[Federal Register Volume 64, Number 109 (Tuesday, June 8, 1999)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 30396-30398]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 99-14222]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
40 CFR Part 52
[CA 011-0146; FRL-6353-1]
Approval and Promulgation of Implementation Plans; California
State Implementation Plan Revision, South Coast Air Quality Management
District, San Joaquin Valley Unified Air Pollution Control District,
Siskiyou County Air Pollution Control District, and Bay Area Air
Quality Management District
AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).
ACTION: Final rule.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: EPA is finalizing limited approvals of revisions to the
California State Implementation Plan (SIP) proposed in the Federal
Register on March 18, 1999. This final action will incorporate these
rules into the federally approved SIP. The intended effect of
finalizing this action is to regulate emissions of sulfur dioxide
(SO2) in accordance with the requirements of the Clean Air
Act, as amended in 1990 (CAA or the Act). The rules control the sulfur
content of fuels within the South Coast Air Quality Management District
and the Siskiyou County Air Pollution Control District, emissions of
sulfuric acid mist within the San Joaquin Valley Unified Air Pollution
Control District and emissions of sulfur dioxide in the Bay Area Air
Quality Management District. Thus, EPA is finalizing a limited approval
under CAA provisions regarding EPA action on SIP submittals and general
rulemaking authority because these revisions, while strengthening the
SIP, also do not fully meet the CAA provisions regarding plan
submissions. There will be no sanctions clock as South Coast Air
Quality Management District, San Joaquin Valley Unified Air Pollution
Control District, Siskiyou County Air Pollution Control District, and
Bay Area Air Quality Management District are in attainment for
SO2.
EFFECTIVE DATE: This action is effective on July 8, 1999.
ADDRESSES: Copies of the rule revisions and EPA's evaluation report for
each rule are 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 95814
Bay Area Air Quality Management District, 939 Ellis Street, San
Francisco, CA 94109-7714.
San Joaquin Valley Unified Air Pollution Control District, 1990 E.
Gettysburg Ave., Fresno, CA 93726.
Siskiyou County Air Pollution Control District, 525 South Foothill Dr.,
Yreka, CA 96097
South Coast Air Quality Management District, 21865 E. Copley Dr.,
Diamond Bar, CA 91765-4182.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Stanley Tong, Rulemaking Office, (AIR-
4), Air Division, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Region IX, 75
Hawthorne Street, San Francisco, CA 94105, Telephone: (415) 744-1191.
[[Page 30397]]
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
I. Applicability
The rules being approved into the California SIP include: South
Coast Air Quality Management District (SCAQMD) Rule 431.2, Sulfur
Content of Liquid Fuels, San Joaquin Valley Unified Air Pollution
Control District (SJVUAPCD) Rule 4802, Sulfuric Acid Mist, Siskiyou
County Air Pollution Control District (SCAPCD) Rule 4.14, Sulfur
Content of Fuels and Bay Area Air Quality Management District (BAAQMD)
Regulation 9 Rule 1, Sulfur Dioxide. SCAQMD Rule 431.2 and SCAPCD Rule
4.14 were submitted by the California Air Resources Board (CARB) to EPA
on December 31, 1990, BAAQMD Regulation 9 Rule 1 was submitted by CARB
to EPA on September 14, 1992, and SJVUAPCD Rule 4802 was submitted by
CARB to EPA on November 18, 1993.
II. Background
On March 18, 1999 in 64 FR 13379, EPA proposed granting limited
approval of the following rules into the California SIP: SCAQMD Rule
431.2, SJVUAPCD Rule 4802, SCAPCD Rule 4.14, and BAAQMD Regulation 9
Rule 1. SCAQMD Rule 431.2 was adopted by SCAQMD on May 4, 1990 and
SCAPCD Rule 4.14 was adopted by SCAPCD on July 11, 1989. These rules
were submitted by the CARB to EPA on December 31, 1990. SJVUAPCD Rule
4802 was adopted by SJVUAPCD on December 17, 1992 and was submitted by
the CARB to EPA on November 18, 1993. BAAQMD Regulation 9 Rule 1 was
adopted on May 20, 1992 and was submitted by the CARB to EPA on
September 14, 1992. A detailed discussion of the proposed action for
each of the above rules is provided in the proposed rule 1
(PR).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ The proposed rule was published on March 18, 1999 in 64 FR
13379.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
EPA has evaluated all of the above rules for consistency with the
requirements of the CAA and EPA regulations and EPA's interpretation of
these requirements as expressed in the various EPA policy guidance
documents referenced in the PR. EPA is finalizing the limited approval
of these rules in order to strengthen the SIP. The PR identified the
following rule deficiencies which should be corrected.
SCAQMD's Rule 431.2 should be corrected to remove Executive Officer
discretion in approving alternate test methods. EPA also recommends
that a reference to a CARB specification for motor vehicle diesel fuel
be updated.
SJVUAPCD's Rule 4802 should be corrected to incorporate
recordkeeping requirements. EPA also recommends correction of a
typographical error found in the rule.
SCAPCD's Rule 4.14 should be corrected to incorporate recordkeeping
requirements and test methods to determine compliance.
BAAQMD's Regulation 9 Rule 1 should be corrected to incorporate
recordkeeping requirements, update the ground level sulfur dioxide
limits and to update a cited test method which has been deleted.
SCAQMD, SJVUAPCD and SCAPCD should also include information on the
length of time records are to be retained. A detailed discussion of the
rule provisions and evaluations has been provided in the PR and in
technical support documents (TSDs) available at EPA's Region IX office
(TSD dated 2/12/99 for SCAQMD Rule 431.2 and TSD dated 2/19/99 for
SJVUAPCD Rule 4802, SCAPCD Rule 4.14 and BAAQMD Regulation 9 Rule 1.)
III. Response to Public Comments
A 30-day public comment period was provided in 64 FR 13379. EPA
received one comment letter on the PR from the South Coast Air Quality
Management District. The comment has been evaluated by EPA and EPA's
response is set forth below.
Comment: SCAQMD indicated that staff will address EPA's comments
and consider the suggestions for strengthening the rule.
Response: EPA will work with SCAQMD in response to EPA's comments.
IV. EPA Action
EPA is finalizing a limited approval of the above-referenced rules.
The limited approval of these rules is being finalized under section
110(k)(3) in light of EPA's authority pursuant to section 301(a) to
adopt regulations necessary to further air quality by strengthening the
SIP. The approval is limited in the sense that the rules strengthen the
SIP. However, the rules do not meet the section 182(a)(2)(A) CAA
requirement because of the rule deficiencies which were discussed in
the PR. Thus, in order to strengthen the SIP, EPA is granting limited
approval of these rules under sections 110(k)(3) and 301(a) of the CAA.
This action approves the rules into the SIP as federally enforceable
rules.
As stated in the proposed rule, there is no sanctions clock as
SCAQMD, SJVUAPCD, SCAPCD, and BAAQMD are in attainment for
SO2. It should be noted that the rules covered by this FR
have been adopted by the SCAQMD, SJVUAPCD, SCAPCD, and BAAQMD and are
currently in effect in those districts. EPA's limited approval action
will not prevent SCAQMD, SJVUAPCD, SCAPCD, BAAQMD or EPA from enforcing
these rules.
V. Administrative Requirements
A. Executive Order 12866
The Office of Management and Budget (OMB) has exempted this
regulatory action from Executive Order (E.O.) 12866, Regulatory
Planning and Review.
B. Executive Order 12875
Under Executive Order 12875, Enhancing the Intergovernmental
Partnership, 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, or
EPA consults with those governments. If EPA complies by consulting,
Executive Order 12875 requires EPA to 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 any written
communications from the governments, and a statement supporting the
need to issue the regulation. In addition, Executive Order 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
[[Page 30398]]
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 Executive Order 13084, Consultation and Coordination with
Indian Tribal Governments, EPA may not issue a regulation that is not
required by statute, that significantly 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, or EPA consults with those
governments. If EPA complies by consulting, Executive Order 13084
requires EPA to 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 officials 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. 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 August 9, 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).)
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.
Laura K. 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 paragraph (c)(182)(i)(A)(5)
and (c)(182)(i)(G), (c)(189)(i)(C)(2), and (c)(194)(i)(C)(3) to read as
follows:
Sec. 52.220 Identification of plan.
* * * * *
(c) * * *
(182) * * *
(i) * * *
(A) * * *
(5) Rule 431.2, amended on May 4, 1990.
* * * * *
(G) Siskiyou County Air Pollution Control District.
(1) Rule 4.14, adopted on July 11, 1989.
* * * * *
(189) * * *
(i) * * *
(C) * * *
(2) Regulation 9 Rule 1, amended on May 20, 1992.
* * * * *
(194) * * *
(i) * * *
(C) * * *
(3) Rule 4802, adopted on May 21, 1992, and amended on December 17,
1992.
* * * * *
[FR Doc. 99-14222 Filed 6-7-99; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P
