[Federal Register Volume 66, Number 204 (Monday, October 22, 2001)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 53340-53342]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 01-26528]


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

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

40 CFR Part 52

[CA 245-0295; FRL-7078-7]


Revisions to the California State Implementation Plan, San 
Joaquin Valley Unified Air Pollution Control District

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Final rule.

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

SUMMARY: EPA is finalizing a limited approval and limited disapproval 
of revisions to the San Joaquin Valley Unified Air Pollution Control 
District (SJVUAPCD) portion of the California State Implementation Plan 
(SIP). This action was proposed in the Federal Register on July 6, 2001 
and concerns volatile organic compound (VOC) emissions from the 
miscellaneous metal parts source category. Under authority of the Clean 
Air Act as amended in 1990 (CAA or the Act), this action simultaneously 
approves a local rule regulating these emission sources and directs 
California to correct the rule's deficiencies.

EFFECTIVE DATE: This rule is effective on November 21, 2001.

ADDRESSES: You can inspect copies of the administrative record for this 
action at EPA's Region IX office during normal business hours. You may 
also see copies of the submitted SIP revisions at the following 
locations:

California Air Resources Board, Stationary Source Division, Rule 
Evaluation Section, 1001 ``I'' Street, Sacramento, CA 95814; and,
San Joaquin Valley Unified Air Pollution Control District, 1990 East 
Gettysburg Street, Fresno, CA 93726.

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.

I. Proposed Action

    On July 6, 2001 (66 FR 35573), EPA proposed a limited approval and 
limited disapproval of SJVUAPCD Rule 4603 submitted by California for 
incorporation into the California SIP.

                                            Table 1.--Submitted Rule
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
            Local agency                 Rule #                 Rule title                Adopted     Submitted
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
SJVUAPCD............................         4603  Surface Coating of Metal Parts and      09/21/00     12/11/00
                                                    Products.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    We proposed a limited approval because we determined that Rule 4603 
improves the SIP and is largely consistent with the relevant CAA 
requirements. Simultaneously, we proposed a limited disapproval because 
some rule provisions conflict with section 110 and part D of the Act.
    These provisions of Rule 4603 conflict with section 110 and part D 
of the Act and prevent full approval of the SIP revision.
    1. The language in section 4.1 allows at least two competing 
interpretations of the rule. This section should be revised to allow 
only one interpretation consistent with EPA guidance and policy 
concerning rule applicability, size cut-offs, and allowable non-
compliant coating use. District practice of exempting fifteen pounds 
per day of non-compliant VOC emissions from all sources contradicts the 
intent of the size cutoff requirements of EPA's RACT Guidance. 
Furthermore, this practice is inconsistent with EPA policy providing 
for no more than 55 gallons of non-compliant coating use per rolling 12 
month period.
    2. Rule 4603 sets a viscosity limit for dip coating of structural 
steel components. However, SJVUAPCD did not provide a test method for 
determining compliance with this viscosity limit.
    3. Rule 4603 incorporates a solid film lubricant specialty category 
emissions limit of 880 grams per liter (gr/l.) This limit exceeds the 
statutory and Control Technique Guideline (CTG) limit of 420 gr/l.

II. Public Comments and EPA Responses

    EPA's proposed action provided a 30-day public comment period. 
During this period, we received no comments on our proposed limited 
approval and disapproval of Rule 4603.

III. EPA Action

    No comments were submitted that may have provoked reconsideration 
of our assessment of the rule as described in our July 6, 2001 proposed 
action. Therefore, EPA is finalizing a limited approval of the 
submitted rule as authorized in sections 110(k)(3) and 301(a) of the 
Act. This action incorporates the submitted rule into the California 
SIP, including those provisions identified as deficient. As authorized 
under section 110(k)(3), EPA is simultaneously finalizing a limited 
disapproval of Rule 4603. As a result, sanctions will be imposed unless 
EPA approves subsequent SIP revisions that correct the rule's 
deficiencies within 18 months of the effective date of this action. 
These sanctions will be imposed under section 179 of the Act according 
to 40 CFR 52.31. In addition, EPA must promulgate a federal 
implementation plan (FIP) under section 110(c) unless we approve 
subsequent SIP revisions that correct the rule's deficiencies within 24 
months. The San Joaquin Valley Unified Air Pollution Control District 
has adopted the submitted rule and EPA's final limited disapproval does 
not prevent the SJVUAPCD from enforcing it.

IV. Administrative Requirements

A. Executive Order 12866

    The Office of Management and Budget has exempted this regulatory 
action

[[Page 53341]]

from Executive Order 12866, entitled ``Regulatory Planning and 
Review.''

B. Executive Order 13211

    This rule is not subject to Executive Order 13211, ``Actions 
Concerning Regulations That Significantly Affect Energy Supply, 
Distribution, or Use'' (66 FR 28355 (May 22, 2001)) because it is not a 
significant regulatory action under Executive Order 12866.

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 Executive Order 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 Executive Order 13045 because it does 
not involve decisions intended to mitigate environmental health or 
safety risks.

D. 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 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, because it 
merely acts on 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.

E. Executive Order 13175

    Executive Order 13175, entitled ``Consultation and Coordination 
with Indian Tribal Governments'' (65 FR 67249, November 6, 2000), 
requires EPA to develop an accountable process to ensure ``meaningful 
and timely input by tribal officials in the development of regulatory 
policies that have tribal implications.'' ``Policies that have tribal 
implications'' is defined in the Executive Order to include regulations 
that have ``substantial direct effects on one or more Indian tribes, on 
the relationship between the Federal government and the Indian tribes, 
or on the distribution of power and responsibilities between the 
Federal government and Indian tribes.''
    This final rule does not have tribal implications. It will not have 
substantial direct effects on tribal governments, 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 in Executive Order 13175. 
Thus, Executive Order 13175 does not apply to this rule.

F. 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 act on 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.
    EPA's disapproval of the state request under section 110 and 
subchapter I, part D of the Clean Air Act does not affect any existing 
requirements applicable to small entities. Any pre-existing federal 
requirements remain in place after this disapproval. Federal 
disapproval of the state submittal does not affect state 
enforceability. Moreover, EPA's disapproval of the submittal does not 
impose any new Federal requirements. Therefore, 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 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).

G. 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 
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 costs of $100 
million or more to either State, local, or tribal governments in the 
aggregate, or to the private sector. This Federal action acts on pre-
existing requirements under State or local law, and imposes no new 
requirements. Accordingly, no

[[Page 53342]]

additional costs to State, local, or tribal governments, or to the 
private sector, result from this action.

H. 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 a new regulation. To comply with 
NTTAA, 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 today's action because it 
does not require the public to perform activities conducive to the use 
of VCS.

I. Submission to Congress and the Comptroller General

    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 rule is not a ``major'' rule as defined by 5 U.S.C. 
804(2).

J. Petitions for Judicial Review

    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 21, 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: September 18, 2001.
Jane Diamond,
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)(285)(i)(B) to 
read as follows:


Sec. 52.220  Identification of plan.

* * * * *
    (c) * * *
    (285) * * *
    (i) * * *
    (B) San Joaquin Valley Unified Air Pollution Control District.
    (1) Rule 4603 adopted on April 11, 1991 and amended on September 
21, 2000.
* * * * *
[FR Doc. 01-26528 Filed 10-19-01; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P