[Federal Register Volume 65, Number 111 (Thursday, June 8, 2000)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 36349-36351]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 00-14173]


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

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

40 CFR Part 52

[CA241-0238a; FRL-6709-1]


Revisions 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 metal parts 
coating operations. EPA is approving a local rule, Rule 330, Surface 
Coating of Metal Parts and Products, that regulates these emission 
sources under the Clean Air Act as amended in 1990 (CAA or the Act).

DATES: This rule is effective on August 7, 2000 without further notice, 
unless EPA receives adverse comments by July 10, 2000. If EPA receives 
such comment, we will publish a timely withdrawal in the Federal 
Register to notify the public 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 SIP revisions and EPA's 
technical support documents (TSDs) at our Region IX office during 
normal business hours. You may also see copies of the submitted SIP 
revisions 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; and,
Santa Barbara County Air Pollution Control District 26, Castilian 
Drive, Suite B-23, Goleta, CA 93117

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Jerald S. Wamsley, Rulemaking Office 
(AIR-4), U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Region IX, (415) 744-
1226.

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 rule revisions?
II. EPA's Evaluation and Action
    A. How is EPA evaluating this rule?
    B. Does the rule meet the evaluation criteria?
    C. EPA's recommendations to further improve the rule.
    D. Public comment and final action.
III. Background Information
    A. 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 the local air agency and submitted by the California Air 
Resources Board (CARB).

                                            Table 1.--Submitted Rule
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
             Local agency                Rule No.               Rule title                Adopted     Submitted
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
SBCAPCD...............................        330   Surface Coating of Metal Parts and    01/20/00     03/28/00
                                                     Products.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    On May 19, 2000, EPA determined that this rule submittal met 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?

    We published a limited approval and limited disapproval of Rule 330 
and incorporated the rule into the SIP on December 3, 1998. The SBCAPCD 
adopted this version of Rule 330 on April 21, 1995. SBCAPCD has not 
submitted to EPA any versions of Rule 330 prior to the January 20, 2000 
version we are acting on today.

C. What Is the Purpose of the Rule Revisions?

    SBCAPCD's January 20, 2000 amendments to Rule 330 included these 
significant changes to its 1995 adopted version:

--The 200 gallon per year allowance for non-compliant coating use was 
lowered to 55 gallons per year (section B.1, Exemptions);
--Daily recordkeeping of non-compliant coating use is required (H.6, 
Requirements-Recordkeeping); and,
--Test methods for determining capture efficiency have been updated 
(section I.3-Test Methods).

SBCAPCD adopted these amendments primarily to address the deficiencies 
described in EPA's December 3, 1998 limited disapproval action. EPA's 
Technical Support Document (TSD) for this rulemaking has more 
information about these rule amendments.

II. EPA's Evaluation and Action

A. How Is EPA Evaluating This 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 330 must fulfill RACT.
    Guidance and policy documents that we used to define specific 
enforceability and RACT requirements include the materials listed 
below.
    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. ``Control of Volatile Organic Emissions from Existing Stationary 
Sources Volume VI: Surface Coating of Miscellaneous Metal Parts and

[[Page 36350]]

Products,'' USEPA, June 1978, EPA-450/2-78-015.

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. On 
December 3, 1998, EPA gave a limited approval and limited disapproval 
of Rule 330 identifying several deficiencies within the rule that 
required correction. The deficiencies identified within EPA's limited 
disapproval have been either corrected or addressed adequately by the 
SBCAPCD's January 20, 2000 amendments to Rule 330.
    EPA's approval action will incorporate the revised Rule 330 into 
the federally approved SIP. Our approval action will stop the sanctions 
process and Federal Implementation Plan clock, which were started on 
December 3, 1998 when EPA published its limited disapproval action in 
the Federal Register (see 63 FR 66758.) EPA's TSD provides more 
information concerning our evaluation.

C. EPA Recommendations to Further Improve the Rule

    Our TSD does not describe additional rule revisions recommended for 
the next time the local agency modifies the rule.

D. Public Comment and Final Action

    As authorized in section 110(k)(3) of the Act, EPA is fully 
approving the submitted Rule 330 because we believe it fulfills all 
relevant requirements. We do not think anyone will object to this 
action, 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 330. If we receive adverse comments by July 10, 2000, we 
will publish a timely withdrawal in the Federal Register to notify the 
public 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, this direct 
final approval will be effective without further notice on August 7, 
2000. This final approval will incorporate SBCAPCD Rule 330 into the 
federally enforceable SIP.

III. Background Information

A. 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 
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

[[Page 36351]]

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 August 7, 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: May 23, 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)(277) to read 
as follows:


Sec. 52.220  Identification of plan.

* * * * *
    (c) * * *
    (277) New and amended regulations for the following APCDs were 
submitted on March 28, 2000, by the Governor's designee.
    (i) Incorporation by reference.
    (A) Santa Barbara County Air Pollution Control District.
    (1) Rule 330, adopted on June 11, 1979 and amended on January 20, 
2000.
* * * * *
[FR Doc. 00-14173 Filed 6-7-00; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P