[Federal Register Volume 64, Number 26 (Tuesday, February 9, 1999)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 6223-6226]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 99-2793]
=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
40 CFR Part 52
[CA-011-0071; FRL-6229-5]
Approval and Promulgation of Implementation Plans; California
State Implementation Plan Revision; North Coast Unified Air Quality
Management District and Northern Sonoma 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
California State Implementation Plan (SIP). This action is an
administrative change which revises the definitions in North Coast
Unified Air Quality Management District (NCUAQMD) and Northern Sonoma
County Air Pollution Control District (NSCAPCD) Rules 130, Definitions.
The intended effect of approving this action is to incorporate changes
to the definitions for clarity and consistency with revised federal and
state definitions. This approval action will incorporate these
definitions into the Federally approved SIP. Thus, EPA is finalizing
the approval of these revisions 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.
DATES: This rule is effective on April 12, 1999, without further
notice, unless EPA receives relevant adverse comments by March 11,
1999. If EPA receives such comment, then it will publish a timely
withdrawal in the Federal Register informing the public that this rule
will not take effect.
ADDRESSES: Written comments on this action should be addressed to:
Andrew
[[Page 6224]]
Steckel, Rulemaking Office (AIR-4), Air Division, U.S. Environmental
Protection Agency, Region 9, 75 Hawthorne Street, San Francisco, CA
94105-3901. Copies of the rule revisions and EPA's existing SIP
approved rule is available for public inspection at EPA's Region IX
office during normal business hours. Copies of the submitted rule
revisions are also 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, SW, Washington, DC 20460.
California Air Resources Board, Stationary Source Division, Rule
Evaluation Section, 2020 ``L'' Street, Sacramento, CA 95812.
North Coast Unified Air Quality Management District, 2300 Myrtle
Avenue, Eureka, CA 95501.
Northern Sonoma County Air Pollution Control District, 150
Matheson, Healdsburg, CA 95448.
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 94105-3901, Telephone: (415)
744-1189.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
I. Applicability
The rules being approved into the California SIP include: North
Coast Unified Air Quality Management District, Rule 130 and Northern
Sonoma County Air Pollution Control District, Rule 130. These rules
were submitted by the California Air Resources Board to EPA on December
31, 1990 and May 18, 1998 (North Coast Unified) and March 10, 1998
(Northern Sonoma).
II. Background
On March 3, 1978, EPA promulgated a list of nonattainment areas
under the provisions of the Clean Air Act, as amended in 1977 (1977 Act
or pre-amended Act), that listed NCUAQMD and NSCAPCD as attainment or
unclassifiable for all pollutants, see 43 FR 8964, 40 CFR 81.305. In
response to Section 110(a) of the Act and other requirements, the
NCUAQMD and NSCAPCD submitted many rules which EPA approved into the
SIP.
This document addresses EPA's direct-final action for the following
NCUAQMD and NSCAPCD rules: Rule 130, Definitions. These rules were
adopted by NCUAQMD on December 7, 1989 and September 26, 1997 and by
NSCAPCD on July 25, 1995, and submitted by the State of California for
incorporation into its SIP on December 31, 1990 and May 18, 1998 (North
Coast Unified) and on March 10, 1998 (Northern Sonoma). These rules
were found to be complete on February 28, 1991 and July 17, 1998 (North
Coast Unified) and on May 21, 1998 (Northern Sonoma), pursuant to EPA's
completeness criteria that are set forth in 40 CFR part 51, Appendix V
\1\ and are being finalized for approval into the SIP. These rules were
originally adopted as part of NCUAQMD and NSCAPCD's efforts to achieve
and maintain the National Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ 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).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The following are EPA's summary and final action for these rules.
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,
which forms the basis for this action, 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 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).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
EPA previously reviewed many rules from the NCUAQMD and NSCAPCD and
incorporated them into the federally approved SIP pursuant to section
110(k)(3) of the CAA. Those definitions that are being superseded by
today's action are as follows:
North Coast Unified AQMD. Rule 130, Definitions (submitted
11/10/76, 05/23/79, 03/23/81, 03/14/84, 08/14/84, 10/19/84)
Northern Sonoma County APCD. Rule 130, Definitions
(submitted 11/10/76, 10/19/84, 10/16/85)
NCUAQMD Rule 130, Definitions, has been revised to include the
following new definitions: (b1) Baseline/Impact Area, (b2) Baseline
Concentration, (b2) Best Available Control Technology (BACT), (e2)
Episode Alert, (n1) Net Increase In Emissions, (p2) Permit, (p4)
Potential to Emit, (p6) Precursor, (s3) Smelt Dissolving Tank, (s4)
Stacking, and (t2) Toxic Air Contaminants. Administrative and other
minor changes have also been made to some SIP approved definitions for
clarity and consistency with revised federal and state definitions.
NSCAPCD Rule 130, Definitions, has been revised to include the
following new definitions: (b1) Baseline Concentration, (b2) Base Unit,
(b3) Best Available Control Technology (BACT), (e2) Episode Alert, (m1)
Modeling, (n1) Net Increase In Emissions, (p2) Permit, (p4) Potential
to Emit, (p6) Precursor, (p7) Prevention of Significant Deterioration
(PSD) Increment, (s2) Significant, (s3) Small Business, (s4) Smelt
Dissolving Tank, (s5) Stacking, (s9) Steam Generating Unit, and (t2)
Toxic Air Contaminant (TAC). Administrative and other minor changes
have also been made to some SIP approved definitions for clarity and
consistency with revised federal and state definitions.
EPA has evaluated the submitted rules and has determined that they
allow proper implementation of rules previously approved into the SIP,
and do not relax the requirements of those rules. Therefore, NCUAQMD
and NSCAPCD Rules 130, Definitions, are being approved under section
110(k)(3) of the CAA as meeting the requirements of section 110(a) and
part D. Future action by EPA on prohibitory, new source review, or
other NCUAQMD and NSCAPCD rules may require changes to these
definitions. We are not, however, aware of any such necessary change at
this time.
EPA is publishing these rules 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 April
12, 1999 without further notice unless the Agency receives relevant
adverse comments by March 11, 1999.
If the EPA received 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 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
[[Page 6225]]
rule will be effective on April 12, 1999 and no further action will be
taken on the proposed rule.
IV. Administrative Requirements
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 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
[[Page 6226]]
States Court of Appeals for the appropriate circuit by April 12, 1999.
Filing a petition for reconsideration by the Administration 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, Nitrogen
dioxide, Ozone, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements, Volatile
organic compound.
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: January 4, 1999.
Laura Yoshii,
Regional Administrator, EPA 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: 41 U.S.C. 7401 et seq.
2. Section 52.220 is amended by adding paragraphs (c)(254)(i)(B)(1)
and (255)(i)(B)(1).
Sec. 52.220 Identification of plan.
* * * * *
(c) * * *
(254) * * *
(i) * * *
(B) Northern Sonoma County Air Pollution Control District.
(1) Rule amended on July 25, 1995.
* * * * *
(255) * * *
(i) * * *
(B) North Coast Unified Air Quality Management District.
(1) Rule 130 amended September 26, 1997.
* * * * *
[FR Doc. 99-2793 Filed 2-8-99; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-M
