[Federal Register Volume 66, Number 137 (Tuesday, July 17, 2001)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 37151-37153]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 01-17702]
=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
40 CFR Part 52
[CA032-0241a; FRL-7001-2]
Revisions to the California State Implementation Plan, Kern
County Air Pollution Control District, Monterey Bay Unified Air
Pollution District, Modoc County Air Pollution Control District
AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).
ACTION: Direct final rule.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: EPA is taking direct final action to approve revisions to the
Kern County Air Pollution Control District (KCAPCD), Modoc County Air
Pollution Control District (MCAPCD), and Monterey Bay Unified Air
Pollution District (MBUAPCD) portions of the California State
Implementation Plan (SIP). These revisions concern visible emissions
(VE) from many different sources of air pollution. We are approving
local rules that regulate these emission sources under the Clean Air
Act as amended in 1990 (CAA or the Act).
DATES: This rule is effective on September 17, 2001 without further
notice, unless EPA receives adverse comments by August 16, 2001. If we
receive 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, NW, Washington D.C. 20460;
California Air Resources Board, Stationary Source Division, Rule
[[Page 37152]]
Evaluation Section, 1001 ``I'' Street, Sacramento, CA 95814;
Kern County Air Pollution Control District, 2700 M Street, Suite 302,
Bakersfield, CA 93301;
Modoc County Air Pollution Control, 202 West 4th Street, Alturas, CA
96101; and,
Monterey Bay Unified Air Pollution District, 24580 Silver Cloud Court,
Monterey, CA 93940-6536.
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 rules did the State submit?
B. Are there other versions of these rules?
C. What is the purpose of the submitted rule revisions?
II. EPA's Evaluation and Action
A. How is EPA evaluating the rules?
B. Do the rules meet the evaluation criteria?
C. EPA recommendations to further improve the rules.
D. Public comment and final action.
III. Background Information
Why were these rules submitted?
IV. Administrative Requirements
I. The State's Submittal
A. What Rules Did the State Submit?
Table 1 lists the rules we are approving with the dates that they
were adopted by the local air agencies and submitted by the California
Air Resources Board (CARB).
Table 1.--Submitted Rules
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Local agency Rule No. Rule title Adopted Submitted
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
KCAPCD................................. 401 Visible Emissions......... 11/29/93 3/29/94
MCAPCD................................. 4.1 Visible Emissions......... 1/15/89 12/31/90
MBUAPCD................................ 400 Visible Emissions......... 3/22/00 5/26/00
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
On the following dates, these rule submittals were found to meet
the completeness criteria in 40 CFR part 51, appendix V: June 3, 1994,
KCAPCD Rule 401; October 6, 2000, MBUAPCD Rule 400; and, February 28,
1991, MCAPCD Rule 4.1. These criteria must be met before formal EPA
review may begin.
B. Are There Other Versions of These Rules?
There are versions of all of these rule within the SIP. In all
cases, the submitted rule consolidates several SIP rules into a single
rule format. The TSD for each rule provides a detailed discussion of
each consolidation. Only MBUAPCD adopted and submitted prior versions
of Rule 400. While we can act on only the most recently submitted
version of Rule 400, we have reviewed materials provided with previous
submittals.
C. What Is the Purpose of the Submitted Rule Revisions?
Each of these rules limit the emissions of visible air contaminants
of any type; usually, but not always particulate matter from combustion
sources and industrial sites. Specifically, these rules prohibit
emissions beyond a defined opacity standard. The TSD has more
information about these rules.
II. EPA's Evaluation and Action
A. How Is EPA Evaluating the Rules?
Generally, SIP rules must be enforceable (see section 110(a) of the
Act), must meet Reasonably Available Control Measure (RACM)
requirements for nonattainment areas (see section 189), and must not
relax existing requirements (see sections 110(l) and 193). The KCAPCD
regulates an PM nonattainment area (see 40 CFR part 81), so Rule 401
must fulfill RACM. MBUAPCD and MCAPCD meet the PM standard and are not
required to meet RACM requirements.
We used the following guidance and policy documents to define our
specific enforceability and RACT requirements:
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 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.
B. Do the Rules Meet the Evaluation Criteria?
We believe these rules are consistent with the relevant policy and
guidance regarding enforceability, RACM, and SIP relaxations. KCAPCD
and MBUAPCD rules contain agricultural exemptions that are narrowly
construed by each district. Consequently, these exempted sources are a
neglible source of emissions in each district. The TSDs have more
information on our respective evaluations.
C. EPA Recommendations To Further Improve the Rules
The TSDs describe additional rule revisions that do not affect
EPA's current action but are recommended for the next time the local
agency modifies the rules. In particular, MCAPCD has retained a 40%
opacity standard. While MCAPCD need not meet the RACM 20% opacity
standard given its PM attainment status, almost all air districts in
California have adopted 20% opacity standard. This suggests that the
standard is readily achievable and should be considered by MCAPCD.
D. Public Comment and Final Action
As authorized in section 110(k)(3) of the Act, EPA is fully
approving the submitted rules because we believe they fulfill all
relevant requirements. We do not think anyone will object to this
approval, so we are finalizing it without proposing it in advance.
However, in the Proposed Rules section of this Federal Register, we are
simultaneously proposing approval of the same submitted rules. If we
receive adverse comments by August 16, 2001, 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, the direct final approval will be effective
without further notice on September 17, 2001. This will incorporate
these rules into the federally enforceable SIP.
III. Background Information
Why Were These Rules Submitted?
Visible emission rules with their opacity standards are basic
components of an air quality regulation program and a general RACM
requirement for PM-10 regulations. Section 110(a) of the CAA requires
states to submit regulations that control VE emissions. Table 2 lists
some of the national milestones leading to the submittal of these local
agency VE rules.
[[Page 37153]]
Table 2.--PM-10 Nonattainment Milestones
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Date Event
------------------------------------------------------------------------
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.
December 10, 1993......................... Section 189(a)(1)(C)
requires that PM-10
nonattainment areas
implement all reasonably
available control measures
(RACM) 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). This rule also does not
have a substantial direct effect on one or more Indian tribes, on the
relationship between the Federal Government and Indian tribes, or on
the distribution of power and responsibilities between the Federal
Government and Indian tribes, as specified by Executive Order 13175 (65
FR 67249, November 9, 2000), nor will it 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 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 September 17, 2001. 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: June 8, 2001.
Keith Takata,
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)(182)(i)(F)(4), (196)(i)(F)(4), and (279)(i)(B)(3), to read as
follows:
Sec. 52.220 Identification of plan.
* * * * *
(c) * * *
(182) * * *
(i) * * *
(F) * * *
(4) Rule 4.1, adopted on January 15, 1989.
* * * * *
(196) * * *
(i) * * *
(F) * * *
(4) Rule 401, adopted on April 18, 1972 and amended on November 29,
1993.
* * * * *
(279) * * *
(i) * * *
(B) * * *
(3) Rule 400, adopted July 1, 1969 and amended on March 22, 2000.
[FR Doc. 01-17702 Filed 7-16-01; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P