[Federal Register Volume 65, Number 58 (Friday, March 24, 2000)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 15864-15867]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 00-7227]


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

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

40 CFR Part 52

[CA 040-0223a FRL-6563-3]


Approval and Promulgation of Implementation Plans; California 
State Implementation Plan Revision, Ventura County Air Pollution 
Control District, Monterey Bay Unified Air Pollution Control District, 
and Santa Barbara County Air Pollution Control District

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Direct final rule.

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

SUMMARY: EPA is taking direct final action on revisions to the 
California State Implementation Plan (SIP). The revisions concern rules 
from the following districts: Ventura County Air Pollution Control 
District (VCAPCD), Monterey Bay Unified Air Pollution Control District 
(MBUAPCD), and Santa Barbara County Air Pollution Control District 
(SBCAPCD). 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 
architectural coatings. Thus, EPA is finalizing the approval of these 
revisions into the California SIP under provisions of the CAA regarding 
EPA

[[Page 15865]]

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 May 23, 2000 without further notice, 
unless EPA receives adverse comments by April 24, 2000. 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 at the 
Region IX office listed below. 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 94105-3901.
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 95812.
Ventura County Air Pollution Control District, 669 County Square Drive, 
2nd Floor, Ventura, CA 93003.
Monterey Bay Unified Air Pollution Control District, 24580 Silver Cloud 
Court, Monterey, CA 93940.
Santa Barbara County Air Pollution Control District, 26 Castilian 
Drive, Suite B-23, Goleta, CA 93117.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Yvonne Fong, Rulemaking Office [AIR-
4], Air Division, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Region IX, 75 
Hawthorne Street, San Francisco, CA 94105-3901, Telephone: (415) 744-
1199.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

I. Applicability

    The rules being approved into the California SIP include: VCAPCD 
Rule 74.2, Architectural Coatings; MBUAPCD Rule 426, Architectural 
Coatings; and SBCAPCD Rule 323, Architectural Coatings. VCAPCD Rule 
74.2 was submitted by the California Air Pollution Control District 
(CARB) to EPA on November 12, 1992. MBUAPCD Rule 426 and SBCAPCD Rule 
323 were both submitted by CARB to EPA on March 3, 1997.

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 Ventura County, 
Monterey Bay, and Santa Barbara-Santa Maria-Lompoc Areas. 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 districts' portions of the California SIP were 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. Section 110(a)(2)(A) of the Act requires that plans which are 
submitted to the EPA in order to achieve or maintain the National 
Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS) contain enforceable emission 
limitations. The Ventura County Area is classified as severe and the 
Monterey Bay and Santa Barbara-Santa Maria-Lompoc Areas are classified 
as serious.\1\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ The Ventura County, Monterey Bay, and Santa Barbara-Santa 
Maria-Lompoc Areas retained their designation of nonattainment and 
were classified by operation of law pursuant to sections 107(d) and 
181(a) upon the date of enactment of the CAA. See 56 FR 56694 
(November 6, 1991). On December 10, 1997, EPA published a final rule 
reclassifying the Santa Barbara-Santa Maria-Lompoc Area from 
moderate to serious. See 62 FR 65025. This reclassification became 
effective on January 9, 1998.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The State of California submitted many rules for incorporation into 
its SIP on November 12, 1992 and March 3, 1997, including the rules 
being acted on in this document. This document addresses EPA's direct-
final action for VCAPCD Rule 74.2, Architectural Coatings; MBUAPCD Rule 
426, Architectural Coatings; and SBCAPCD Rule 323, Architectural 
Coatings. These rules were adopted by the VCAPCD, MBUAPCD, and SBCAPCD 
on August 11, 1992, December 18, 1996, and July 18, 1996, respectively. 
VCAPCD Rule 74.2 was found to be complete on March 26, 1993. MBUAPCD 
Rule 426 and SBCAPCD Rule 323 were found to be complete on August 12, 
1997. Findings of completeness are made pursuant to EPA's completeness 
criteria that are set forth in 40 CFR part 51 Appendix V.\2\ These 
submitted rules are being finalized for approval into the SIP.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \2\ 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).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    These rules control VOC emissions from architectural coatings. VOCs 
contribute to the production of ground level ozone and smog. These 
rules were originally adopted as part of the districts' efforts to 
achieve the NAAQS for ozone and in response to EPA's SIP-Call and the 
section 110(a)(2)(A) CAA requirement. The following is EPA's evaluation 
and final action for these rules.

III. EPA Evaluation and Action

    In determining the approvability of VOC rules, EPA must evaluate 
the rules for consistency with the requirements of the CAA and EPA 
regulations, as found in section 110 and part D of the CAA and 40 CFR 
part 51 (Requirements for Preparation, Adoption, and Submittal of 
Implementation Plans).
    In addition, these rules were evaluated against the general 
requirements of the CAA (section 110 and part D) 40 CFR part 52 and 
``Issues Relating to VOC Regulation Cutpoints, Deficiencies, and 
Deviations--Clarification to Appendix D of November 24, 1987 Federal 
Register'' (EPA's ``Blue Book''). In general, these guidance documents 
have been set forth to ensure that VOC rules are fully enforceable and 
strengthen or maintain the SIP.
    On January 24, 1985, EPA approved into the SIP a version of Rule 
74.2, Architectural Coatings, that had been adopted by the VCAPCD on 
November 22, 1983. VCAPCD submitted Rule 74.2, Architectural Coatings 
includes the following significant changes from the current SIP:
     Deletion of Section A1b in the SIP version to allow the 
sale of bituminous pavement sealers;
     Addition of 19 VOC limits and deletion of three VOC limits 
from the Table of Standards;
     A provision that the lowest VOC limit shall apply when a 
coating may fall under two or more categories;
     A requirement that all VOC-containing materials be stored 
in closed containers;
     A requirement that the maximum VOC content be displayed on 
coating containers;
     Deletion of Section B1 in the SIP version to remove the 
small business exemption;
     Exemptions for aerosol containers and emulsion-type 
bituminous pavement sealers;
     Removal of exemptions for 11 categories of coatings;
     Addition of test methods for determining the VOC, acid, 
and metal content of coatings; and
     Addition of 15, deletion of eight, and revision of 12 
definitions.
    On February 9, 1996, EPA approved into the SIP a version of Rule 
426, Architectural Coatings, that had been adopted by the MBUAPCD on 
August

[[Page 15866]]

25, 1993. MBUAPCD submitted Rule 426, Architectural Coatings includes 
the following significant changes from the current SIP:
     Addition of a VOC limit to the Table of Standards;
     References to other MBUAPCD rules;
     Addition of three and revision of five definitions; and
     Addition of a test method for determining the gloss of 
non-flat coatings.
    On July 14, 1995, EPA approved into the SIP a version of Rule 323, 
Architectural Coatings, that had been adopted by the SBCAPCD on March 
16, 1995. SBCAPCD submitted Rule 323, Architectural Coatings includes 
the following significant change from the current SIP:
     Deletion of the definition of reactive organic compound 
found in Section C27 of the SIP to maintain consistency with the 
definition in SBCAPCD Rule 102, Definitions.
    EPA has evaluated the submitted rules and has determined that they 
strengthen the applicable SIP and are consistent with the CAA and EPA 
policy. Therefore, VCAPCD Rule 74.2, Architectural Coatings; MBUAPCD 
Rule 426, Architectural Coatings; and SBCAPCD Rule 323, Architectural 
Coatings are being approved under section 110(k)(3) of the CAA.
    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 these SIP revisions should 
adverse comments be filed. This rule will be effective May 23, 2000 
without further notice unless the Agency receives adverse comments by 
April 24, 2000.
    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. 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 is 
effective on May 23, 2000 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 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 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 (64 FR 
43255, August 10, 1999), because it merely approves a state rule 
implementing a federal standard, and does not alter the relationship or 
the distribution of power and responsibilities established in the Clean 
Air Act. Thus, the requirements of section 6 of the 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 OMB, 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,

[[Page 15867]]

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 sections 110 and 
301, 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 the 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 May 23, 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, Intergovernmental relations, Ozone, 
Reporting and recordkeeping requirements, Volatile organic compounds.

    Dated: March 10, 2000.
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)(190)(i)(A)(2), (244)(i)(A)(5), and (244)(i)(F) to read as follows:


Sec. 52.220  Identification of plan.

* * * * *
    (c) * * *
    (190) * * *
    (i) * * *
    (A) * * *
    (2) Rule 74.2 revised on August 11, 1992.
* * * * *
    (244) * * *
    (i) * * *
    (A) * * *
    (5) Rule 426 revised December 18, 1996.
* * * * *
    (F) Santa Barbara County Air Pollution Control District.
    (1) Rule 323 revised July 18, 1996.
* * * * *
[FR Doc. 00-7227 Filed 3-23-00; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P