[Federal Register Volume 62, Number 199 (Wednesday, October 15, 1997)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 53542-53544]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 97-27265]
[[Page 53542]]
=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
40 CFR Part 52
[CA157-0050a; FRL-5907-7]
Approval and Promulgation of Implementation Plans; California
State Implementation Plan Revision; Santa Barbara County Air Pollution
Control District, California
AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).
ACTION: Direct final rule.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: EPA is taking direct final action to approve Santa Barbara
County Air Pollution Control District's (Santa Barbara or District)
Rule 370 ``Potential to Emit--Limitations for Part 70 Sources''
(prohibitory rule) under Clean Air Act (CAA) sections 110 and 112(l).
This rule creates federally-enforceable limits on potential to emit for
sources with actual emissions less than 50 percent of the major source
thresholds. This approval action will incorporate Rule 370 into the
federally-approved State Implementation Plan (SIP) for California. The
rule was submitted by the State to satisfy certain Federal requirements
for an approvable SIP. EPA is finalizing the approval of this rule into
the California SIP under provisions of the CAA regarding EPA action on
SIP submittals, SIPs for national primary and secondary ambient air
quality standards and plan requirements for nonattainment areas. EPA is
taking this action without prior proposal because the Agency views this
action as a non-controversial amendment and anticipates no adverse
comments.
DATES: This action is effective on December 15, 1997 unless adverse or
critical comments are received by November 14, 1997. If the effective
date is delayed, a timely notice will be published in the Federal
Register.
ADDRESSES: Written comments on this action should be addressed to: John
Walser, Permits Office (AIR-3), Air Division, U.S. Environmental
Protection Agency, Region IX, 75 Hawthorne Street, San Francisco, CA
94105. Copies of the rule and EPA's Technical Support Document for the
rule are available for public inspection at the following locations:
Permits Office (AIR-3), Air Division, U.S. Environmental Protection
Agency, Region IX, 75 Hawthorne Street, 17th Floor, San Francisco, CA
94105
California Air Resources Board, Stationary Source Division, Rule
Evaluation Section, 2020 ``L'' Street, Sacramento, CA 95812
Santa Barbara County Air Pollution Control District, 26 Castilian
Drive, B-23, Goleta, CA 93117.
Copies of the regulations being incorporated by reference in
today's rule are available for inspection at the following location:
Air Docket (6102), U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, 401 M Street,
S.W., Washington, D.C. 20460.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: John Walser (telephone 415/744-1257),
Permits Office (AIR-3), Air Division, U.S. Environmental Protection
Agency, Region IX, 75 Hawthorne Street, San Francisco, CA 94105.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
I. Background
On June 15, 1995, the Santa Barbara County Air Pollution Control
District adopted Rule 370: Potential to Emit--Limitations for Part 70
Sources. The purpose of the rule is to exempt small sources from the
requirements of the federal operating permit program (see 60 FR 55460
dated November 1, 1995).
EPA determines which sources are subject to the federal operating
permit requirements based on their ``potential to emit.'' Under Rule
370, Santa Barbara County sources that would otherwise be required to
obtain a federal permit would be exempt if their ``actual'' 12-month
(rolling average) emissions are less than 50 percent of their
``potential to emit.'' Sources below specified emission levels would
also be exempt. Federal recordkeeping and reporting requirements will
vary for businesses with different operational levels.
On August 10, 1995, the California Air Resources Board (CARB)
submitted to EPA, on behalf of the District, the District's prohibitory
rule (Rule 370), adopted on June 15, 1995. On September 20, 1995, EPA
reviewed this rule for completeness and found that the rule conformed
to the completeness criteria in 40 CFR part 51, Appendix V.
II. EPA Evaluation and Action
The EPA has evaluated the submitted rule and has determined that it
is consistent with 40 CFR part 70 and with section 112(l) of the Act.
The following is a brief analysis of the key regulatory revisions being
acted on in today's notice. (Please refer to the Technical Support
Document for a complete analysis of the submission.)
A. Analysis of Submission
Rule 370 ``Potential to Emit--Limitation for Part 70 Sources''
On August 10, 1995, CARB submitted for approval into Santa
Barbara's portion of the California State Implementation Plan (SIP),
Rule 370 ``Potential to Emit--Limitations for Part 70 Sources.'' This
Rule creates a streamlined process for limiting the potential to emit
of sources that emit less than 50 percent of major source levels but
whose potential to emit is above those levels. Sources complying with
this Rule will have federally-enforceable limits on their potential to
emit and will avoid being subject to Title V.
The basic requirement for approving into the SIP rules to limit
potential to emit is that the limits in the rule are practically
enforceable. For a discussion of general principle of practical
enforceability, see Memorandum from John Seitz to Regional Air
Directors, ``Options for Limiting the Potential to Emit (PTE) of a
Stationary source Under section 112 and Title V of the Clean Air Act
(Act),'' January 25, 1995, found in the docket for this rulemaking.
Rule 370 meets the requirements for practical enforceability for
limiting potential to emit through general prohibitory rules in SIPs.
Please refer to the TSD for further analysis of the Rule.
CARB also submitted Rule 370 for approval under section 112(l) of
the Act. The request for approval under section 112 (l) is necessary
because the proposed SIP approval discussed above only provides a
mechanism for controlling criteria pollutants. EPA has determined that
the practical enforceability criterion for SIPs is also appropriate for
evaluating and approving Rule 370 under section 112(l). In addition,
Rule 370 must meet the statutory criteria under section 112(l)(5). For
a discussion of EPA's authority to approve rules under section 112(l),
see 59 FR 60944 (November 29, 1994).
EPA proposes approval of Rule 370 under section 112(l) because the
Rule meets all of the approval criteria specified in section 112(l)(5)
of the Act. EPA believes Rule 370 contains adequate authority to assure
compliance with section 112 because it does not waive any section 112
requirements applicable to non-major sources. Regarding adequate
resources, Rule 370 is a supporting element of the district's title V
program which has demonstrated adequate funding. Furthermore, EPA
believes that Rule 370 provides for an expeditious schedule for
assuring compliance because it provides a streamlined approval that
allows sources to establish limits on potential to emit and avoid being
subject to a federal Clean Air Act requirement applicable on a
particular date. Finally, Rule 370 is consistent with the objectives of
the section 112 program
[[Page 53543]]
because its purpose is to enable sources to obtain federally
enforceable limits on potential to emit to avoid major source
classification under section 112. The EPA believes this purpose is
consistent with the overall intent of section 112.
Rule 370 is modeled on the California model prohibitory rule
developed by the California Association of Air Pollution Control
Officers, CARB and EPA. In its agreement on the model rule, EPA
expressed certain understandings and caveats. See letter from Lydia
Wegman, Deputy Director, Office of Air Quality Planning and Standards,
U.S. EPA to Peter Venturini, Chief, Stationary Source Division, CARB,
January 11, 1995. A copy of this letter is in the docket for this
rulemaking.
Part 70 Requirements
The definition of ``potential to emit'' in Santa Barbara's Rule 370
is consistent with the definition of ``potential to emit'' as defined
in 40 CFR 70.2 ``Definitions--Potential to Emit.'' The requirements of
Rule 370 do not conflict or overlap with those of Santa Barbara's
interim-approved Part 70 operating permit program.
B. Final Action and Implications
The EPA is publishing this notice without prior proposal because
the Agency views this as a noncontroversial amendment and anticipates
no adverse comments. However, in a separate document in this Federal
Register publication, EPA is also proposing approval of Santa Barbara's
rule revision should adverse or critical comments be filed. The final
action will be effective December 15, 1997, unless, within 30 days of
its publication, adverse or critical comments are received.
If EPA receives such comments, the final action would be withdrawn
before the effective date by publishing a subsequent notice. This
action would then serve as a proposed rule only. All public comments
received after this action would then be addressed in a subsequent
final rule. The EPA will not institute a second comment period on this
action. Any parties interested in commenting on this action should do
so at this time. If no such comments are received, the public is
advised that this action will be effective December 15, 1997.
Rule 370 ``Potential to Emit--Limitations for Part 70 Sources''
EPA is promulgating approval of Rule 370 submitted to EPA by CARB
on August 10, 1995.
Nothing in this action should be construed as permitting or
allowing or establishing a precedent for any future implementation
plan. Each request for revision to the state implementation plan shall
be considered separately in light of specific technical, economic, and
environmental factors and in relation to relevant statutory and
regulatory requirements.
III. Administrative Requirements
A. Docket
Copies of Santa Barbara's submittal and other information relied
upon for the direct final actions are contained in docket number CA-SB-
97-001 maintained at the EPA Regional Office. The docket is an
organized and complete file of all the information submitted to, or
otherwise considered by, EPA in the development of this direct final
rulemaking. The docket is available for public inspection at the
location listed under the ADDRESSES section of this document.
B. Regulatory Flexibility Act
Under the Regulatory Flexibility Act, 5 U.S.C. 600 et seq., EPA
must prepare a regulatory flexibility analysis assessing the impact of
any proposed or final rule on small entities. 5 U.S.C. 603 and 604.
Alternatively, EPA may certify that the rule will not have a
significant impact on a substantial number of small entities. Small
entities include small businesses, small not-for-profit enterprises and
government entities with jurisdiction over population of less than
50,000.
The EPA's actions under section 502 of the Act do not create any
new requirements, but simply address revisions to Santa Barbara's
existing operating permits program that was submitted to satisfy the
requirements of 40 CFR part 70. Because these approval actions do not
impose any new requirements, they do not have a significant impact on
any small entities affected.
C. Unfunded Mandates
Under section 202 of the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995
(``Unfunded Mandates Act''), signed into law on March 22, 1995, EPA
must prepare a budgetary impact statement to accompany any proposed or
final rule that includes a federal mandate that may result in estimated
costs to state, local, or tribal governments in the aggregate; or to
the private sector, of $100 million or more. Under section 205, EPA
must select the most cost-effective and least burdensome alternative
that achieves the objectives of the rule and is consistent with
statutory requirements. Section 203 requires EPA to establish a plan
for informing and advising any small governments that may be
significantly or uniquely impacted by the rule.
EPA has determined that the approval action promulgated today does
not include a federal mandate that may result in estimated costs of
$100 million or more to either state, local, or tribal governments in
the aggregate, or to the private sector. This federal action approves
pre-existing requirements under state or local law, and imposes no new
federal requirements. Accordingly, no additional costs to state, local,
or tribal governments, or to the private sector, are anticipated to
result from this action.
D. Executive Order 12866
The Office of Management and Budget has exempted this action from
review under Executive Order 12866.
E. Submission to Congress and the General Accounting Office
Under 5 U.S.C. 801(a)(1)(A) as added by the Small Business
Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act of 1996, EPA submitted 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
General Accounting Office prior to Publication of the rule in today's
Federal Register. This rule is not a ``major rule'' as defined by 5
U.S.C. 804(2).
F. Petitions for Judicial Review
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 October 18, 1997. 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.
List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52
Environmental protection, Air pollution control, Carbon monoxide,
Hydrocarbons, Incorporation by reference, Intergovernmental relations,
Lead, Nitrogen dioxide, Ozone, Particulate matter, Sulfur oxides,
Volatile organic compounds.
[[Page 53544]]
Dated: September 26, 1997.
Felicia Marcus,
Regional Administrator.
Part 52, chapter I, title 40 of the Code of Federal Regulations is
amended as follows:
PART 52--[AMENDED]
1. The authority citation for part 52 continues to read as follows:
Authority: 42 U.S.C. 7401-7671q.
Subpart F--California
2. Section 52.220 is amended by adding paragraph (c)(224)(i)(E) to
read as follows:
Sec. 52.220 Identification of plan.
* * * * *
(c) * * *
(224) * * *
(i) * * *
(E) Santa Barbara County Air Pollution Control District.
(1) Amended Rule 370 adopted on June 15, 1995.
* * * * *
[FR Doc. 97-27265 Filed 10-14-97; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P
