[Federal Register Volume 69, Number 102 (Wednesday, May 26, 2004)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 29880-29882]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 04-11769]


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

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

40 CFR Part 52

[CA 040-0448a; FRL-7662-2]


Revisions to the California State Implementation Plan, El Dorado 
County Air Pollution Control District, Feather River Air Quality 
Management District, Kern County Air Pollution Control District, 
Sacramento Metropolitan Air Quality Management District, San Bernardino 
County Air Pollution Control District, Santa Barbara County Air 
Pollution Control District, and Yolo-Solano 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 
El Dorado County Air Pollution Control District (EDCAPCD), Feather 
River Air Quality Management District (FRAQMD), Kern County Air 
Pollution Control District (KCAPCD), Sacramento Metropolitan Air 
Quality Management District (SMAQMD), San Bernardino County Air 
Pollution Control District (now Mojave Desert Air Quality Management 
District) (MDAQMD), Santa Barbara County Air Pollution Control District 
(SBCAPCD), and Yolo-Solano Air Pollution Control District (YSAPCD) 
portions of the California State Implementation Plan (SIP). Under 
authority of the Clean Air Act as amended in 1990 (CAA or the Act), we 
are approving local rules that address emission statements.

DATES: This rule is effective on July 26, 2004, without further notice, 
unless EPA receives adverse comments by June 25, 2004. If we receive 
such comments, we will publish a timely withdrawal in the Federal 
Register to notify the public that this direct final 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.
    El Dorado County Air Pollution Control District, 2850 Fairlane 
Court, Building C, Placerville, CA 95667-4100.
    Feather River Air Quality Management District, 938--14th Street, 
Marysville, CA 95901-4149.
    Kern County Air Pollution Control District, 2700 ``M'' Street, 
Suite 302, Bakersfield, CA 93301-2370.
    Mojave Desert Air Quality Management District, 14306 Park Avenue, 
Victorville, CA 92392-2310.
    Sacramento Metropolitan Air Quality Management District, 777--12th 
Street, Third Floor, Sacramento, CA 95814-1908.
    Santa Barbara County Air Pollution Control District, 26 Castilian 
Drive, Suite B-23, Goleta, CA 93117-3027.
    Yolo-Solano Air Quality Management District, 1947 Galileo Court, 
Suite 103, Davis, CA 95616-4882.
    Copies of the rules may also be available via the Internet at the 
following site, http://www.arb.ca.gov/drdb/drdbltxt.htm. Please be 
advised that this is not an EPA Web site and may not contain the same 
version of the rules that were submitted to EPA.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Julie A. Rose, EPA Region IX, (415) 
947-4126, [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 Submitted Rules?
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
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
          Local agency             Rule                 Rule title               Adopted     Submitted
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
EDCAPCD........................  1000..............  Emission Statement...............     09/21/92     11/12/92
FRAQMD.........................  4.8...............  Further Information..............     09/14/92     11/12/92
KCAPCD.........................  108.2.............  Emission Statement Requirements..     07/13/92     11/12/92
MDAQMD.........................  107...............  Certification and Emission            09/17/92     11/12/92
                                                      Statements.
SMAQMD.........................  105...............  Emission Statements..............     04/20/93     11/18/93
SBCAPCD........................  212...............  Emission Statements..............     10/20/92     11/12/92

[[Page 29881]]

 
YSAPCD.........................  3.18..............  Emission Statements..............     11/15/92     11/18/93
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    On March 26, 1993, and December 23, 1993, the rules submitted on 
November 12, 1992, and November 18, 1993, respectively were found to 
meet the completeness criteria in 40 CFR part 51, appendix V, which 
must be met before formal EPA review.

B. Are There Other Versions of These Rules?

    There are no previous versions of these rules with the exception of 
FRAPCD Rule 4.8, Further Information. We approved Sutter County Air 
Pollution Control District (SCAPCD) Rule 4.8, Public Information and 
Yuba County Air Pollution Control District (YCAPCD) Rule 4.8, Further 
Information into the California SIP on April 12, 1982. SCAPCD and 
YCAPCD joined together to form the FRAPCD on September 3, 1991. FRAPCD 
Rule 4.8 has now been revised to include emission statement 
requirements.

C. What Is the Purpose of the Submitted Rules and Rule Revision?

    Section 182(a)(3)(B)(i) of the CAA requires that States with areas 
designated as nonattainment for ozone require emission statement data 
from sources of volatile organic compounds or oxides of nitrogen in the 
nonattainment areas. This requirement applies to all ozone 
nonattainment areas regardless of the classification (Marginal, 
Moderate, etc.). Emission statements were required to be submitted by 
November 15, 1993, and annually thereafter. Section 182(a)(3)(B)(ii) of 
the CAA allows the States and Districts to waive the requirement for 
emission statements for classes or categories of sources with less than 
25 tons per year if the class or category is included in the base year 
and periodic inventories and emissions are calculated using emission 
factors established by EPA or other methods acceptable to EPA.
    Section 110(a) of the CAA requires States to submit regulations 
that control volatile organic compounds and oxides of nitrogen, 
particulate matter, and other air pollutants which harm human health 
and the environment. These rules were developed as part of the local 
agency's program to control these pollutants and meet the requirements 
of sections 110 and 182 of the CAA.

II. EPA's Evaluation and Action

A. How Is EPA Evaluating the Rules?

    These rules require owners or operators of sources which emit 
oxides of nitrogen (NOX), volatile organic compounds (VOC), 
or reactive organic gas (ROG) to provide the Air Pollution Control 
Officer (APCO) and CARB with a statement showing actual emissions of 
NOX, VOC, and ROG annually. The statement must contain a 
certification by a responsible official of the company that the 
information contained in the statement is accurate. The statement must 
contain the same information required in CARB's Emission Inventory Turn 
Around Document. The CARB's Emission Inventory Turn Around Document 
complies with the suggested contents of an emission statement found in 
EPA's draft Guidance on the Implementation of an Emission Statement 
Program. In combination with the other requirements, these rules must 
be enforceable (see section 110(a) of the Act) and must not relax 
existing requirements (see sections 110(l) and 193). EPA policy that we 
used to help evaluate enforceability requirements consistently includes 
the Bluebook (``Issues Relating to VOC Regulation Cutpoints, 
Deficiencies, and Deviations,'' EPA, May 25, 1988) and the Little 
Bluebook (``Guidance Document for Correcting Common VOC & Other Rule 
Deficiencies,'' EPA Region 9, August 21, 2001).

B. Do the Rules Meet the Evaluation Criteria?

    We believe these rules are consistent with the relevant policy and 
guidance regarding enforceability and SIP relaxations. The TSDs have 
more information on our evaluation.

C. EPA Recommendations To Further Improve the Rules

    The TSDs recommend that the CARB's most current emission inventory 
document, the ``California Emission Inventory and Development And 
Reporting System II (CEIDARSII),'' be referenced in the rules the next 
time the local agencies modify their 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 June 25, 2004, 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 July 26, 2004. This will incorporate these 
rules into the federally enforceable SIP.

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 (Public Law 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

[[Page 29882]]

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 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 July 26, 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, Particulate matter, Reporting 
and recordkeeping requirements, Sulfur oxides.

    Dated: May 3, 2004.
Wayne Nastri,
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)(190)(i)(C) to (G) 
and (c)(194)(i)(I) and (J) to read as follows:


Sec.  52.220  Identification of plan.

* * * * *
    (c) * * *
    (190) * * *
    (i) * * *
    (C) El Dorado County Air Pollution Control District.
    (1) Rule 1000 adopted on September 21, 1992.
    (D) Feather River Air Pollution Control District.
    (1) Rule 4.8 adopted on September 14, 1992.
    (E) Kern County Air Pollution Control District.
    (1) Rule 108.2 adopted on July 13, 1992.
    (F) San Bernardino County Air Pollution Control District (now 
Mojave Desert Air Quality Management District).
    (1) Rule 107 adopted on September 14, 1992.
    (G) Santa Barbara County Air Pollution Control District.
    (1) Rule 212 adopted on October 20, 1992.
* * * * *
    (194) * * *
    (i) * * *
    (I) Sacramento Metropolitan Air Quality Management District.
    (1) Rule 105 adopted on April 20, 1993.
    (J) Yolo-Solano Air Quality Management District.
    (1) Rule 3.18 adopted on July 28, 1993.
* * * * *
[FR Doc. 04-11769 Filed 5-25-04; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P