process and the 
implementation status of some of the control measures. Finally, EPA is 
approving the State's joint commitment with EPA to issue regulations to 
eliminate the remaining SIP shortfall as determined appropriate for 
each agency. EPA is taking these actions under provisions of the Clean 
Air Act (CAA) regarding EPA action on SIP submittals, SIPs for NAAQS, 
and plan requirements for nonattainment areas.

EFFECTIVE DATE: This rule is effective on August 23, 1999.

ADDRESSES: The rulemaking docket for this rule is available for public 
inspection during normal business hours at EPA's Region IX office, Air 
Division, 75 Hawthorne Street, San Francisco, CA 94105-3901. A 
reasonable fee may be charged for copying parts of the docket.
    Electronic availability: This document is also available as an 
electronic file on EPA's Region 9 Web Page at http://www.epa.gov/
region09.
    Copies of related materials are also available for inspection at 
the following location: California Air Resources Board, 2020 L Street, 
Sacramento, California.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Dave Jesson, EPA Region IX Air 
Planning Office, (415) 744-1288, or [email protected].

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

I. EPA's Final Action

    We are concluding the Public Consultative Process on mobile source 
reductions needed for attainment of the 1-hour ozone NAAQS in the South 
Coast.1 During this process, we have issued or are in the 
process of issuing regulations which are expected to reduce emissions 
of nitrogen oxides (NOX) in the South Coast in 2010 by 
approximately 94 tons per day (tpd), and reduce emissions of volatile 
organic compounds (VOC) by about 39 tpd.2 This is roughly 85 
percent of the Federal emission reductions identified in the 1994 ozone 
SIP submittal for the South Coast.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ For a description of the boundaries of the Los Angeles-South 
Coast Air Basin, see 40 CFR 81.305. The nonattainment area includes 
all of Orange County and the more populated portions of Los Angeles, 
San Bernardino, and Riverside Counties.
    \2\ The South Coast plan sometimes substitutes the term Reactive 
Organic Gases (ROG) for VOC. These terms are essentially synonymous.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    To achieve the remaining reductions (15 tpd of NOX and 8 
tpd of VOC), we intend to continue a focused cooperative effort with 
California to resolve remaining issues and to agree upon the best 
approach for achieving the balance of reductions still unaccomplished. 
We will complete by December 31, 2001, any actions identified as 
appropriate for our rulemaking under our existing commitment, 
promulgated when we approved the 1994 ozone SIP (40 CFR 52.238).
    We are approving a similar commitment by the California Air 
Resources Board (CARB). The State included this commitment in Executive 
Order G-99-037, dated May 20, 1999.3 In the order, CARB 
``commits to continue working with U.S. EPA and the affected parties to 
achieve the emission reductions identified in the SIP for federal 
measures, and to (a) adopt by December 31, 2000, and submit as a SIP 
revision, a revised attainment demonstration for the federal one-hour 
ozone standard in the South Coast Air Basin, and (b) adopt by December 
31, 2001, control measures needed to achieve any additional emission 
reductions which are determined to be appropriate for ARB.'' This State 
commitment replaces a commitment made at the beginning of the Public 
Consultative Process in 1996, and codified at 40 CFR 52.220(c)(235). We 
are therefore rescinding that prior commitment.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \3\ CARB submitted the Executive Order on May 20, 1999. We found 
the submittal complete on May 20, 1999. We 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).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Finally, we are approving the State's update on the status of CARB 
control measures in the 1994 ozone SIP, included as Attachment A to the 
Executive Order. This update displays

[[Page 39924]]

reductions from CARB's various measures for control of mobile sources, 
consumer products, and aerosol paints. It also discusses new CARB 
control measures to achieve the reductions required in the 1994 ozone 
SIP.

II. Background

    On June 7, 1999, in 64 FR 30276-30287, we proposed to conclude the 
Public Consultative Process, identified emissions reductions from 
promulgated and pending Federal measures, discussed potential measures 
for eliminating the remaining emissions reduction shortfall, and 
proposed to approve CARB's commitment and SIP update for the South 
Coast. For additional details and background, please consult that 
document and our final approval of the 1994 ozone SIP for the South 
Coast, which was issued on January 8, 1997 (62 FR 1150-
1187).4
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \ 4\ The 1994 ozone SIP for the South Coast consists of two 
plans: California's 1994 State Implementation Plan for Ozone, which 
deals with the State's control measures, and the South Coast Air 
Quality Management District's 1994 Air Quality Management Plan, 
which includes all of the local control measures and other plan 
elements. The State's portion of the plan is available 
electronically at the California Air Resources Board's web site at 
www.arb.ca.gov/sip/sip.htm.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    You may also find in the proposal a description of EPA's consent 
decree and settlement agreement with environmental plaintiffs in 
Coalition for Clean Air, et al. v. SCAQMD, CARB, and USEPA, No. CV 97-
6916 HLH (C.D. Cal.). Among other things, the consent decree requires 
us to conclude the Public Consultative Process by July 1, 1999, and to 
attempt to promulgate by December 31, 2001, final measures that are 
needed for ozone attainment and are appropriate for EPA to 
promulgate.5
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \5\ We issued a notice of the pending settlement on December 9, 
1998 (63 FR 67879), consistent with CAA section 113(g). The consent 
decree was entered by the Court on June 9, 1999; the settlement 
agreement has been signed by the plaintiffs and EPA.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

III. Response to Public Comments

A. Summary of Comments and Responses

    In response to the proposal, we received comments from South Coast 
Air Quality Management District (``SCAQMD''), City of Los Angeles 
(``City''), Los Angeles County Sanitation Districts, and US Navy 
(Region Southwest). We appreciate the thoughtful comments and the 
commenters' support and encouragement of our efforts to achieve further 
emission reductions from national and international mobile sources 
beyond the jurisdiction of local and State agencies.
1. Fair Share Reductions of Federal Sources
    All but one of the commenters asked the Federal government to do 
its fair share in reducing emissions from Federal mobile sources, 
stating that: (a) Further control of local stationary sources will be 
difficult, given the stringency of existing local rules, and (b) 
Federal sources are under-controlled. To make this point visually, 
SCAQMD presented a table showing 2010 reductions from 1990 baseline 
emissions inventories for Federal sources, in contrast to much greater 
reductions required from stationary sources in the 1994 California 
Ozone SIP. Commenters stated that it is especially critical that EPA 
and other federal agencies cooperate and achieve additional reductions 
from sources beyond the State's regulatory authority.
    Response: We intend that the Federal government will contribute 
emission reductions to help the South Coast attain the NAAQS. We will 
fulfill our regulatory responsibilities under Title II of the CAA and 
thus will continue to pursue all appropriate national mobile source 
controls, even after the current shortfall is eliminated.
2. Toxic Benefit of Diesel Emission Reductions
    SCAQMD noted that we stated that mobile sources are a contributor 
to urban air toxics and adverse health effects have been associated 
with diesel exhaust. SCAQMD presented a table of the potential cancer 
risk contribution from diesel compared to all other emission sources in 
the South Coast. SCAQMD stated that local citizens may not benefit from 
potential reductions in toxic emissions if reductions are achieved from 
non-diesel sources located in and around airports and marine ports, 
rather than from diesel-type sources in the aircraft and marine engine 
categories.
    Response: We appreciate SCAQMD's information regarding the relative 
magnitude of diesel emissions among sources of air toxics in the South 
Coast. Reductions in urban air toxics are, and will continue to be, an 
important consideration in our standard-setting activities.
3. Heavy-Duty Off-Cycle Settlement
    SCAQMD estimated a 7 tpd NOX emission reduction 
shortfall in 2010 in the South Coast due to excess emissions from non-
compliant engines. SCAQMD expressed concern about claiming benefits 
from the settlement until this issue is resolved.
    Response: We agree that this issue warrants further analysis in the 
context of future SIP revisions, and wish to work with SCAQMD and CARB 
to assess 2010 emissions from trucks in the South Coast using the most 
current inventory models and assumptions. For purposes of the close-out 
of the Public Consultative Process, which is rooted in the 1994 SIP 
submittal, we continue to agree with CARB that use of the 1994 SIP 
assumptions throughout made the most sense, rather than attempting to 
adjust the SIP analysis with various updates to our information base. 
Thus, all of the calculations in the table of Public Consultative 
Process reductions and shortfalls at 64 FR 30280-1 are consistent with 
the 1994 ozone SIP in terms of base year and projected emissions 
inventories and emissions factors. The emission reduction numbers shown 
for the heavy-duty off-cycle settlement are for the early introduction 
in October 2002 of cleaner engines assumed in the 1994 ozone SIP to be 
introduced in January 2004.
4. Public Process
    Commenters desired greater opportunities for public input. SCAQMD 
noted that agreements negotiated by EPA and CARB with affected 
industries did not go through extensive discussions and public input. 
In order to update stakeholders on future developments and public 
involvement opportunities, the City of Los Angeles recommended that we 
establish an information mechanism, such as EPA Region IX's web page. 
Commenters objected to the 14-day public comment period as too short to 
allow for the most meaningful comment.
    Response: We intend to post information on the status of our South 
Coast mobile source activities on the Region IX web page (www.epa.gov/
region09/air). The Office of Mobile Source web page (www.epa.gov/
omswww) informs the public of ongoing national mobile source rulemaking 
activities and opportunities for public involvement. Both EPA and CARB 
will also continue to use mailing lists of parties interested in the 
aircraft/airport and vessel/port task forces. We solicit suggestions 
for other ways to expand public notification and involvement. While we 
prefer longer public comment periods, we need to comply with a consent 
decree, which requires final action by July 1.
5. Enforceability of Credited SIP Reductions; Credit for Voluntary 
Measures
    SCAQMD expressed concern that CARB and EPA should not claim credit 
for voluntary agreements (such as the State's clean locomotive fleet 
agreement

[[Page 39925]]

with railroads operating in California), unless the agreements are 
turned into regulatory form. SCAQMD encouraged us to provide backstop 
measures for future rules, in the event that emission reductions do not 
occur. The City of Los Angeles supported voluntary measures, noted that 
existing EPA policy on credit for voluntary measures constrains SIP 
accounting for such measures, and urged us to assist states and local 
air districts in developing flexible and innovative emission reduction 
strategies and allowing full SIP credit for such programs.
    Response: As indicated in the proposal, we have concluded that it 
is appropriate to assign credit to the South Coast Locomotive Fleet 
Average Emissions Program. The agreement between CARB and the railroads 
is exemplary in its detail and in the extent of its provisions to 
quantify and verify reductions. We believe that the program will 
achieve the scheduled reductions, but if it does not, we will use our 
existing authorities to assure that the reductions will occur. We 
support voluntary and other innovative measures and commit to work with 
agencies to establish SIP credit to the extent that such credit is 
consistent with the Clean Air Act.
6. Remaining Shortfall
    Some commenters encouraged EPA not to downplay the potential 
shortfall of 23 tpd, which must be eliminated if the area is to attain 
the ozone NAAQS. These commenters also felt that EPA should not assign 
responsibility for remaining reductions to the State. If EPA ultimately 
does assign responsibility to the State, SCAQMD urged EPA to require 
the State to achieve reductions from mobile sources, rather than 
stationary sources, which are already stringently controlled. SCAQMD 
also felt that EPA's statement that ``EPA actions might not be limited 
to controls on mobile sources and fuels'' was not consistent with the 
consent decree.
    Response: We agree with commenters that the task of eliminating the 
shortfall is important and directly linked to public health protection. 
In concert with the State and other parties, we expect to achieve most, 
if not all, of the remaining reductions from mobile sources rather than 
stationary sources.
7. Marine Vessel Activities
    The City requested that EPA fund finalization of the ship emission 
and alternative marine vessel control strategy study, and that EPA 
support (including with Federal funds) CARB's Deep Sea Vessel/Shipping 
Channel Technical Working Group. The Navy reiterated its opposition to 
an operational control strategy to move the vessel channel 25 miles off 
the coast, based on the Navy's belief that the strategy lacks 
scientific support and would have severe impacts on the Pt. Mugu Sea 
Test Range. The Navy preferred a strategy involving slowing commercial 
vessels, and encouraged us to make that determination, implement the 
measure, and conclude the process with respect to marine vessel 
operational controls.
    Response: In May 1999, the EPA contracted study referenced in the 
City's comment letter was finalized. However, the results may need to 
be updated to reflect more recent information. We will continue to 
participate in, and support, studies needed to evaluate the feasibility 
and benefit of marine vessel control options. We appreciate the Navy's 
valuable contributions to the technical assessment of potential 
strategies, as we do the participation and expertise of the shipping 
industry, the ports, and other stakeholders. CARB, EPA, and other 
participants will provide the Navy with opportunities to express its 
views and share its research as we conclude the technical projects and 
reach final decisions on the best approaches.
8. Programs to Increase Engine Turn-Over Rates
    The City encouraged us to pursue Federal funding sources for such 
programs and to ensure that Federal fleets, such as the U.S. Postal 
Service fleet, convert to cleaner technologies at an accelerated rate.
    Response: We identified possible Federal funding sources in the 
proposal and will attempt to direct currently available funds to 
projects that can reduce pollutants in the South Coast. Other potential 
Federal funds, such as for the Clean Air Partnership, or Federal 
subsidies, including changes to the Federal Tax Code, depend upon 
Congressional action. We intend to work with Federal agencies in the 
South Coast to increase use of alternative-fueled vehicles with the 
lowest emissions.

B. Conclusion

    We are finalizing the action as proposed. As noted above, however, 
we will undertake additional actions in response to comments in order 
to improve and strengthen the process for resolving the remaining 
shortfall in emission reductions.
    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.

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, 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

[[Page 39926]]

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 is 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. 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).

G. 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 September 21, 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).)

H. 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 this action 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 proposes to approve 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.

List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52

    Environmental protection, Air pollution control, Incorporation by 
reference, Intergovernmental relations, Oxides of nitrogen, Ozone, 
Particulate matter, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements, Volatile 
organic compounds.

    Dated: July 1, 1999.
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 removing paragraph (c)(235) and 
adding paragraph (c)(265) to read as follows:


Sec. 52.220  Identification of plan.

* * * * *
    (c) * * *
    (265) New and amended plans for the following agencies were 
submitted on May 20, 1999, by the Governor's designee.
    (i) Incorporation by reference.
    (A) California Air Resources Board.
    (1) Executive Order G-99-037, dated May 20, 1999, State commitment 
to continue working with U.S. EPA and the affected parties to achieve 
the emission reductions identified in the SIP for federal measures, and 
to adopt by December 31, 2000, and submit as a SIP revision, a revised 
attainment demonstration for the federal one-hour ozone standard in the 
South Coast Air

[[Page 39927]]

Basin, and adopt by December 31, 2001, control measures needed to 
achieve any additional emission reductions which are determined to be 
appropriate for ARB; Attachment A, update to the 1994 ozone SIP for the 
South Coast.

[FR Doc. 99-18719 Filed 7-22-99; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P