[Federal Register Volume 69, Number 220 (Tuesday, November 16, 2004)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 67058-67060]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 04-25300]


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

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

40 CFR Part 52

[CA 309-0468a; FRL-7834-3]


Revisions to the California State Implementation Plan, Imperial 
County 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 
Imperial County Air Pollution Control District (ICAPCD) portion of the 
California State Implementation Plan (SIP). The revisions concern the 
emission of particulate matter (PM-10) and sulfur compounds into the 
atmosphere from industrial processes. We are approving local rules that 
administer regulations and regulate emission sources under the Clean 
Air Act as amended (CAA or the Act).

DATES: This rule is effective on January 18, 2005, without further 
notice, unless EPA receives adverse comments by December 16, 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: Mail or e-mail comments to Andy Steckel, Rulemaking Office 
Chief (AIR-4), U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Region IX, 75 
Hawthorne Street, San Francisco, CA 94105, or e-mail to 
[email protected], or submit comments at http://www.regulations.gov.
    You can inspect copies of the submitted rule revisions and EPA's 
technical support document (TSD) at our Region IX office during normal 
business hours. You may also see copies of the submitted rule revisions 
and TSD at the following locations:

Environmental Protection Agency, Air Docket (6102), Ariel Rios 
Building, 1200 Pennsylvania Avenue, NW., Washington DC 20460.

[[Page 67059]]

California Air Resources Board, Stationary Source Division, Rule 
Evaluation Section, 1001 ``I'' Street, Sacramento, CA 95814.
Imperial County Air Pollution Control District, 150 South 9th Street, 
El Centro, CA 92243.

    A copy of the rules 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 rules 
that were submitted to EPA.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Al Petersen, Rulemaking Office (AIR-
4), U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Region IX, (415) 947-4118 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 Are the Purposes 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. 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 date that they 
were adopted by the local air agency and submitted by the California 
Air Resources Board (CARB).

                                            Table 1.--Submitted Rules
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
               Local agency                 Rule No.             Rule title               Revised     Submitted
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
ICAPCD...................................        403  General Limitations on the           05/18/04     07/19/04
                                                       Discharge of Air Contaminants.
ICAPCD...................................        405  Sulfur Compounds Emissions           05/18/04     07/19/04
                                                       Standards, Limitations and
                                                       Prohibitions.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    On August 10, 2004, the submittal of ICAPCD Rules 403 and 405 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 These Rules?

    We finalized a limited approval/limited disapproval of a previous 
version of ICAPCD Rule 403 on March 24, 2003 (68 FR 14161). We 
finalized a limited approval/limited disapproval of a previous version 
of ICAPCD Rule 405 on February 7, 2002 (67 FR 5727). There were 
sanction implications on our action on Rule 403 but not on Rule 405.

C. What Are the Purposes of the Submitted Rule Revisions?

    PM-10 and sulfur compounds harm human health and the environment. 
Section 110(a) of the CAA requires states to submit regulations that 
control PM-10 and sulfur oxide emissions.
    The purposes of the revisions to Rule 403 are as follows:
     To limit the duration of the exemption from emission 
standards for the startup or shutdown period and when changing 
conditions to bring the process up to operating levels.
     To require periodic demonstrations of compliance with 
source tests of PM-10 emissions.
     To require a 5-year records retention period. The purpose 
of the revisions to Rule 405 are as follows:
     To allow demonstration of compliance with sulfur compound 
emissions by using the supplier's analysis of sulfur content of the 
fuel.
     To require 2-year records retention period, except for a 
5-year retention period for a major source.
     To update the issue date of ASTM test procedures.
    The revisions described above correct the deficiencies cited in the 
previous limited approval/limited disapprovals of Rules 403 and 405.

II. EPA's Evaluation and Action

A. How Is EPA Evaluating the Rules?

    Generally, PM-10 SIP rules must be enforceable (see section 110(a) 
of the Act) and must not relax existing requirements (see sections 
110(1) and 193).
    Sections 172(c)(1) and 189(a) of the CAA require moderate PM-10 
nonattainment areas with significant PM-10 sources to adopt reasonably 
available control measures (RACM), including reasonably available 
control technology (RACT). RACM/RACT is not required for source 
categories that are not significant (de minimis) and do not have major 
sources. See Addendum to the General Preamble for the Implementation of 
Title I of the Clean Air Act Amendments of 1990, 59 FR 41998 (August 
16, 1994). Based on the latest emissions inventory data contained in 
Imperial County PM-10 State Implementation Plan Attainment 
Demonstration, Draft Report (July 2001), Imperial County has at least 
three major PM sources: Santa Fe Pacific Gold Corp (541 tpy), U.S. 
Gypsum (Plaster City) (156 tpy), and American Girl Mine (136 tpy). 
Therefore, we conclude that submitted rule 403 must meet RACM/RACT in 
the absence of a demonstration by the State that these major sources do 
not contribute significantly to PM-10 levels which exceed the PM-10 
NAAQS in the area. We also note that ICAPCD's Draft Report, which 
formed a basis for our 2001 attainment finding, refers to Rule 403 as 
one of the controls that should fulfill RACM/RACT for stationary 
sources in Imperial County (see pages 37-38 of that report).
    The ICAPCD is in attainment for sulfur oxides, therefore there is 
no RACT requirement for Rule 405.
    The following guidance documents were used for reference:
     Requirements for Preparation, Adoption, and Submittal of 
Implementation Plans, U.S. EPA, 40 CFR part 51.
     General Preamble for the Implementation of Title I of the 
Clean Air Act Amendments of 1990, 57 FR 13498, 13540 (April 16, 1992).
     PM-10 Guideline Document (EPA-452/R-93-008).

B. Do the Rules Meet the Evaluation Criteria?

    We believe the rules are consistent with the relevant policy and 
guidance regarding enforceability, SIP relaxations, and fulfilling 
RACM/RACT.
    The TSD has more information on our evaluation.

C. Public Comment and Final Action

    As authorized in section 110(k)(3) of the CAA, EPA is fully 
approving Rules 403 and 405 because we believe they fulfill all 
relevant requirements. We do not think anyone will object to this 
approval, so we are finalizing the approval without proposing it in 
advance. However, in the Proposed Rules section of this Federal 
Register,

[[Page 67060]]

we are simultaneously proposing approval of the same submitted rules. 
If we receive adverse comments by December 16, 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 January 18, 2005. This will 
incorporate these rules into the federally-enforceable SIP and will 
permanently terminate all sanction and FIP implications of our limited 
disapproval of a previous version of Rule 403.
    Please note that if EPA receives adverse comment on an amendment, 
paragraph, or section of this direct final 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. 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 January 18, 2005. 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.

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

    Dated: October 13, 2004.
Keith Takata,
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)(332) to read as 
follows:


Sec.  52.220  Identification of plan.

* * * * *
    (c) * * *
    (332) Amended regulations for the following APCDs were submitted on 
July 19, 2004, by the Governor's designee.
    (i) Incorporation by reference.
    (A) Imperial County Air Pollution Control District.
    (1) Rule 403, adopted on November 19, 1985 and revised on May 18, 
2004 and Rule 405, adopted prior to November 4, 1977 and revised on May 
18, 2004.

[FR Doc. 04-25300 Filed 11-15-04; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P