[Federal Register Volume 64, Number 8 (Wednesday, January 13, 1999)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 2141-2144]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 99-15]
=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
40 CFR Part 52
[CA 211-0116a; FRL-6214-1]
Approval and Promulgation of Implementation Plans; California
State Implementation Plan Revision, Antelope Valley Air Pollution
Control District
AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).
[[Page 2142]]
ACTION: Direct final rule.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: EPA is taking direct final action on revisions to the
California State Implementation Plan. The revisions concern the
recission of three rules for the Antelope Valley Air Pollution Control
District (AVAPCD). The intended effect of this action is to bring the
AVAPCD SIP up to date in accordance with the requirements of the Clean
Air Act, as amended in 1990 (CAA or the Act). EPA is finalizing the
approval of these recissions from 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.
DATES: This rule is effective on March 15, 1999 without further notice,
unless EPA receives adverse comments by February 12, 1999. If EPA
receives such comment, it will publish a timely withdrawal in the
Federal Register informing the public that this rule will not take
effect.
ADDRESSES: Written comments must be submitted to Andrew Steckel, Chief,
Rulemaking Office at the Region IX office listed below. Copies of the
rule revisions and EPA's evaluation report are available for public
inspection at EPA's Region IX office during normal business hours.
Copies of the submitted rule revisions are available for inspection at
the following locations:
Rulemaking Office (AIR-4), Air Division, U.S. Environmental Protection
Agency, Region IX, 75 Hawthorne Street, San Francisco, CA 94105
Environmental Protection Agency, Air Docket (6102), 401 ``M'' Street,
S.W., Washington, D.C. 20460
California Air Resources Board, Stationary Source Division, Rule
Evaluation Section, 2020 ``L'' Street, Sacramento, CA 95812
Antelope Valley Air Pollution Control District, 43301 Division Street,
Suite 206, Lancaster, CA 93539-4409
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Julie A. Rose, Rulemaking Office, AIR-
4, Air Division, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Region IX, 75
Hawthorne Street, San Francisco, CA 94105, Telephone: (415) 744-1184
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
I. Applicability
The rules being approved for recission from the Antelope Valley Air
Pollution Control District (AVAPCD) portion of the California SIP
include: Rule 1106, Marine Coating Operations; Rule 1142, Marine Tank
Vessel Operations; and Rule 1148, Thermally Enhanced Oil Recovery
Wells. These rule recissions were submitted by the California Air
Resources Board to EPA on June 23, 1998.
II. Background
On March 3, 1978, EPA promulgated a list of ozone nonattainment
areas under the provisions of the Clean Air Act, as amended in 1977
(1977 Act or pre-amended Act), that included the Southeast Desert
Modified Air Quality Maintenance Area and the Los Angeles-South Coast
Air Basin Area. 43 FR 8964, 40 CFR 81.305. On May 26, 1988, EPA
notified the Governor of California, pursuant to section 110(a)(2)(H)
of the 1977 Act, that the above district's portion of the California
SIP was inadequate to attain and maintain the ozone standard and
requested that deficiencies in the existing SIP be corrected (EPA's
SIP-Call). On November 15, 1990, the Clean Air Act Amendments of 1990
were enacted. Pub. L. 101-549, 104 Stat. 2399, codified at 42 U.S.C.
7401-7671q. In amended section 182(a)(2)(A) of the CAA, Congress
statutorily adopted the requirement that nonattainment areas fix their
deficient reasonably available control technology (RACT) rules for
ozone and established a deadline of May 15, 1991 for states to submit
corrections of those deficiencies.
Section 182(a)(2)(A) applies to areas designated as nonattainment
prior to enactment of the amendments and classified as marginal or
above as of the date of enactment. It requires such areas to adopt and
correct RACT rules pursuant to pre-amended section 172(b) as
interpreted in pre-amendment guidance.1 EPA's SIP-Call used
that guidance to indicate the necessary corrections for specific
nonattainment areas. The Southeast Desert Modified Air Quality
Maintenance Area is classified as Severe-17, therefore, this area was
subject to the RACT fix-up requirement and the May 15, 1991 deadline.
The Los Angeles-South Coast Air Basin Area is classified as Extreme and
was also subject to the RACT fix-up requirements and the May 15, 1991
deadline.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ Among other things, the pre-amendment guidance consists of
those portions of the proposed Post-1987 ozone and carbon monoxide
policy that concern RACT, 52 FR 45044 (November 24, 1987); ``Issues
Relating to VOC Regulation Cutpoints, Deficiencies, and Deviations,
Clarification to Appendix D of November 24, 1987 Federal Register
Notice'' (Blue Book) (notice of availability was published in the
Federal Register on May 25, 1988); and the existing control
technique guidelines (CTGs).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The Antelope Valley Air Pollution Control District (AVAPCD) was
created pursuant to California Health and Safety Code (CHSC) section
40106 and assumed all air pollution control responsibilities of the
South Coast Air Quality Management District (SCAQMD) in the Antelope
Valley region of Los Angeles County,2 effective July 1,
1997. AVAPCD is the successor agency to SCAQMD in the Antelope Valley
portion of the Southeast Desert Modified Air Quality Maintenance Area.
The AVAPCD remains subject to the RACT requirements. The AVAPCD has
rescinded Rules 1106, 1142, and 1148 and has submitted negative
declarations to certify that there are no sources covered by these
rules within the jurisdiction of the AVAPCD.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\2\ The Antelope Valley region of Los Angeles County is
contained within the Federal area known as the Southeast Desert
Modified Air Quality Management Area and the region identified by
the State of California as the Mojave Desert Air Basin.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The State of California submitted these rule recissions for
incorporation into its SIP on June 23, 1998. This document addresses
EPA's direct-final action for the recission of AVAPCD Rule 1106, Marine
Coating Operations; Rule 1142, Marine Tank Vessel Operations; and Rule
1148, Thermally Enhanced Oil Recovery Wells. AVAPCD adopted these rule
recissions on January 20, 1998. These submitted rule recissions were
found to be complete on August 25, 1998 pursuant to EPA's completeness
criteria that are set forth in 40 CFR part 51 Appendix V 3
and is being finalized for approval into the SIP.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\3\ EPA adopted the completeness criteria on February 16, 1990
(55 FR 5830) and, pursuant to section 110(k)(1)(A) of the CAA,
revised the criteria on August 26, 1991 (56 FR 42216).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Rules 1106 and 1142 establish limits on volatile organic compound
(VOC) emissions produced by marine coating operations and marine tank
vessel operations, respectively. Rule 1148 establishes limits on VOC
emissions produced by thermally enhanced oil recovery wells. These
rules were originally adopted as part of SCAQMD's effort to achieve the
National Ambient Air Quality Standard (NAAQS) for ozone and in response
to EPA's SIP-Call and the section 182(a)(2)(A) CAA requirement. The
following is EPA's evaluation and final action for these rule
recissions.
III. EPA Evaluation and Action
EPA has evaluated all the appropriate background and submittal
documentation and has determined that the recission of Rules 1106,
1142, and 1148 is approvable. The AVAPCD has certified with Negative
Declarations that the sources regulated by these rules are not present
in the AVAPCD. Further, the
[[Page 2143]]
AVAPCD also stated that they do not anticipate these types of sources
in the future.
The rule recissions are consistent with the CAA, EPA regulations,
and EPA policy. Therefore, the recission of AVAPCD Rule 1106, Marine
Coating Operations; Rule 1142, Marine Tank Vessel Operations; and Rule
1148, Thermally Enhanced Oil Recovery Wells is being approved under
section 110(k)(3) of the CAA as meeting the requirements of section
110(a) and part D.
EPA is publishing this rule without prior proposal because the
Agency views this as a noncontroversial amendment and anticipates no
adverse comments. However, in the proposed rules section of this
Federal Register publication, EPA is publishing a separate document
that will serve as the proposal to approve the SIP revision should
adverse comments be filed. This rule will be effective March 15, 1999
without further notice unless the Agency receives adverse comments by
February 12, 1999.
If the EPA receives such comments, then EPA will publish a timely
withdrawal in the Federal Register informing the public that the rule
will not take effect. All public comments received will then be
addressed in a subsequent final rule based on the proposed rule. The
EPA will not institute a second comment period on this rule. Any
parties interested in commenting on this rule should do so at this
time. If no such comments are received, the public is advised that this
rule will be effective on March 15, 1999 and no further action will be
taken on the proposed rule.
IV. Administrative Requirements
A. Executive Order 12866
The Office of Management and Budget (OMB) has exempted this
regulatory action from Executive Order (E.O.) 12866, entitled
``Regulatory Planning and Review.''
B. Executive Order 12875
Under E.O. 12875, EPA may not issue a regulation that is not
required by statute and that creates a mandate upon a state, local, or
tribal government, unless the Federal government provides the funds
necessary to pay the direct compliance costs incurred by those
governments. If the mandate is unfunded, EPA must provide to the Office
of Management and Budget a description of the extent of EPA's prior
consultation with representatives of affected state, local, and tribal
governments, the nature of their concerns, copies of written
communications from the governments, and a statement supporting the
need to issue the regulation. In addition, E.O. 12875 requires EPA to
develop an effective process permitting elected officials and other
representatives of state, local, and tribal governments ``to provide
meaningful and timely input in the development of regulatory proposals
containing significant unfunded mandates.''
Today's rule does not create a mandate on state, local or tribal
governments. The rule does not impose any enforceable duties on these
entities. Accordingly, the requirements of section 1(a) of E.O. 12875
do not apply to this rule.
C. Executive Order 13045
Protection of Children from Environmental Health Risks and Safety
Risks (62 FR 19885, April 23, 1997), applies to any rule that: (1) is
determined to be ``economically significant'' as defined under E.O.
12866, and (2) concerns an environmental health or safety risk that EPA
has reason to believe may have a disproportionate effect on children.
If the regulatory action meets both criteria, the Agency must evaluate
the environmental health or safety effects of the planned rule on
children, and explain why the planned regulation is preferable to other
potentially effective and reasonably feasible alternatives considered
by the Agency.
This rule is not subject to E.O. 13045 because it does not involve
decisions intended to mitigate environmental health or safety risks.
D. Executive Order 13084
Under E.O. 13084, EPA may not issue a regulation that is not
required by statute, that significantly affects or uniquely affects the
communities of Indian tribal governments, and that imposes substantial
direct compliance costs on those communities, unless the Federal
government provides the funds necessary to pay the direct compliance
costs incurred by the tribal governments. If the mandate is unfunded,
EPA must provide to the Office of Management and Budget, in a
separately identified section of the preamble to the rule, a
description of the extent of EPA's prior consultation with
representatives of affected tribal governments, a summary of the nature
of their concerns, and a statement supporting the need to issue the
regulation. In addition, Executive Order 13084 requires EPA to develop
an effective process permitting elected and other representatives of
Indian tribal governments ``to provide meaningful and timely input in
the development of regulatory policies on matters that significantly or
uniquely affect their communities.''
Today's rule does not significantly or uniquely affect the
communities of Indian tribal governments. This action does not involve
or impose any requirements that affect Indian Tribes. Accordingly, the
requirements of section 3(b) of E.O. 13084 do not apply to this rule.
E. Regulatory Flexibility Act
The Regulatory Flexibility Act (RFA) generally requires an agency
to conduct a regulatory flexibility analysis of any rule subject to
notice and comment rulemaking requirements unless the agency certifies
that the rule will not have a significant economic impact on a
substantial number of small entities. Small entities include small
businesses, small not-for-profit enterprises, and small governmental
jurisdictions. This final rule will not have a significant impact on a
substantial number of small entities because SIP approvals under
section 110 and subchapter I, part D of the Clean Air Act do not create
any new requirements but simply approve requirements that the State is
already imposing. Therefore, because the Federal SIP approval does not
create any new requirements, I certify that this action will not have a
significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities.
Moreover, due to the nature of the Federal-State relationship under the
Clean Air Act, preparation of flexibility analysis would constitute
Federal inquiry into the economic reasonableness of state action. The
Clean Air Act forbids EPA to base its actions concerning SIPs on such
grounds. Union Electric Co., v. U.S. EPA, 427 U.S. 246, 255-66 (1976);
42 U.S.C. 7410(a)(2).
F. 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
annual costs to State, local, or tribal governments in the aggregate;
or to 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
[[Page 2144]]
may be significantly or uniquely impacted by the rule.
EPA has determined that the approval action promulgated does not
include a Federal mandate that may result in estimated annual 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
requirements. Accordingly, no additional costs to State, local, or
tribal governments, or to the private sector, result from this action.
G. Submission to Congress and the Comptroller General
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. This rule is not a
``major'' rule as defined by 5 U.S.C. 804(2).
H. 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 March 15, 1999. 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, Hydrocarbons,
Incorporation by reference, Intergovernmental relations, Ozone,
Reporting and recordkeeping requirements, Volatile organic compounds.
Note: Incorporation by reference of the State Implementation
Plan for the State of California was approved by the Director of the
Federal Register on July 1, 1982.
Dated: December 17, 1998.
Laura Yoshii,
Acting Regional Administrator, Region IX.
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 et seq.
Subpart F--California
2. Section 52.220 is amended by adding paragraphs (c)(127)(vii)(E),
(187)(i)(C)(3), and (215)(i)(A)(5) to read as follows:
Sec. 52.220 Identification of plan.
* * * * *
(c) * * *
(127) * * *
(vii) * * *
(E) Previously approved on October 19, 1984 and now deleted without
replacement for implementation in the Antelope Valley Air Pollution
Control District Rule 1148.
* * * * *
(187) * * *
(i) * * *
(C) * * *
(3) Previously approved on December 13, 1994 and now deleted
without replacement for implementation in the Antelope Valley Air
Pollution Control District Rule 1142.
* * * * *
(215) * * *
(i) * * *
(A) * * *
(6) Previously approved on July 14, 1995 and now deleted without
replacement for implementation in the Antelope Valley Air Pollution
Control District Rule 1106.
* * * * *
[FR Doc. 99-15 Filed 1-12-99; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P
