[Federal Register Volume 65, Number 62 (Thursday, March 30, 2000)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 16864-16869]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 00-7736]


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

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

40 CFR Part 52

[CA-225-0230; FRL-6567-3]


Proposed Approval and Promulgation of State Implementation Plans; 
California--Santa Barbara Ozone Nonattainment Area

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Proposed rule.

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

SUMMARY: EPA is proposing to approve Santa Barbara's 1998 Clean Air 
Plan (CAP), submitted by the California Air Resources Board (CARB). The 
Santa Barbara County Air Pollution Control District (SBCAPCD) adopted 
the plan to meet the Clean Air Act (CAA) requirements for ozone areas 
classified as serious. EPA is proposing to approve this revision to the 
California State Implementation Plan (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: We must receive your written comments on this proposal by May 1, 
2000.

ADDRESSES: Please address your comments to the EPA contact below. You 
may inspect and copy the rulemaking docket for this notice at the 
following location during normal business hours. We may charge you a 
reasonable fee for copying parts of the docket.
    Environmental Protection Agency, Region 9, Air Division, Air 
Planning Office (AIR-2), 75 Hawthorne Street, San Francisco, CA 94105-
3901,
    Copies of the SIP materials are also available for inspection at 
the addresses listed below:
    California Air Resources Board, 2020 L Street, Sacramento, CA 
92123-1095.
    Santa Barbara County Air Pollution Control District, 26 Castilian 
Drive B-23, Goleta, CA 93117.
    Santa Barbara's 1998 Clean Air Plan is available electronically at: 
http://www3.sbcapcd.org/capes.htm

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Dave Jesson, Air Planning Office (AIR-
2), Air Division, U.S. EPA, Region 9, 75 Hawthorne Street, San 
Francisco, CA 94105-3901. Telephone: (415) 744-1288. E-mail: 
[email protected].

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

I. What Action Are We Proposing?

    This Santa Barbara SIP revision addresses applicable CAA 
requirements for serious ozone nonattainment areas, including a 
demonstration of attainment by the statutory deadline of November 15, 
1999.\1\ We are proposing to approve the Santa Barbara ozone SIP with 
respect to its emissions inventories, control measures, 1999 rate-of-
progress (ROP) plan, attainment plan, and transportation budgets. As 
discussed in section III.H., the 1998 CAP supersedes most portions of 
the 1994 ozone SIP for Santa Barbara, which we approved on January 8, 
1997 (62 FR 1187-1190).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ Santa Barbara County was originally classified as a moderate 
area, but failed to attain the ozone NAAQS by the November 15, 1996, 
statutory deadline, and was reclassified as serious on December 10, 
1997 (62 FR 65025-65030).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

II. What Clean Air Act Provisions Apply to This Plan?

A. What Is the Ozone NAAQS?

    Under section 109 of the CAA, we established NAAQS for ozone in 
1979. 44 FR 8220 (February 8, 1979). The 1-hour NAAQS for ozone is 0.12 
parts per million (ppm). Ground-level ozone is formed when nitrogen 
oxides (NOX) and volatile organic compounds (VOCs) react in 
the presence of sunlight, generally at elevated temperatures.\2\ 
Strategies for reducing smog typically require reductions in both VOC 
and NOX emissions.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \2\ The 1998 CAP generally substitutes the terms reactive 
organic gases (ROG) for VOC. These terms are essentially synonymous 
and are used interchangeably throughout this document.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Ozone causes serious health problems, particularly in children, by 
damaging lung tissue and sensitizing the lungs to other irritants. Even 
at very low levels, ozone can cause acute respiratory problems; 
aggravate asthma; cause temporary decreases in lung capacity of 15 to 
20 percent in healthy adults, cause inflammation of lung tissue; lead 
to hospital admissions and emergency room visits; and impair the body's 
immune system defenses, making people more susceptible to respiratory 
illnesses, including bronchitis and pneumonia. Children are most at 
risk from exposure to ozone because they breathe more air per pound of 
body weight than adults, their respiratory systems are still developing 
and thus are more susceptible to environmental threats, and children 
exercise outdoors more than adults.

B. What Requirements Apply to This SIP Revision?

    The most fundamental of the CAA provisions for ozone nonattainment 
areas is the requirement that the State submit a SIP demonstrating 
attainment of the NAAQS as expeditiously as practicable but no later 
than the

[[Page 16865]]

applicable CAA deadline. Such a demonstration must provide enforceable 
measures to achieve emission reductions each year leading to emissions 
at or below the level predicted to result in attainment of the NAAQS 
throughout the nonattainment area.
    We have issued a ``General Preamble'' describing the Agency's 
preliminary views on how we intend to act on SIPs submitted under Title 
I of the Act. See generally 57 FR 13498 (April 16, 1992) and 57 FR 
18070 (April 28, 1992). You should refer to the General Preamble for a 
more detailed discussion of our preliminary interpretations of Title I 
requirements. In this action, we are applying these policies to the 
Santa Barbara ozone SIP submittal, taking into consideration the 
specific factual issues presented.

III. Does This SIP Submittal Meet CAA Requirements?

A. Does the 1998 CAP Satisfy the Procedural Requirements?

    On December 29, 1998, the SBCAPCD adopted the 1998 CAP, after 
providing public notice and opportunity to comment. CARB approved the 
1998 CAP (Executive Order 99-2a) and, on March 19, 1999, submitted the 
plan as a revision to the California SIP (letter from Michael P. Kenny, 
Executive Officer, to Felicia Marcus, EPA Regional Administrator). The 
SIP submittal includes proof of publication for the notice of SBCAPCD 
public hearing, as evidence that the hearing was properly noticed. We 
found this submittal to be complete on April 28, 1999.\3\ We believe 
that the public process associated with the 1998 CAP meets the 
procedural requirements of CAA sections 110(a) and (l) and 40 CFR 
51.102.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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

B. Are the Emissions Inventories in the Plan Approvable?

    Chapter 3, Chapter 6, and Appendix A of the 1998 CAP include 
updated historic and projected emission inventories for the years 1990, 
1996, and 1999. The inventories summarize emissions from all stationary 
and mobile source categories both onshore and in the Outer Continental 
Shelf (OCS), where there are significant emissions from petroleum 
production and marine vessels. The inventories include estimated 
emissions from anthropogenic activities, biogenic and geogenic sources, 
and wildfires. Appendix A of the 1998 CAP includes estimates of ozone 
precursor emissions--ROG, NOX, and carbon monoxide (CO)-- 
for the following: (1) 1990 base year annual emissions (Table A-3); (2) 
1996 ozone season emissions (Tables A-7 and A-10); (3) 1996 annual 
emissions (Tables A-1 and A-2); and (4) 1999 ozone season emissions 
(Tables A-8 and A-11).\4\ As part of the ROP plan, the 1998 CAP 
presents 1990 base year ozone season emissions in Table 9-1. For 
informational purposes only, the 1998 CAP also includes projected ozone 
season emissions for 2005.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \4\ In Santa Barbara County, the ozone season covers the months 
of May through October.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The motor vehicle emissions in the 1998 CAP were generated using a 
group of models developed by CARB known as the Motor Vehicle Emission 
Inventory 7G1.0 corrected (MVEI7G1.0c). The Santa Barbara County 
Association of Governments (SBCAG) transportation model generated the 
area-specific data on motor vehicle population and usage. SBCAG also 
provided projections of population, employment, and housing, and the 
1998 CAP identifies the source of other activity factors.
    For 1999, SBCAG projected 9,459,848 vehicle miles traveled, 
1,327,665 trips, and 2,213,431 starts, assuming State and local 
controls (1998 CAP, Appendix C, page C-29). The 1998 CAP (pages 5-4 and 
5-5) also shows the motor vehicle emissions estimates for 1996 and 
1999.
    The revised and updated emissions inventories are comprehensive, 
accurate, and current estimates of actual emissions, as required by the 
CAA. The methodologies used to prepare the base and projected 
inventories conform to EPA guidance documents.\5\ Our guidance allows 
approval of California's motor vehicle emissions factors in place of 
the corresponding federal emissions factors. Therefore, we propose to 
approve the 1998 CAP emissions inventories for 1990, 1996, and 1999, 
under CAA sections 172(c)(3) and 182(a)(1). We are not acting on the 
emissions inventories for 2005, which the CAA does not require.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \5\ See, for example, Procedures for the Preparation of Emission 
Inventories for Carbon Monoxide and Precursors of Ozone, Volume I: 
General Guidance for Stationary Sources, EPA--450/4-91-016; 
Procedures for Emission Inventory Preparation, Volume IV: Mobile 
Sources, EPA--450/5-9-026d Revised.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

C. Are the Control Measures Approvable?

    CAA sections 110(a)(2)(A) and 172(c)(6) require that all measures 
and other elements in the SIP be enforceable. We have interpreted these 
provisions to allow for approval of attainment demonstrations that 
rely, in part, on commitments to adopt and implement rules in the 
future, so long as the commitments are specific and enforceable (see 57 
FR 13556 and 13568, April 16, 1992; and 62 FR 1155-1157, January 8, 
1997).
    The attainment demonstration in the 1998 CAP rests primarily on 
emission reductions derived from adopted State and SBCAPCD measures, 
which the 1998 CAP describes in Chapter 4 (stationary sources) and 
Chapter 5 (transportation sources).
    The transportation control measure (TCM) package for Santa Barbara 
County is summarized in Tables 5-1, 5-2, and 5-3. Table 5-1 summarizes 
each type of TCM, the adopting agency, the implementing agency, the 
commitments, and the monitoring mechanisms. Table 5-2 presents the 
specific projects, sponsors, and implementation status of all TCMs 
implemented as part of the 1994 Clean Air Plan while Table 5-3 
summarizes all new projects, sponsors, and funding mechanisms as part 
of the 1998 Clean Air Plan. The information contained in these three 
tables adequately summarizes all TCMs applicable to Santa Barbara 
County.
    To a small extent, both the ROP plan and attainment plan rely on 
reductions from 2 rules and 2 TCMs which SBCAPCD committed to adopt and 
implement in 1999. The 1998 CAP includes these 4 new control measures 
and 3 contingency measures, which are summarized in Table 1, entitled 
``Santa Barbara Measures.''

[[Page 16866]]



                                                            Table 1.--Santa Barbara Measures
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                    Emission reductions                                       Schedule
                                                     (tons/avg. summer    ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                Control Measures                         weekday)
                                                --------------------------   Adoption   Implementation                  Status as of 2/00
                                                     ROG          NOX
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
352--Residential & Commercial Space and Water             0       0.0047          4/99           6/99   Adopted 9/16/99.
 Heaters.                                                          (1999)
353--Control of ROG from Adhesives and Sealants      0.4228            0          4/99           6/99   Adopted 8/19/99.
                                                      (1999)
T13 Accelerated Retirement of Vehicles.........        0.06         0.02         (\1\)          99-01   Currently in force
                                                      (1999)       (1999)
T18 Alternative Fuels..........................      0.0003        0.002   ...........  ..............  In Progress.
                                                      (1999)       (1999)
333--Control of Emissions from Reciprocating              0       1.3656          4/99           4/01   Contingency Measure.
 Internal Combustion Engines.                                      (2005)
T21--Enhanced Inspection & Maintenance.........        4.29         3.07   ...........  ..............  Contingency Measure.
                                                      (2005)       (2005)
T22--County-Wide Implementation of Tier III TDM    30,840 VMT reduction    ...........  ..............  Contingency Measure.
 Program.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ Adopted.

    The measures 352, 353, T13, and T18 are relied upon in meeting the 
1999 ROP and attainment demonstration requirements of the Act, while 
measures 333, T21, and T22 serve as contingency measures. Accordingly, 
and because the measures strengthen the SIP, we propose to approve all 
of the measures in Table 1 under CAA sections 110(k)(3) and 301(a).

D. Is the Rate-of-Progress Plan Approvable?

    For ozone areas classified as serious or above, section 182(c)(2) 
requires that the SIP must provide for reductions in ozone-season, 
weekday VOC emissions of at least 3 percent per year net of growth 
averaged over each consecutive 3-year period beginning in 1996 until 
the attainment date. This is in addition to the 15 percent reduction 
over the first 6-year period required by CAA section 182(b)(1) for 
areas classified as moderate and above.
    Chapter 9 of the 1998 CAP presents the 1999 ROP plan. As required 
by CAA sections 182(b)(1) and 182(c)(2)(B), the plan includes an 
adjusted 1990 base year ROG emission inventory and computes creditable 
1999 emission reductions. The ROP plan must show that creditable 
reductions bring emissions below the required target level: a 24 
percent reduction from 1990 emissions.\6\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \6\ The assessment of whether an area has met the reasonable 
further progress requirement in the milestone year is based on 
whether the area is at or below the milestone year target level of 
emissions and not on whether the area has achieved a certain actual 
emissions reduction under the SIP control strategy. See General 
Preamble. 57 FR 13516.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Table 2 entitled ``1999 ROP Demonstration'' presents these 
calculations, demonstrating that creditable ROG reductions are achieved 
without the need for substituting NOX reductions, as allowed 
by the CAA section 182(c)(2)(C). Consistent with CAA section 
182(b)(1)(D), the ROP demonstration factors out reductions that would 
have been achieved by the Federal Motor Vehicle Control Program and 
Federal gasoline Reid Vapor Pressure regulations that were promulgated 
by November 15, 1990, or were required by CAA section 211(h).

                    Table 2.--1999 ROP Demonstration
------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                         ROG emissions
                                                             (tpd)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
1990 ROP Base Year ROG Inventory.....................              79.32
1990 Adjusted Base Year Inventory....................              56.72
24% ROP Adjusted Base Year...........................              13.61
Federal Motor Vehicle Control Program and Reid Vapor               22.60
 Pressure Requirement................................
1999 ROP Target......................................              43.11
1999 Inventory with Controls.........................              38.93
------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Because the Santa Barbara ROP demonstration satisfies applicable 
requirements as discussed above, we propose to approve the 1998 CAP as 
meeting the progress requirements of CAA section 182(c)(2).

E. Is the Attainment Demonstration Approvable?

    CAA section 181(a) requires serious ozone areas, including Santa 
Barbara, to demonstrate attainment as expeditiously as practicable but 
no later than November 15, 1999. The demonstration must show that VOC 
and NOx emissions will be (or have been) reduced to levels at which the 
ozone NAAQS will not be exceeded. Thus, the SIP must show that the 
projected design value will be less than or equal to 0.12 ppm at all 
locations within the nonattainment area.\7\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \7\ The design value is the fourth highest concentration at any 
monitor within the nonattainment area, over a 3-year period. You may 
find more details on the interpretation of the 1-hour ozone NAAQS at 
40 CFR 50, Appendix H. If you wish to find out more about ozone 
modeling, attainment demonstrations, and applicable EPA guidance, 
please see 61 FR 10939-13940 (March 18, 1996) and 40 CFR 51, 
Appendix W.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The measured design value concentration at the peak monitoring 
station in Santa Barbara was 0.13 ppm

[[Page 16867]]

for the period 1994-1996. The SIP must show that sufficient emission 
reductions will occur by 1999 to reduce this level by at least 4 
percent in order to achieve the NAAQS, since the rounding convention 
treats values up to 0.1249 ppm as not exceeding the 0.12 ppm standard.
    Appendix D of the CAP discusses the attainment demonstration, which 
CARB prepared for the Santa Barbara area. The State employed the Urban 
Airshed Model, using the September 5-7, 1984 episode, with eastern 
boundary conditions based on measured concentrations during the 1984 
field study. Base case simulations for September 6 and 7 met our 
performance guidelines with one exception: the normalized bias for 
September 6 was very slightly above EPA's guideline.
    CARB determined 1999 ozone concentrations by scaling the design 
value (0.13 ppm) by the relative change in peak ozone concentrations 
between 1996 and 1999. Based on the simulation results, the projected 
design value for 1999 was .1247 ppm.
    We propose to approve the attainment demonstration portion of the 
plan as meeting the requirements of CAA section 182(c)(2)(A), since it 
demonstrates that the area will attain the NAAQS before the applicable 
deadline of November 15, 1999. In fact, the Santa Barbara area did 
reach attainment in 1999, having recorded no more than 3 exceedances at 
any monitor during the period 1997-1999, as shown in Table 3 below 
labeled ``Exceedances of the 1-Hour Ozone NAAQS in Santa Barbara 
County, 1997-1999.''

Table 3.--Exceedances of the 1-Hour Ozone NAAQS in Santa Barbara County,
                                1997-1999
   [1999 values are preliminary data from EPA's Aerometric Data System
                                 (AIRS)]
------------------------------------------------------------------------
     Monitoring station          1997       1998       1999      Total
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Carpinteria.................          0          0          0          0
El Capitan*.................          0          0          0          0
Goleta*.....................          0          0          0          0
Las Flores Canyon...........          1          1          1          3
Lompoc H S and P............          0          0          0          0
Lompoc H Street*............          0          0          0          0
Nojoqui Summit..............          0          0          0          0
Paradise Road...............          0          1          0          1
Santa Barbara*..............          0          0          0          0
Santa Maria*................          0          0          0          0
Santa Rosa Island*..........          0          0          0          0
Santa Ynez*.................          0          0          0          0
Vandenberg Air Force Base...          0          0          0         0
------------------------------------------------------------------------
* Denotes part of the State and Local Air Monitoring System (SLAMS).
  Other stations are operated by industry, at the direction of the
  SBCAPCD, as a condition to permits issued under the Prevention of
  Significant Deterioration (PSD) program.

F. Are the Motor Vehicle Emissions Budgets Approvable?

    Attainment demonstration submittals must specify the maximum motor 
vehicle emissions allowed in the attainment year and demonstrate that 
this emissions level, when considered with emissions from all other 
sources, is consistent with attainment. In order for us to find the 
budget adequate and approvable, the submittal must meet the conformity 
adequacy requirements of 40 CFR 93.118(e)(4) and be approvable under 
all pertinent SIP requirements.
    The motor vehicle emissions caps defined by this and other plans 
when they are approved into the SIP are used to determine the 
conformity of transportation plans, programs, and projects to the SIP, 
as described by CAA section 176(c)(2)(A). For more detail on this part 
of the conformity requirements see 40 CFR 93.118. For transportation 
conformity purposes, the cap on motor vehicle emissions is known as the 
motor vehicle emissions budget. The budget must reflect all of the 
motor vehicle control measures contained in the attainment 
demonstration (40 CFR 93.118(e)(4)(v)).
    The motor vehicle emissions budgets in the 1998 CAP for 1999 are 
17.42 tpd VOC and 22.07 tpd NOX, as shown below in Table 4 
labeled ``Santa Barbara Motor Vehicle Emissions Budgets.''

         Table 4.--Santa Barbara Motor Vehicle Emissions Budgets
             [1999 Emissions in Tons per Day, Using EMFAC7G]
------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                    Voc          NOX
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Emissions without TCMs........................        17.52        22.16
Emission Reductions from TCMs.................         0.10         0.09
Emissions Budget..............................        17.42        22.07
------------------------------------------------------------------------

    These budgets were developed using the State's MVEI7G1.0c motor 
vehicle emissions factors. We have already determined that these 
budgets are adequate (see 64 FR 73549, December 30, 1999), and we now 
propose to approve the budgets as consistent with all of the adequacy 
criteria of 40 CFR 93.118(e)(4), including consistency with the 1999 
baseline emissions inventory, the motor vehicle control measure 
emission reductions used in the attainment demonstration, and the 
reductions needed for attainment.
    CARB is expected to issue refinements to the emissions factors for 
use in developing onroad mobile source emission inventories and for 
making transportation conformity determinations. The refinements would 
more accurately reflect emission reductions associated with the State's 
motor vehicle inspection and maintenance (I/M) program and other motor 
vehicle controls.\8\ These refinements must be used in conformity 
determinations, in accordance with our transportation conformity 
regulations, which require use of the most current and accurate 
information (40 CFR 93.110(e), 122(a)(2)). Subsequent budgets will 
reflect these changes and any new or modified control measures adopted 
to ensure maintenance of the NAAQS.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \8\ The updated emission reductions which, among other things, 
would reflect more accurately the I/M program as compared to the 
1994 submittal, are necessary in the case of I/M to account for 
legislative change to the program in 1997. The Santa Barbara area is 
subject to the ``basic'' I/M requirement of CAA section 182(b)(4) 
rather than the ``enhanced'' I/M requirement of section 182(c)(3) 
because the 1980 urbanized area population was less than 200,000. 
See CAA section 182(c)(3)(A).

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

[[Page 16868]]

G. Has the Area Established an Enhanced Monitoring Program?

    As a result of the reclassification of the County to serious, Santa 
Barbara became subject to the CAA section 182(c)(1) requirement that 
the area establish and implement a Photochemical Assessment Monitoring 
Station (PAMS) network. To support the implementation of this 
regulatory requirement, EPA provided in excess of $435,000 to SBCAPCD 
through the Section 105 Grant, from FY1998 through FY2000.
    The District worked diligently to expedite the implementation of a 
PAMS network, consisting of a split-Type II maximum ozone precursor 
station. VOC and carbonyl concentrations are collected at SBCAPCD's 
office, and additional data, including ozone, NOX, and 
meteorological parameters, are collected at SBCAPCD's SLAMS Goleta 
site. Upper air information is collected at the Santa Barbara Airport 
location. It was agreed that if Santa Barbara County remained in 
nonattainment status, the District would relocate all PAMS sampling to 
an optimum location in the foothills of Santa Barbara.

H. What Are the Implications of EPA's Proposed Plan Approval?

    If we finalize the proposed approval of the 1998 CAP, this plan 
would replace and supersede the 1994 ozone SIP with the exception of 
the approved State control measures, the local control measures that 
are not amended by the 1998 CAP, and the local transportation control 
measures for which the 1998 CAP augments the TCM measures and projects 
included in the 1994 CAP. Our final approval would also make 
enforceable the SBCAPCD commitments to adopt and implement the control 
measures and contingency measures (if applicable) listed above in Table 
1, to achieve the specified emissions reductions.

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 13132

    Executive Order 13132, entitled 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 proposed 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

    Executive Order 13045, entitled 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 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

[[Page 16869]]

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. 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 new regulations. To comply with 
NTTAA, the 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.
    EPA believes that VCS are inapplicable to this proposed action. 
Today's proposed action does not require the public to perform 
activities conducive to the use of VCS.

List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52

    Environmental protection, Air pollution control, Hydrocarbons, 
Intergovernmental regulations, Nitrogen oxides, Ozone, Reporting and 
recordkeeping requirements, Volatile organic compounds.

    Authority: 42 U.S.C. 7401 et seq.

    Dated: March 20, 2000.
David P. Howekamp,
Acting Regional Administrator, Region IX.
[FR Doc. 00-7736 Filed 3-29-00; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P