[Federal Register Volume 64, Number 232 (Friday, December 3, 1999)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 67787-67789]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 99-31212]



[[Page 67787]]

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

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

40 CFR Part 52

[CA 217-0192; FRL-6480-4]


Approval and Promulgation of Implementation Plans; California 
State Implementation Plan Revision, South Coast Air Quality Management 
District and Ventura County Air Pollution Control District

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Final rule.

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

SUMMARY: EPA is finalizing the approval of revisions to the California 
State Implementation Plan (SIP) proposed in the Federal Register on 
September 22, 1999. The revisions concern rules from the following 
districts: South Coast Air Quality Management District (SCAQMD) and the 
Ventura County Air Pollution Control District (VCAPCD). This approval 
action will incorporate these rules into the federally approved SIP. 
The intended effect of approving these rules 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 revised 
rules control the sulfur content of fuels. Thus, EPA is finalizing the 
approval of these revisions into the California SIP under provisions of 
the CAA regarding EPA action on SIP submittals and SIPs for national 
primary and secondary ambient air quality standards.

EFFECTIVE DATE: This action is effective on January 3, 2000.

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, 
S.W., Washington, D.C. 20460.
California Air Resources Board, Stationary Source Division, Rule 
Evaluation Section, 2020 ``L'' Street, Sacramento, CA 95812.
South Coast Air Quality Management District, 21865 E. Copley Dr., 
Diamond Bar, CA 91765-4182.
Ventura County APCD, 669 County Square Dr., 2nd Fl., Ventura, CA 93003-
5417.

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.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

I. Applicability

    The rules being approved into the California SIP include: South 
Coast Air Quality Management District (SCAQMD) Rule 431.1, Sulfur 
Content of Gaseous Fuels and Ventura County Air Pollution Control 
District (VCAPCD) Rule 64, Sulfur Content of Fuels. These rules were 
submitted by the California Air Resources Board (CARB) to EPA on 
September 29, 1998 and June 3, 1999 respectively.

II. Background

    On September 22, 1999 in 64 FR 51278, EPA proposed to approve the 
following rules into the California SIP: SCAQMD's Rule 431.1, Sulfur 
Content of Gaseous Fuels and VCAPCD's Rule 64, Sulfur Content of Fuels. 
Rule 431.1 was adopted by the SCAQMD on June 12, 1998. On September 29, 
1998, this rule was submitted by the CARB to EPA. Rule 64 was adopted 
by the VCAPCD on April 13, 1999. On June 3, 1999, this rule was 
submitted by the CARB to EPA. VCAPCD Rule 64 was submitted in response 
to a limited approval/limited disapproval EPA published on January 15, 
1999 in 64 FR 2575 for an earlier version of the rule. Both SCAQMD and 
VCAPCD are in attainment for the National Ambient Air Quality Standards 
for SO2. A detailed discussion of the background for each of 
the above rules is provided in the Notice of Proposed Rulemaking (NPRM) 
cited above.
    EPA has evaluated both 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 64 FR 51278 
and in the technical support document (TSD) available at EPA's Region 
IX office (TSD dated 8/23/99).

III. Response to Public Comments

    A 30-day public comment period was provided in 64 FR 51278. EPA 
received no comments on these rules.

IV. EPA Action

    EPA is finalizing action to approve the above rules for inclusion 
into the California SIP. EPA is approving the submittal under section 
110(k)(3) as meeting the requirements of section 110(a) 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 SO2 in accordance with the 
requirements of the CAA.

V. Administrative Requirements

A. Executive Order 12866

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

B. Executive Order 13132

    Federalism (64 FR 43255, August 10, 1999) revokes and replaces 
Executive Orders 12612, Federalism and 12875, Enhancing the 
Intergovernmental Partnership. Executive Order 13132 requires EPA to 
develop an accountable process to ensure ``meaningful and timely input 
by State and local officials in the development of regulatory policies 
that have federalism implications.'' ``Policies that have federalism 
implications'' is defined in the Executive Order to include regulations 
that 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.'' Under Executive Order 13132, EPA may not issue a 
regulation that has federalism implications, that imposes substantial 
direct compliance costs, and that is not required by statute, unless 
the Federal government provides the funds necessary to pay the direct 
compliance costs incurred by State and local governments, or EPA 
consults with State and local officials early in the process of 
developing the proposed regulation. EPA also may not issue a regulation 
that has federalism implications and that preempts State law unless the 
Agency consults with State and local officials early in the process of 
developing the proposed regulation.
    This final rule will 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. 
Thus, the requirements of section 6 of the

[[Page 67788]]

Executive Order 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 
Executive Order 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 Executive Order 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 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. Accordingly, the requirements of section 3(b) of Executive 
Order 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. A major rule cannot 
take effect until 60 days after it is published in the Federal 
Register. This rule is not a ``major'' rule as defined by 5 U.S.C. 
804(2).

H. National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act

    Section 12 of the National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act 
(NTTAA) of 1995 requires Federal agencies to evaluate existing 
technical standards when developing a new regulation. To comply with 
NTTAA, EPA must consider and use ``voluntary consensus standards'' 
(VCS) if available and applicable when developing programs and policies 
unless doing so would be inconsistent with applicable law or otherwise 
impractical.
    The EPA believes that VCS are inapplicable to this action. Today's 
action does not require the public to perform activities conducive to 
the use of VCS.

I. 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 February 1, 2000. 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,

[[Page 67789]]

Intergovernmental relations, Ozone, Reporting and recordkeeping 
requirements, Sulfur Oxides.

    Dated: November 9, 1999.
Felicia Marcus,
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)(264)(i)(C) 
and (266)(i)(A)(2).


Sec. 52.220  Identification of Plan.

* * * * *
    (c) * * *
    (264) * * *
    (i) * * *
    (C) Ventura County Air Pollution Control District.
    (1) Rule 64, adopted on April 13, 1999.
* * * * *
    (266) * * *
    (i) * * *
    (A) * * *
    (2) Rule 431.1, adopted on November 4, 1997 and amended on June 12, 
1998.
* * * * *
[FR Doc. 99-31212 Filed 12-2-99; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-U