[Federal Register Volume 69, Number 141 (Friday, July 23, 2004)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 43916-43918]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 04-16566]


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

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

40 CFR Part 52

[CA 289-0451a; FRL-7783-9]


Revisions to the California State Implementation Plan, Monterey 
Bay Unified and Santa Barbara County Air Pollution Control Districts

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Direct final rule.

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

SUMMARY: EPA is taking direct final action to approve revisions to the 
Monterey Bay Unified Air Pollution Control District (MBUAPCD) and Santa 
Barbara County Air Pollution Control District (SBCAPCD) portions of the 
California State Implementation Plan (SIP). These revisions concern 
definitions. Under authority of the Clean Air Act as amended in 1990 
(CAA or the Act), we are approving local rules that are administrative 
and address changes for clarity and consistency.

DATES: This rule is effective on September 21, 2004, without further 
notice, unless EPA receives adverse comments by August 23, 2004. 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.
Monterey Bay Unified Air Pollution Control District, 24580 Silver Cloud 
Ct., Monterey, CA 93940-6536.
Santa Barbara County Air Pollution Control District, 260 North San 
Antonio Road, Suite A, Santa Barbara, CA 93110-1315.

    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 Web site and may not contain the same version of the rule that 
was submitted to EPA.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Cynthia G. Allen, EPA Region IX, (415) 
947-4120, [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 rule revisions?
II. EPA's Evaluation and Action
    A. How is EPA evaluating the rules?
    B. Do the rules meet the evaluation criteria?
    C. 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 No.             Rule title              Adopted    Submitted
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
MBUAPCD.....................................        101  Definitions....................    04/16/03    08/11/03
SBCAPCD.....................................        102  Definitions....................    06/19/03    08/11/03
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    On October 10, 2003, these rule submittals 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?

    We approved versions of these rules into the SIP on the dates 
listed: MBUAPCD Rule 101, May 16, 2000 and SBCAPCD Rule 102, October 7, 
1999.

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

    Monterey Rule 101 is amended by adding two new definitions: 
``Emergency Generators and Water Pumps'' and ``Owner/Operator.''
    Santa Barbara Rule 102 is amended by adding a new definition for 
``common operations'' to indicate that the emissions from all marine 
vessels and cargo carriers servicing or associated with a stationary 
source shall be considered emissions from the stationary source while 
operating within the air basin. The amended rule defines the geographic 
area to be California Coastal Waters adjacent to the APCD. This is 
consistent with the approach used by other coastal APCDs.
    The TSD has more information about these rules.

II. EPA's Evaluation and Action

A. How Is EPA Evaluating the Rules?

    These rules describe administrative provisions and definitions that 
support emission controls found in other local agency requirements. 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

[[Page 43917]]

& 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 TSD has more 
information on our evaluation.

C. 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 23, 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 September 21, 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 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 September 21, 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, Nitrogen dioxide, Ozone, 
Reporting and recordkeeping requirements, Volatile organic compounds.

    Dated: June 15, 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)(320)(i)(A)(4) and 
(c)(320)(i)(C) to read as follows:


Sec.  52.220  Identification of plan.

* * * * *
    (c) * * *
    (320) * * *
    (i) * * *
    (A) * * *
    (4) Rule 101, adopted on April 16, 2003.
* * * * *
    (C) Santa Barbara County Air Pollution Control District.

[[Page 43918]]

    (1) Rule 102, adopted on June 19, 2003.
* * * * *
[FR Doc. 04-16566 Filed 7-22-04; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P