[Federal Register Volume 69, Number 198 (Thursday, October 14, 2004)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 60962-60964]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 04-22956]


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

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

40 CFR Part 52

[CA 307-0464a; FRL-7818-6]


Revisions to the California State Implementation Plan, 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 Joaquin Valley Unified Air Pollution Control District (SJVUAPCD) 
portion of the California State Implementation Plan (SIP). These 
revisions concern volatile organic compound (VOC) emissions from glass 
coating operations. We are approving a local rule that regulates these 
emission sources under the Clean Air Act as amended in 1990 (CAA or the 
Act).

DATES: This rule is effective on December 13, 2004, without further 
notice, unless EPA receives adverse comments by November 15, 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 revision, EPA's 
technical support document (TSD), and other materials relevant to this 
action at our Region IX office during normal business hours by 
appointment. You may also see copies of the submitted SIP revision 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.

[[Page 60963]]

California Air Resources Board, Stationary Source Division, Rule 
Evaluation Section, 1001 ``I'' Street, Sacramento, CA 95814.
San Joaquin Valley APCD, 1990 E. Gettysburg, 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: Francisco D[oacute][ntilde]ez, EPA 
Region IX, (415) 972-3956, [email protected].

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Throughout this document, ``we,'' ``us'' and 
``our'' refer to EPA.

Table of Contents

I. The State's Submittal
    A. What rule did the State submit?
    B. Are there other versions of this rule?
    C. What is the purpose of the submitted rule revisions?
II. EPA's Evaluation and Action
    A. How is EPA evaluating the rule?
    B. Does the rule meet the evaluation criteria?
    C. EPA recommendations to further improve the rule
    D. Public comment and final action
III. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews

I. The State's Submittal

A. What Rule Did the State Submit?

    Table 1 lists the rule we are approving with the dates that it was 
adopted by the local air agency and submitted by the California Air 
Resources Board (CARB).

                                                                Table 1.--Submitted Rule
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
               Local agency                   Rule number                            Rule title                               Adopted        Submitted
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
SJVUAPCD..................................            4610  Glass Coating Operations....................................        04/17/03        06/03/04
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    On June 30, 2004, this rule submittal was 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 This Rule?

    We approved a version of Rule 4610 into the SIP on September 16, 
2003 (see 68 FR 54167). The SJVUAPCD adopted revisions to the SIP-
approved version on April 17, 2003 and CARB submitted them to us on 
June 3, 2004.

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. The submitted rule 
revisions delay by six months the implementation date for additional 
VOC emission reductions for mirror backing operations. This delay is to 
allow time for the single mirror coating operation in the district to 
implement a powder coating line to substitute for its previous high-VOC 
coating operation. Powder coat application reduces VOC emissions for 
the coating process from 63 tons per year to essentially zero. The TSD 
has more information about this rule.

II. EPA's Evaluation and Action

A. How Is EPA Evaluating the Rule?

    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(b)(2)), and must 
not relax existing requirements (see sections 110(l) and 193). The San 
Joaquin Valley Unified APCD regulates an ozone nonattainment area (see 
40 CFR part 81), so Rule 4610 must fulfill RACT.
    Guidance and policy documents that we use 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).

B. Does the Rule Meet the Evaluation Criteria?

    We believe this rule is consistent with the relevant policy and 
guidance regarding enforceability, RACT, and SIP relaxations. The 
submitted rule makes a minor revision to the SIP-approved Rule 4610, 
which EPA determined to fulfill RACT. See 68 FR 54167 (September 16, 
2003) and the associated TSD. The submitted rule's emission limits are 
consistent with other California air district rules regulating glass 
coating operations. The rule contains adequate record keeping and test 
methods provisions for monitoring the compliance of regulated 
facilities. The submitted rule grants a six month extension for the 
implementation of additional VOC emission reductions for mirror backing 
operations, but this short compliance delay does not interfere with 
RACT or with relevant attainment or reasonable further progress (RFP) 
requirements. The TSD has more information on our evaluation.

C. EPA Recommendations to Further Improve the Rules

    EPA has no recommended changes for future revisions of Rule 4610.

D. Public Comment and Final Action

    As authorized in section 110(k)(3) of the Act, EPA is fully 
approving the submitted rule because we believe it fulfills 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 rule. If we 
receive adverse comments by November 15, 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 December 13, 2004. This will incorporate this 
rule 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

[[Page 60964]]

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. 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 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: September 10, 2004.
Laura Yoshii,
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 paragraph (c)(331) to read as 
follows:


Sec.  52.220  Identification of plan.

* * * * *
    (c) * * *
    (331) New and amended regulations for the following APCDs were 
submitted on June 3, 2004, by the Governor's designee.
    (i) Incorporation by reference.
    (A) San Joaquin Valley Unified Air Pollution Control District.
    (1) Rule 4610 amended on April 17, 2003.
* * * * *
[FR Doc. 04-22956 Filed 10-13-04; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P