[Federal Register Volume 65, Number 66 (Wednesday, April 5, 2000)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 17771-17773]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 00-8147]


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

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

40 CFR Part 52

[CA 236-0225a; FRL-6569-5]


Revision to the California State Implementation Plan, Santa 
Barbara County Air Pollution Control District

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Direct final rule.

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

SUMMARY: EPA is taking direct final action to approve a revision to the 
Santa Barbara County Air Pollution Control District (SBCAPCD) portion 
of the California State Implementation Plan (SIP). This revision 
concerns volatile organic compound (VOC) emissions from adhesive and 
sealants. We are approving a local rule that regulates this emission 
source under the Clean Air Act as amended in 1990 (CAA or the Act).

DATES: This rule is effective on June 5, 2000 without further notice, 
unless EPA receives adverse comments by May 5, 2000. If we receive such 
comment, we will withdraw the document and notify the public in the 
Federal Register that this rule will not take effect.

ADDRESSES:  Mail comments to Andy Steckel, Rulemaking Office Chief 
(AIR-4), U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Region IX, 75 Hawthorne 
Street, San Francisco, CA 94105-3901.
    You can inspect copies of the submitted rule revision and EPA's 
technical support document (TSD) at our Region IX office during normal 
business hours. You may also see copies of the submitted rule revision 
at the following locations:

Environmental Protection Agency, Air Docket (6102), Ariel Rios 
Building, 1200 Pennsylvania Avenue, N.W., Washington D.C. 20460.
California Air Resources Board, Stationary Source Division, Rule 
Evaluation Section, 2020 ``L'' Street, Sacramento, CA 95812.
Santa Barbara County Air Pollution Control District, 26 Castilian Dr. 
Suite B-23, Goleta, CA 93117.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Yvonne Fong, Rulemaking Office (AIR-
4), U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Region IX, (415) 744-1199.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Throughout this document, ``we,'' ``us'' and 
``our'' refer to EPA.

Table of Contents

I. The State's Submittal
    A. What Rule Did the State Submit?
    B. Are there other versions of this rule?
    C. What is the purpose of the submitted rule?
II. EPA's Evaluation and Action
    A. How is EPA evaluating the rule?
    B. Does the rule meet the evaluation criteria?
    C. Public comment and final action.
III. Background Information
    Why was this rule submitted?
IV. Administrative Requirements

I. The State's Submittal

A. What Rule Did the State submit?

    Table 1 lists the rule we are approving with the date that it was 
adopted by local air agency and submitted by the California Air 
Resources Board (CARB).

[[Page 17772]]



                                            Table 1.--Submitted Rule
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
             Local agency                     Rule #                Rule title            Adopted     Submitted
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
SBCAPCD...............................  353                Adhesives and sealants.....     08/19/99     10/29/99
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    On December 16, 1999, this rule submittal was found to meet the 
completeness criteria in 40 CFR part 51, appendix V, which must be met 
before formal EPA review.

B. Are There Other versions of This Rule?

    There are no previous versions of Rule 353 in the SIP and no 
earlier versions of this rule were adopted by the SBCAPCD.

C. What Is the Purpose of the Submitted Rule?

    Rule 353 limits VOC emissions from the application of adhesive and 
sealants. The TSD has more information about this rule and its 
provisions.

II. EPA's Evaluation and Action

A. How Is EPA Evaluating the Rule?

    Generally, SIP rules must be enforceable (see section 110(a) of the 
Act), must require Reasonably Available Control Technology (RACT) for 
major sources in nonattainment areas (see section 182(a)(2)(A)), and 
must not relax existing requirements (see sections 110(l) and 193). The 
SBCAPCD regulates an ozone nonattainment area (see 40 CFR part 81), so 
Rule 353 must fulfill RACT.
    Guidance and policy documents that we used to define specific 
enforceability and RACT requirements include the following:
    1. Portions of the proposed post-1987 ozone and carbon monoxide 
policy that concern RACT, 52 FR 45044, November 24, 1987.
    2. ``Issues Relating to VOC Regulation Cutpoints, Deficiencies, and 
Deviations; Clarification to Appendix D of November 24, 1987 Federal 
Register document,'' (Blue Book), notice of availability published in 
the May 25, 1988 Federal Register.
    3. The State of California Air Resources Board's ``Determination of 
Reasonably Available Control Technology (RACT) and Best Available 
Retrofit Control Technology (BARCT) for Adhesives and Sealants,'' 
December 1998.

B. Does the Rule Meet the Evaluation Criteria?

    We believe this rule is consistent with the relevant policy and 
guidance regarding enforceability, RACT, and SIP relaxations. Rule 353 
contains one deviation from RACT which was determined to meet EPA's 5% 
equivalency policy (see the Blue Book). The TSD has more information on 
our evaluation.

C. Public Comment and Final Action

    As authorized in section 110(k)(3) of the Act, EPA is fully 
approving the submitted rule because we believe it fulfills all 
relevant requirements. We do not think anyone will object to this, so 
we are finalizing the approval without proposing it in advance. 
However, in the Proposed Rules section of this Federal Register, we are 
simultaneously proposing approval of the same submitted rule. If we 
receive adverse comments by May 5, 2000, we will notify the public in 
the Federal Register that the direct final approval will not take 
effect and we will address the comments in a subsequent final action 
based on the proposal. If we do not receive timely adverse comments, 
the direct final approval will be effective without further notice on 
June 5, 2000. This will incorporate this rule into the federally 
enforceable SIP.

III. Background Information

Why Was This Rule Submitted?

    VOCs help produce ground-level ozone and smog, which harm human 
health and the environment. Section 110(a) of the CAA requires states 
to submit regulations that control VOC emissions. Table 2 lists some of 
the national milestones leading to the submittal of this local agency 
VOC rule.

                Table 2.--Ozone Nonattainment Milestones
------------------------------------------------------------------------
             Date                                 Event
------------------------------------------------------------------------
March 3, 1978.................  EPA promulgated a list of ozone
                                 nonattainment areas under the Clean Air
                                 Act as amended in 1977. 43 FR 8964; 40
                                 CFR 81.305.
May 26, 1988..................  EPA notified Governors that parts of
                                 their SIPs were inadequate to attain
                                 and maintain the ozone standard and
                                 requested that they correct the
                                 deficiencies (EPA's SIP-Call). See
                                 section 110(a)(2)(H) of the pre-amended
                                 Act.
November 15, 1990.............  Clean Air Act Amendments of 1990 were
                                 enacted. Pub. L. 101-549, 104 Stat.
                                 2399, codified at 42 U.S.C. 7401-7671q.
May 15, 1991..................  Section 182(a)(2)(A) requires that ozone
                                 nonattainment areas correct deficient
                                 RACT rules by this date.
------------------------------------------------------------------------

IV. Administrative Requirements

    Under Executive Order 12866 (58 FR 51735, October 4, 1993), this 
action is not a ``significant regulatory action'' and therefore is not 
subject to review by the Office of Management and Budget. This action 
merely approves state law as meeting federal requirements and imposes 
no additional requirements beyond those imposed by state law. 
Accordingly, the Administrator certifies that this rule will not have a 
significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities 
under the Regulatory Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 601 et seq.). Because 
this rule approves pre-existing requirements under state law and does 
not impose any additional enforceable duty beyond that required by 
state law, it does not contain any unfunded mandate or significantly or 
uniquely affect small governments, as described in the Unfunded 
Mandates Reform Act of 1995 (Public Law 104-4). For the same reason, 
this rule also does not significantly or uniquely affect the 
communities of tribal governments, as specified by Executive Order 
13084 (63 FR 27655, May 10, 1998). 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

[[Page 17773]]

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. This rule also is 
not subject to Executive Order 13045 (62 FR 19885, April 23, 1997), 
because it is not economically significant.
    In reviewing SIP submissions, EPA's role is to approve state 
choices, provided that they meet the criteria of the Clean Air Act. In 
this context, in the absence of a prior existing requirement for the 
State to use voluntary consensus standards (VCS), EPA has no authority 
to disapprove a SIP submission for failure to use VCS. It would thus be 
inconsistent with applicable law for EPA, when it reviews a SIP 
submission, to use VCS in place of a SIP submission that otherwise 
satisfies the provisions of the Clean Air Act. Thus, the requirements 
of section 12(d) of the National Technology Transfer and Advancement 
Act of 1995 (15 U.S.C. 272 note) do not apply. As required by section 3 
of Executive Order 12988 (61 FR 4729, February 7, 1996), in issuing 
this rule, EPA has taken the necessary steps to eliminate drafting 
errors and ambiguity, minimize potential litigation, and provide a 
clear legal standard for affected conduct. EPA has complied with 
Executive Order 12630 (53 FR 8859, March 15, 1988) by examining the 
takings implications of the rule in accordance with the ``Attorney 
General's Supplemental Guidelines for the Evaluation of Risk and 
Avoidance of Unanticipated Takings'' issued under the executive order. 
This rule does not impose an information collection burden under the 
provisions of the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. 3501 et 
seq.).
    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 action is not a ``major rule'' as defined by 5 U.S.C. 
804(2).
    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 June 5, 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.

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

    Dated: March 17, 2000.
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 adding paragraphs (c)(270)(i)(D)(1) 
to read as follows:


Sec. 52.220  Identification of plan.

* * * * *
    (c) * * *
    (270) * * *
    (i) * * *
    (D) Santa Barbara County Air Pollution Control District.
    (1) Rule 353, adopted on August 19, 1999.
* * * * *
[FR Doc. 00-8147 Filed 4-4-00; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P