[Federal Register Volume 63, Number 162 (Friday, August 21, 1998)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 44792-44794]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 98-22335]
=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
40 CFR Part 52
[CA 126-0082a FRL-6140-6]
Approval and Promulgation of Implementation Plans; California
State Implementation Plan Revision, South Coast Air Quality Management
District, Yolo-Solano Air Quality Management District, and Ventura
County Air Pollution Control District
AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).
ACTION: Direct final rule.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: EPA is taking direct final action on revisions to the
California State Implementation Plan. The revisions concern rules from
the following Districts: South Coast Air Quality Management District
(SCAQMD), Yolo-Solano Air Quality Management District (YSAQMD), and
Ventura County Air Pollution Control District (VCAPCD). This approval
action will incorporate these rules into the federally approved SIP.
The intended effect of approving these rules is to regulate emissions
of volatile organic compounds (VOCs) in accordance with the
requirements of the Clean Air Act, as amended in 1990 (CAA or the Act).
The revised rules control VOCs from screen printing and graphic arts
operations. 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 October 20, 1998 without further
notice, unless EPA receives adverse comments by September 21, 1998. If
EPA received such comments, then it will publish a timely withdrawal in
the Federal Register informing the public that this rule will not take
effect.
ADDRESSES: Comments must be submitted to Andrew Steckel at the Region
IX office listed below. 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 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 92123-1095
South Coast Air Quality Management District, 21865 E. Copley Drive,
Diamond Bar, CA 91765-4182
Yolo-Solano Air Quality Management District, 1947 Galileo Court, Suite
103, Davis, CA 95616.
Ventura County Air Pollution Control District, 669 County Square Drive,
Ventura, CA 93003.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Andrew Steckel, Rulemaking Office,
AIR-4, Air Division, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Region IX,
75 Hawthorne Street, San Francisco, CA 94105, Telephone: (415) 744-
1185.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
I. Applicability
The rules being approved into the California SIP include: SCAQMD
Rule 1130.1, Screen Printing Operations, YSAQMD Rule 2.29, Graphic Arts
Printing Operations, and VCAPCD Rule 74.19.1, Screen Printing
Operations. These rules were submitted by the California Air Resources
Board (CARB) to EPA on March 3, 1997 (1130.1), November 30, 1994
(2.29), and October 18, 1996 (74.19.1).
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 South Coast Air Basin,
the Sacramento Metro Area, and Ventura County. 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
districts' portions of the California SIP were 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 South Coast Air Basin is classified as
extreme, the Sacramento
[[Page 44793]]
Metro Area and Ventura County are classified as severe,2 and
therefore, these areas were subject to the RACT fix-up requirement 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).
\2\ The South Coast Air Basin, the Sacramento Metro Area, and
Ventura County retained their designation of nonattainment and were
classified by operation of law pursuant to sections 107(d) and
181(a) upon the date of enactment of the CAA. On April 25, 1995, EPA
published a final Rule granting the State's request to reclassify
the Sacramento Metro Area to severe from serious. 60 CFR 20237. This
reclassification became effective on June 1, 1995.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The State of California submitted many revised RACT rules for
incorporation into its SIP on March 3, 1997, November 30, 1994, and
October 18, 1996, including the rules being acted on in this document.
This document addresses EPA's direct-final action for SCAQMD Rule
1130.1, Screen Printing Operations, YSAQMD Rule 2.29, Graphic Arts
Printing Operations, and VCAPCD Rule 74.19.1, Screen Printing
Operations. SCAQMD amended Rule 1130.1 on December 13, 1996, YSAQMD
adapted Rule 2.29 on May 25, 1994, and VCAPCD adopted Rule 74.19.1 on
June 11, 1996. These submitted rules were found to be complete on
August 12, 1997 (1130.1), January 30, 1995 (2.29), and December 19,
1996 (74.19.1) pursuant to EPA's completeness criteria that are set
forth in 40 CFR part 51 Appendix V 3 and are 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).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
SCAQMD's Rule 1130.1 and VCAPCD's Rule 74.19.1 regulate emissions
of volatile organic compounds (VOCs) emanating from screen printing
operations, and YSAQMD's Rule 2.29 limits emissions of VOCs from
graphic arts facilities. VOCs contribute to the production of ground
level ozone and smog. These rules were originally adopted as part of
the above districts' efforts 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 rules.
III. EPA Evaluation and Action
In determining the approvability of a VOC 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 today's action, appears in the various EPA
policy guidance documents listed in footnote 1. Among those provisions
is the requirement that a VOC rule must, at a minimum, provide for the
implementation of RACT for stationary sources of VOC emissions. This
requirement was carried forth from the pre-amended Act.
For the purpose of assisting state and local agencies in developing
RACT rules, EPA prepared a series of Control Technique Guideline (CTG)
documents. The CTGs are based on the underlying requirements of the Act
and specify the presumptive norms for what is RACT for specific source
categories. Under the CAA, Congress ratified EPA's use of these
documents, as well as other Agency policy, for requiring States to
``fix-up'' their RACT rules. See section 182(a)(2)(A). The CTG
applicable to YSAQMD Rule 2.29 is entitled, Control of Volatile Organic
Emissions from Existing Stationary Sources--Volume VIII: Graphic Arts--
Rotogravure and Flexography--EPA-450/2-78-033. SCAQMD Rule 1130.1 and
VCAPCD Rule 74.19.1 cover source categories for which EPA has not
published a CTG. Accordingly, these rules were evaluated for
consistency with the general RACT requirement of the Clean Air Act (CAA
Section 110 and part D). Further interpretations of EPA policy are
found in the Blue Book, referred to in footnote 1. In general, these
guidance documents have been set forth to ensure that VOC rules are
fully enforceable and strengthen or maintain the SIP.
There is currently no version of SCAQMD Rule 1130.1, Screen
Printing Operations in the SIP. The submitted rule includes the
following provisions:
Applicability section including a statement of the rule's
purpose;
Reference to Rule 102 for the exempt compound listing;
Option of using emission control equipment or using
reduced VOC content inks and coatings;
Test methods for VOC contents of coatings and inks;
Test methods for metal contents of inks;
Test methods for determining capture and control
efficiency of an emission control device;
Rule exemptions for firms emitting small quantities of
VOCs.
There is currently no version of YSAQMD's Rule 2.29, Graphic Arts
in the SIP. The submitted rule includes the following provisions:
Statement of applicability;
Exemptions for firms emitting small quantities of VOCs;
Operation specific standards limiting the VOC content of
inks and coatings;
Option of using an emission control system, or reduced VOC
content inks and coatings;
Test methods for determining the VOC content of inks and
coatings;
Test methods for determining the capture and control
efficiency of an emission control system;
Record keeping requirements.
There is currently no version of VCAPCD's Rule 74.19.1, Screen
Printing Operations in the SIP. The submitted rule includes the
following provisions:
Statement of applicability;
Reactive organic compound (ROC) limits for specific end-
use products and substrates;
Option to use an emission control system in lieu of using
low ROC coatings;
Cleaning methods and storage conditions of ROC containing
materials;
Record keeping requirements;
Exemption for firms using small quantities of ROC
containing material;
Test methods for measurement of ROC content of inks,
coatings, adhesives, resists, and solvents;
Test method to determine the metal content of metallic
ink;
Test method to measure capture and control efficiency of
an emission control system.
EPA has evaluated the submitted rules and has determined that they
are consistent with the CAA, EPA regulations, and EPA policy.
Therefore, SCAQMD Rule 1130.1, Screen Printing Operations, YSAQMD Rule
2.29, Graphic Arts Printing Operations, and VCAPCD Rule 74.19.1, Screen
Printing Operations are being approved under section 110(k)(3) of the
CAA as meeting the requirements of section 110(a) and part D.
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.
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 October
[[Page 44794]]
20, 1998 without further notice unless the Agency receives relevant
adverse comments by September 21, 1998.
If the EPA received such comments, then EPA will publish a timely
withdrawal of the direct 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 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 October 20, 1998 and no further action will
be taken on the proposed rule.
IV. Administrative Requirements
A. Executive Orders 12866 and 13045
The Office of Management and Budget (OMB) has exempted this
regulatory action from E.O. 12866 review.
The final rule is not subject to E.O. 13045, entitled ``Protection
of Children from Environmental Health Risks and Safety Risks,'' because
it is not an ``economically significant'' action under E.O. 12866.
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 populations of less than
50,000.
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 impose any new requirements, the
Administrator certifies that it does not have a significant impact on
any small entities affected. Moreover, due to the nature of the
Federal-State relationship under the CAA, preparation of a 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).
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
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 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, result from this
action.
D. Submission to Congress and the General Accounting Office
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).
E. 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 20, 1998. 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: July 28, 1998.
Sally Seymour,
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)(207)(i)(C)(6),(241)(i)(C) and (244)(i)(D), to read as follows:
Sec. 52.220 Identification of plan.
* * * * *
(c) * * *
(207) * * *
(i) * * *
(C) * * *
(6) Rule 2.29, adopted on May 25, 1994.
* * * * *
(241) * * *
(i) * * *
(C) Ventura County Air Pollution Control District.
(1) Rule 74.19.1, adopted on June 11, 1996.
* * * * *
(244) * * *
(i) * * *
(D) South Coast Air Quality Management District.
(1) Rule 1130.1, adopted on August 2, 1991 and amended on December
13, 1996.
* * * * *
[FR Doc. 98-22335 Filed 8-20-98; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P
