[Federal Register Volume 68, Number 220 (Friday, November 14, 2003)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 64537-64540]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 03-28305]


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

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

40 CFR Part 52

[CA261-0420a; FRL-7582-2]


Revisions to the California State Implementation Plan, San Diego 
County Air Pollution Control District; San Joaquin Valley 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 
San Diego County Air Pollution Control District (SDCAPCD) and San 
Joaquin Valley Unified Air Pollution Control District (SJVUAPCD) 
portions of the California State Implementation Plan (SIP). These 
revisions concern volatile organic compound (VOC) emissions from the 
metal parts and aerospace coating industries. 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 January 13, 2004 without further 
notice, unless EPA receives adverse comments by

[[Page 64538]]

December 15, 2003. 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: Send comments to Andy Steckel, Rulemaking Office Chief (AIR-
4), U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Region IX, 75 Hawthorne 
Street, San Francisco, CA 94105-3901, or e-mail to 
[email protected], or submit comments at http://www.regulations.gov.
    You can inspect copies of the submitted SIP revisions, EPA's 
technical support documents (TSDs), and public comments at our Region 
IX office during normal business hours by appointment. You may also see 
copies of the submitted SIP revisions by appointment at the following 
locations:

    Air and Radiation Docket and Information Center, U.S. 
Environmental Protection Agency, Room B-102, 1301 Constitution 
Avenue, NW., (Mail Code 6102T), Washington, DC 20460;
    California Air Resources Board, Stationary Source Division, Rule 
Evaluation Section, 1001 ``I'' Street, Sacramento, CA 95814;
    San Diego County Air Pollution Control District, 9150 Chesapeake 
Drive, San Diego, CA 92123;
    San Joaquin Valley Unified Air Pollution Control District, 1990 
East Gettysburg Street, Fresno, CA, 93726.

    A copy of the rule may also be available via the Internet at http://www.arb.ca.gov/drdb/drdbltxt.htm. Please be advised that this is not 
an EPA website and may not contain the same version of the rule that 
was submitted to EPA.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Jerald S. Wamsley, EPA Region IX, at 
either (415) 947-4111, or [email protected].

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 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. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews

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                  Rule title                 Adopted           Submitted
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
SDCAPCD.....................          67.3  Metal Parts and Products......           04/09/03           06/05/03
SJVUAPCD....................        4605    Aerospace Assembly and                   12/20/01           02/20/02
                                             Component Coating Operations.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    On July 18, 2003 for SDCAPCD Rule 67.3 and March 15, 2002 for 
SJVUAPCD Rule 4605, EPA found these rule submittals met the 
completeness criteria in 40 CFR Part 51 Appendix V.

B. Are There Other Versions of These Rules?

    We approved a version of SDCAPCD Rule 67.3 into the SIP on March 
27, 1997 (see 62 Federal Register (FR) 14639). Similarly, we approved a 
version of SJVUAPCD Rule 4605 into the SIP on August 17, 1998 (see 63 
FR 43884). Between these SIP incorporations and today, CARB has made no 
intervening submittals of these two rules.

C. What Is The Purpose of the Submitted Rule Revisions?

    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.
    SDCAQMD Rule 67.3 is designed to reduce volatile organic compound 
(VOC) emissions at industrial sites engaged in metal parts and product 
coating operations. VOCs are emitted during the preparation and coating 
of the metal parts and products, as well as the drying phase of the 
coating process. Rule 67.3 establishes general emission limits in units 
of pound of VOC per gallon of coating (lb/gal), and grams of VOC per 
litre (gr/1) of coating, less water and exempt compounds as applied. 
Also, the rule allows the use of add-on emission controls whose 
combined capture and control efficiency must be 85 percent or better 
and specifies certain operating equipment. The rule also contains 
provisions for appropriate methods of analysis, exemptions, alternative 
emission control plans (pursuant to Rule 67.1), record keeping, and 
emission reduction credits.
    SDCAPCD's April 9, 2003 amendments to Rule 67.3 included these 
significant changes to the May 15, 1996 adopted version within the SIP.

--An exemption was added for specialty sign painting and construction.
--The VOC content definition was deleted and referenced to Rule 2, 
Subsection (b)(52).

    SJVUAPCD Rule 4605 is designed to reduce volatile organic compound 
(VOC) emissions at industrial sites engaged in manufacturing, 
assembling, coating, masking, bonding, paint stripping, surface 
cleaning, service, and maintenance of aerospace components. VOCs are 
emitted during the preparation, coating, and drying phase of any of the 
above listed processes. Rule 4605 establishes general emission limits 
of VOC per liter of coating less water and exempt compounds as applied. 
It also allows for the use of add-on emission controls with a combined 
capture/control efficiency of approximately 81 percent.
    SJVUAPCD's December 20, 2001 amendments to Rule 4605 included the 
following significant changes to its 1998 SIP-limited approved/
disapproved version.

--The rule's purpose and applicability statements were changed to 
include organic solvent cleaning as well as the storage and disposal of 
organic solvents and waste solvent materials derived from coating 
operations subject to the rule. The majority of changes to the rule 
stem from adding organic solvent use, disposal, and storage 
requirements to the rule.
--Eleven new definitions were added to the rule to support the new rule 
amendments.
--In Table 1, May 1, 2002 emission limits are delayed until May 1, 
2003. However, this change affects only Adhesive Bonding Primer 
requirements. Adhesive Bonding Primer requirements are amended 
beginning May 1, 2003. First, several sub-categories are deleted and

[[Page 64539]]

renamed reducing them from 8 to 6. Of these renamed subcategories of 
Adhesive Bonding Primer, All Military Aircraft, Remanufactured 
Commercial Aircraft Parts, and Sonic and Acoustic Applications are 
given a content requirement of 805 grams per liter (gr/l) where they 
had been assigned requirement of 250 gr/l.
--A requirement for enclosed equipment cleaning is added at Section 
5.2.3.
--High Volume Low Pressure spray application requirements were defined 
at Section 5.5.3.
--Records must be retained for 5 years.

    The respective TSD each rule has more information about each rule 
and its revisions.

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). 
Both the SDCAPCD and SJVUAPCD regulate an ozone nonattainment area (see 
40 CFR part 81), so each rule must fulfill RACT.
    Guidance and policy documents that we used to help evaluate 
specific enforceability and RACT requirements consistently 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,'' EPA, May 25, 1988 (the Bluebook);
    3. ``Guidance Document for Correcting Common VOC & Other Rule 
Deficiencies,'' EPA Region 9, August 21, 2001 (the Little Bluebook);
    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; and,
    5. ``Control of Volatile Organic Emissions from Coating Operations 
at Aerospace Manufacturing and Rework Operations,'' USEPA, 1997, EPA-
453/R-97-004.

B. Do the Rules Meet the Evaluation Criteria?

    We believe these rules are consistent with the relevant policy and 
guidance regarding enforceability, RACT, and SIP relaxations. While the 
revisions to SDCAPCD Rule 67.3 and SJVUAPCD Rule 4605 contain specific 
rule relaxations, SDCAPCD and SJVUAPCD have provided analyses 
demonstrating that the added emissions resulting from these rule 
relaxations are either a de minimis amount in the case of SDCAPCD Rule 
67.3, or offset by emission reductions elsewhere in the case of 
SJVUAPCD Rule 4605. Given these analyses, we find that neither 
reasonable further progress towards, nor achievement of the air quality 
standards will be jeopardized.
    The respective TSD for each rule has more detailed information on 
these analyses and our evaluation.

C. EPA Recommendations To Further Improve the Rules

    We have no 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 December 15, 2003, 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 January 13, 2004. This will incorporate these 
rules into the federally enforceable SIP.
    Please note that if EPA receives adverse comment on an amendment, 
paragraph, or section of this rule and if that provision may be severed 
from the remainder of the rule, EPA may adopt as final those provisions 
of the rule that are not the subject of an adverse comment.

III. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews

    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 13211, 
``Actions Concerning Regulations That Significantly Affect Energy 
Supply, Distribution, or Use'' (66 FR 28355, May 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 tribal implications because it will 
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). This action also does not have Federalism 
implications because it does 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). This action 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 
``Protection of Children from Environmental Health Risks and Safety 
Risks'' (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. This rule does not 
impose an information collection

[[Page 64540]]

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. section 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. 
section 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 January 13, 2004. 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, Incorporation by 
reference, Intergovernmental relations, Ozone, Reporting and 
recordkeeping requirements, Volatile organic compounds.

    Dated: October 16, 2003.
Debra Jordan,
Acting Regional Administrator, Region IX.

0
Part 52, chapter I, title 40 of the Code of Federal Regulations is 
amended as follows:

PART 52--[AMENDED]

0
1. The authority citation for Part 52 continues to read as follows:

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

Subpart F--California

0
2. Section 52.220 is amended by adding paragraphs (c)(294)(i)(A)(5) and 
(c)(316)(i)(C) to read as follows:


Sec.  52.220  Identification of plan.

* * * * *
    (c) * * *
    (294) * * *
    (i) * * *
    (A) * * *
    (5) Rule 4605 adopted on December 19, 1991 and amended on December 
20, 2001.
* * * * *
    (316) * * *
    (i) * * *
    (C) San Diego County Air Pollution Control District.
    (1) Rule 67.3 adopted on May 9, 1979 and amended on April 9, 2003.
* * * * *
[FR Doc. 03-28305 Filed 11-13-03; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P