[Federal Register Volume 63, Number 251 (Thursday, December 31, 1998)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 72197-72200]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 98-34698]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
40 CFR Part 52
[CA-207-0088; FRL; 6211-2]
Approval and Promulgation of Implementation Plans; California
State Implementation Plan Revision, Antelope Valley Air Pollution
Control District
AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).
ACTION: Direct final rule.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: EPA is taking direct final action on a revision to the
California State Implementation Plan. This action is an administrative
change that revises three administrative rules in the Antelope Valley
Air Pollution Control District (AVAPCD or District). The intended
effect of approving this action is to federally recognize the newly
established AVAPCD and to notify the public that the AVAPCD has assumed
all air pollution control responsibilities from the South Coast Air
Quality Management District in the Los Angeles County portion of the
Mojave Desert Air Basin effective July 1, 1997.
DATES: This action is effective on March 1, 1999 unless adverse or
critical comments are received by February 1, 1999. If EPA receives
such comments,
[[Page 72198]]
then it will publish a timely withdrawal in the Federal Register
informing the public that this rule will not take effect.
ADDRESSES: 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 95814
Antelope Valley Air Pollution Control District, 315 West Pondera
Street, Suite C, Lancaster, CA 93539-1409
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Cynthia G. Allen, Rulemaking Office
(AIR-4), Air Division, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Region IX,
75 Hawthorne Street, San Francisco, CA 94105, Telephone (415-744-1189).
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
I. Applicability
The rules being approved into the California SIP are: AVAPCD Rule
101, Title, Rule 102, Definition of Terms, and Rule 103, Definition of
Geographical Areas, submitted on March 10, 1998, by the California Air
Resources Board.
II. Background
Portions of the South Coast Air Basin are currently nonattainment
for ozone, particulate matter, and other national ambient air quality
standards (40 CFR 81.305). As a result, the South Coast AQMD has
submitted and EPA has approved many rules to fulfill the requirements
for nonattainment areas described in section 110 and elsewhere in the
Clean Air Act.
The AVAPCD assumed all air pollution control responsibilities from
the South Coast Air Quality Management District (SCAQMD) in the Los
Angeles County portion of the Mojave Desert Air Basin (previously in a
portion of the former Southeast Desert Air Basin) effective July 1,
1997. The AVAPCD adopted the SCAQMD Rulebook on July 1, 1997 when it
assumed the air pollution control responsibilities from SCAQMD in the
Antelope Valley. The amendments reflect Antelope Valley's air quality
designation and classification.
This document addresses EPA's direct-final action for the following
AVAPCD rules: Rule 101, Title; Rule 102, Definition of Terms; and Rule
103, Definition of Geographical Areas. The amendments to Rules 101 and
102 remove references to the SCAQMD and Executive Officer, and provide
certain cross-references in the AVAPCD Rule Book. These rules were
adopted by AVAPCD on August 19, 1997 and September 16, 1997, and
submitted by the State of California for incorporation into its SIP on
March 10, 1998. These rules were found to be complete on May 21, 1998,
pursuant to EPA's completeness criteria that are set forth in 40 CFR
part 51, Appendix V 1 and is being finalized for approval
into the SIP. These rules were originally adopted as part of efforts to
achieve the National Ambient Air Quality Standards (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 rules.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ EPA adopted the completeness criteria on February 16, 1990
(55 FR 5830) and, pursuant to section (110)(k)(1) of the CAA,
revised the criteria on August 26, 1991 (56 FR 42216).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
III. EPA Evaluation and Action
In determining the approvability of a rule, EPA must evaluate the
rule for consistency with the requirements of the CAA and EPA
regulations, as found in section 110 and part D of the CAA and 40 CFR
part 51 (Requirements for Preparation, Adoption, and Submittal of
Implementation Plans). The EPA interpretation of these requirements
appears in various EPA policy guidance documents.2
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\2\ 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 Deviation,
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).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
EPA has previously reviewed many rules from AVAPCD's predecessor
agency, SCAQMD, and incorporated them into the federally approved SIP
for SCAQMD pursuant to section 110(k)(3) of the CAA. The AVAPCD
recognizes that all SIP revisions submitted by its predecessor agency
SCAQMD and approved by the United States Environmental Protection
Agency (USEPA) prior to July 1, 1997, remain in effect and are fully
enforceable in the AVAPCD jurisdiction until USEPA approves SIP
revisions submitted by AVAPCD to supersede them.
In a Resolution dated July 1, 1997, the AVAPCD Board affirms that
the Rules and Regulations of the SCAQMD will be effective in the AVAPCD
until AVAPCD adopts rules and regulations that supercede them.
EPA has evaluated the submitted rules and has determined that they
are consistent with the CAA, EPA regulations, and EPA policy.
Therefore, AVAPCD Rule 101, Title; Rule 102, Definition of Terms; and
Rule 103, Definition of Geographical Areas, are 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
relevant adverse comments be filed. This rule will be effective March
1, 1999 without further notice unless the Agency receives relevant
adverse comments by February 1, 1999.
If the EPA receives such comments, then EPA will publish a document
withdrawing the final rule and 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 the rule. Any parties interested
in commenting on the 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 1, 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
[[Page 72199]]
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 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 1, 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.
[[Page 72200]]
Date: December 4, 1998.
Laura Yoshii,
Acting Regional Administrator, EPA, Region IX.
Part 52, chapter I, title of 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 paragraph (c)(254)(i)(E) to
read as follows:
Sec. 52.220 Identification of plan.
* * * * *
(c) * * *
(254) * * *
(i) * * *
(E) Antelope Valley Air Pollution Control District.
(1) Resolution No. 97-01 dated July 1, 1997.
(2) Rules 101 and 102 amended on August 19, 1997 and Rule 103
amended on September 16, 1997.
* * * * *
[FR Doc. 98-34698 Filed 12-30-98; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P
