[Federal Register Volume 66, Number 192 (Wednesday, October 3, 2001)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 50319-50321]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 01-24483]


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

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

40 CFR Part 52

[CA242-0291a; FRL-7058-9]


Revisions to the California State Implementation Plan, Imperial 
County Air Pollution Control District, Monterey Bay Unified 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 
Imperial County Air Pollution Control District (ICAPCD) and Monterey 
Bay Unified Air Pollution Control District (MBUAPCD) portions of the 
California State Implementation Plan (SIP). These revisions concern 
volatile organic compound (VOC) emissions from automotive refinishing 
operations, metal parts and products coating, and applications of 
nonarchitectural coatings. 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 December 3, 2001, without further 
notice, unless EPA receives adverse comments by November 2, 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, N.W., Washington D.C. 20460;
California Air Resources Board, Stationary Source Division, Rule 
Evaluation Section, 1001 ``I'' Street, Sacramento, CA 95814;
Imperial County Air Pollution Control District, 150 South 9th 
Street, El Centro, CA 92243; and,
Monterey Bay Unified Air Pollution Control District, 24580 Silver 
Cloud Court, Monterey, CA 93940.


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
------------------------------------------------------------------------
                      Rule
    Local agency       #          Rule title         Adopted   Submitted
------------------------------------------------------------------------
ICAPCD.............    427  Automotive Refinishing    9/14/99    5/26/00
                             Operations.
MBUAPCD............    429  Applications of           1/17/01     5/8/01
                             Nonarchitectural
                             Coatings.
MBUAPCD............    434  Coating of Metal Parts    1/17/01     5/8/01
                             and Products.
------------------------------------------------------------------------

    On the following dates, EPA found these rule submittals met the 
completeness criteria in 40 CFR part 51, appendix V: October 6, 2000, 
ICAPCD Rule 427; and, July 20, 2001, MBUAPCD Rules 434 and 429. These 
criteria must be met before formal EPA review may begin.

B. Are there other versions of these rules?

    There is no previous version of ICAPCD 427 in the SIP. We approved 
versions of MBUAPCD Rules 429 and 434 into the SIP on March 22, 2000 
and August 18, 1999, respectively. CARB has not made an intervening 
submittal of these rules.

C. What is the purpose of the submitted rule revisions?

    ICAPCD Rule 427, Automotive Refinishing Operations, is a rule 
designed to reduce volatile organic compound (VOC) emissions at 
industrial sites engaged in the auto coating operations. As a new SIP 
rule,

[[Page 50320]]

Rule 427 includes the following provisions:
    --a description of rule purpose and applicability;
    --definitions under the rule;
    --rule standards and limits covering application, transfer 
efficiency, surface preparation and clean-up;
    --exemptions from the rule;
    --administrative requirements;
    --source monitoring and recordkeeping requirements; and,
    --test methods for determining compliance with the standards and 
limits of the rule.
    MBUAPCD Rule 429, Applications of Nonarchitectural Coatings, is a 
rule designed to regulate industrial sites engaged in spraying 
nonarchitectural coatings. VOCs are emitted during the spray 
application process used to apply the coating. Rule 429 requires the 
use of a spray booth or enclosure while applying the coatings. The 
recent amendments to Rule 429 include new definitions for high transfer 
efficiency methods and a new test method for determining the control 
efficiency of particulate matter control devices.
    MBUAPCD Rule 434, Coating of Metal Parts and Products, is a rule 
designed to reduce volatile organic compound (VOC) emissions at 
industrial sites engaged in metal coating operations. The recent 
amendments to Rule 434 include a definition of aerosol container, an 
exemption for aerosol container use, and added test methods for 
determining the VOC content of water-based coatings.
    The TSD has more information about these rules and their specific 
changes.

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 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). 
ICAPCD regulates an ozone nonattainment area (see 40 CFR part 81), so 
its Rules must fulfill RACT. MBUAPCD regulates an ozone attainment and 
maintenance area. Consequently, MBUAPCD VOC RACT rules that maintain 
the ozone standard are subject to the anti-backsliding provisions of 
the CAA.
    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. ``National Volatile Organic Compound Emission Standards for 
Automobile Refinish Coatings,'' at 40 CFR (Code of Federal Regulations) 
part 59, subpart B.
    These standards apply to the manufacture of auto refinishing 
coatings and not to their application. Consequently, these Subpart B 
standards are not binding on body shops and auto painters. So, EPA is 
using these standards, California statewide guidance and other auto 
refinishing rules adopted in California to advise our review of ICAPCD 
Rule 427.
    4. ``Control of Volatile Organic Emissions from Existing Stationary 
Sources Volume VI: Surface Coating of Miscellaneous Metal Parts and 
Products,'' USEPA, June 1978, EPA-450/2-78-015.

B. Do the rules meet the evaluation criteria?

    We believe ICAPCD Rule 427 and MBUAPCD Rules 429 and 434 are 
consistent with the relevant policy and guidance regarding 
enforceability, RACT, and SIP relaxations. The respective TSD for each 
rule has more information on our evaluation.

C. EPA recommendations to further improve the rules

    The TSD describes additional rule revisions that do not affect 
EPA's current action but are recommended for the next time the local 
agency modifies the rules.

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 November 2, 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 December 3, 2001. This will incorporate these 
rules into the federally enforceable SIP.

III. Background Information

Why were these rules 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 these local agency 
VOC rules.

                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. For this 
reason, this action is also not subject to Executive Order 32111, 
``Actions Concerning Regulations That Significantly Affect Energy 
Supply, Distribution, or Use'' (66 FR 28355, May

[[Page 50321]]

22, 2001). 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 (Pub. L. 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 December 3, 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: August 24, 2001.
Sally Seymour,
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)(279)(i)(A)(5) 
and (284) to read as follows:


Sec. 52.220  Identification of plan.

* * * * *
    (c) * * *
    (279) * * *
    (i) * * *
    (A) * * *
    (5) Rule 427, adopted on September 14, 1999.
* * * * *
    (284) New and amended regulations for the following APCDs were 
submitted on May 8, 2001, by the Governor's designee.
    (i) Incorporation by reference.
    (A) Monterey Bay Unified Air Pollution Control District.
    (1) Rules 429 adopted on September 16, 1987 and amended on January 
17, 2001 and Rule 434 adopted on June 15, 1994 and amended on January 
17, 2001.
[FR Doc. 01-24483 Filed 10-2-01; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-U