E6-22420. Revisions to the California State Implementation Plan, Imperial 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 Imperial County Air Pollution Control District (ICAPCD) portion of the California State Implementation Plan (SIP). These revisions concern the permitting of air pollution sources. We are approving local rules under authority of the Clean Air Act as amended in 1990 (CAA or the Act).

DATES:

This rule is effective on March 5, 2007 without further notice, unless EPA receives adverse comments by February 2, 2007. If we receive such comment, we will publish a timely withdrawal in the Federal Register to notify the public that this rule will not take effect.

ADDRESSES:

Submit comments, identified by docket number EPA-R09-OAR-2005-CA-0011, by one of the following methods:

• Federal eRulemaking Portal: www.regulations.gov. Follow the on-line instructions.
• E-mail: [e-mail].
• Mail or deliver: Gerardo Rios (Air-3), U.S. Environmental Protection Agency Region IX, 75 Hawthorne Street, San Francisco, CA 94105.

Instructions: All comments will be included in the public docket without change and may be made available online at www.regulations.gov, including any personal information provided, unless the comment includes Confidential Business Information (CBI) or other information whose disclosure is restricted by statute. Information that you consider CBI or otherwise protected should be clearly identified as such and should not be submitted through www.regulations.gov or e-mail. www.regulations.gov is an “anonymous access” system, and EPA will not know your identity or contact information unless you provide it in the body of your comment. If you send e-mail directly to EPA, your e-mail address will be automatically captured and included as part of the public comment. If EPA cannot read your comment due to technical difficulties and cannot contact you for clarification, EPA may not be able to consider your comment.

Docket: The index to the docket for this action is available electronically at www.regulations.gov and in hard copy at EPA Region IX, 75 Hawthorne Street, San Francisco, California. While all documents in the docket are listed in the index, some information may be publicly available only at the hard copy location (e.g., copyrighted material), and some may not be publicly available in either location (e.g., CBI). To inspect the hard copy materials, please schedule an appointment during normal business hours with the contact FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section below.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Manny Aquitania, Permits Office (AIR-3), U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Region IX, [phone], [e-mail].

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Throughout this document, “we,” “us” and “our” refer to EPA.

Table of Contents

I. The State's Submittal

A. What rules did the State submit?

B. Are there other versions of these rules?

C. What is the purpose of the submitted rules or rule revisions?

II. EPA's Evaluation and Action

A. How is EPA evaluating the rules?

B. Do the rules meet the evaluation criteria?

C. EPA recommendations to further improve the rules

D. Proposed action and public comment

III. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews

I. The State's Submittal

A. What rules did the State submit?

Table 1 lists the rules we are approving with the dates that they were adopted by the local air agency and submitted by the California Air Resources Board.

Table 1.—Submitted Rules

Local Agency	Rule No.	Rule title	Revised	Submitted
ICAPCD	201	Permits Required	09/14/99	05/26/00
ICAPCD	203	Transfer	09/14/99	05/26/00
ICAPCD	205	Cancellation of Applications	09/14/99	05/26/00
ICAPCD	206	Processing of Applications	09/14/99	05/26/00
ICAPCD	208	Permit to Operate	09/14/99	05/26/00

On October 6, 2000 these rule submittals were found to meet the completeness criteria in 40 CFR part 51, appendix V, which must be met before formal EPA review.

B. Are there other versions of these rules?

We approved a version of Rule 201 into the SIP on January 27, 1981 (46 FR 8472). We approved a version of Rules 203 and 205 into the SIP on February 3, 1989 (54 FR 5448). We approved a version of Rule 208 into the SIP on November 10, 1980 (45 FR 74480). There is no version of Rule 206 in the SIP.

C. What is the purpose of the submitted rules or rule revisions?

These rules describe administrative provisions and definitions that support emission controls found in other local agency requirements. In combination with the other requirements, these rules must be enforceable (see section 110(a) of the CAA) and must not relax existing requirements (see sections 110(l) and 193).

The purposes of the new rule are as follows:

• Rule 206 provides extensive guidelines for the Air Pollution Control Officer to process an application for a permit; specifies required standards for actions on applications; and defines ministerial permits and discretionary permits.

The purposes of rule revisions relative to the SIP rule are as follows:

• Rule 201 adds the requirement for an Authority to Construct (ATC) in addition to a Permit to Operate (PTO); clarifies that the types of permits regulated by Rules 420, 421, and 701 are not part of Rule 201; and specifies requirements for posting of a permit.
• Rule 203 is reformatted.
• Rule 205 adds a reference to the (California) Health and Safety Code.
• Rule 208 moves to Rule 207 the standards for a Permit to Operate, including offset requirements; adds a requirement for the APCO to inspect the facility to determine compliance; adds a provision for existing facilities without an ATC to obtain a PTO; and adds a provision to permit certain movable equipment where no construction is required.

The TSD has more information about these rules.

II. EPA's Evaluation and Action

A. How is EPA evaluating the rules?

These rules describe administrative requirements and definitions that support emission controls found in other local agency requirements. In combination with the other requirements, these rules must be enforceable (see section 110(a) of the CAA) and must not relax existing requirements (see sections 110(l) and 193).

Guidance and policy documents that we used to help evaluate enforceability requirements consistently include the following:

• Review of New Sources and Modifications, U.S. EPA, 40 CFR part 51, subpart I, sections 161-165.
• Issues Relating to VOC Regulation Cutpoints, Deficiencies, and Deviations, EPA (May 25, 1988). (The Blue Book)
• Guidance Document for Correcting Common VOC & Other Rule Deficiencies, EPA Region 9, (August 21, 2001). (The Little Bluebook)

B. Do the rules meet the evaluation criteria?

We believe these rules are consistent with the relevant policy and guidance regarding enforceability and SIP relaxations. The TSD has more information on our evaluation.

C. EPA recommendations to further improve the rules

The TSD describes additional revisions to Rules 201 and 205 that do not affect EPA's current action but are recommended for the next time the local agency modifies the rule.

D. Public Comment and Final Action

As authorized in section 110(k)(3) of the CAA, EPA is fully approving the submitted ICAPCD Rules 201, 203, 205, 206, and 208 because we believe they fulfill all relevant requirements. We do not think anyone will object to this approval, so we are finalizing it without proposing it in advance. However, in the Proposed Rules section of this Federal Register, we are simultaneously proposing approval of the same submitted rules. If we receive adverse comments by February 2, 2007, we will publish a timely withdrawal in the Federal Register to notify the public that the direct final approval will not take effect and we will address the comments in a subsequent final action based on the proposal. If we do not receive timely adverse comments, the direct final approval will be effective without further notice on March 5, 2007. This will incorporate these rules into the federally enforceable SIP.

Please note that if EPA receives adverse comment on an amendment, paragraph, or section of this direct final rule and if that provision may be severed from the remainder of the rule, EPA may adopt as final those provisions of the rule that are not the subject of an adverse comment.

III. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews

Under Executive Order 12866 (58 FR 51735, October 4, 1993), this action is not a “significant regulatory action” and therefore is not subject to review by the Office of Management and Budget. For this reason, this action is also not subject to Executive Order 13211, “Actions Concerning Regulations That Significantly Affect Energy Supply, Distribution, or Use” (66 FR 28355, May 22, 2001). This action merely approves state law as meeting Federal requirements and imposes no additional requirements beyond those imposed by state law. Accordingly, the Administrator certifies that this rule will not have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities under the Regulatory Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 601 et seq.). Because this rule approves pre-existing requirements under state law and does not impose any additional enforceable duty beyond that required by state law, it does not contain any unfunded mandate or significantly or uniquely affect small governments, as described in the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995 (Pub. L. 104-4).

This rule also does not have tribal implications because it will not have a substantial direct effect on one or more Indian tribes, on the relationship between the Federal Government and Indian tribes, or on the distribution of power and responsibilities between the Federal Government and Indian tribes, as specified by Executive Order 13175 (65 FR 67249, November 9, 2000). This action also does not have Federalism implications because it does not have substantial direct effects on the States, on the relationship between the national government and the States, or on the distribution of power and responsibilities among the various levels of government, as specified in Executive Order 13132 (64 FR 43255, August 10, 1999). This action merely approves a state rule implementing a Federal standard, and does not alter the relationship or the distribution of power and responsibilities established in the Clean Air Act. This rule also is not subject to Executive Order 13045 “Protection of Children from Environmental Health Risks and Safety Risks” (62 FR 19885, April 23, 1997), because it is not economically significant.

In reviewing SIP submissions, EPA's role is to approve state choices, provided that they meet the criteria of the Clean Air Act. In this context, in the absence of a prior existing requirement for the State to use voluntary consensus standards (VCS), EPA has no authority to disapprove a SIP submission for failure to use VCS. It would thus be inconsistent with applicable law for EPA, when it reviews a SIP submission, to use VCS in place of a SIP submission that otherwise satisfies the provisions of the Clean Air Act. Thus, the requirements of section 12(d) of the National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act of 1995 (15 U.S.C. 272 note) do not apply. This rule does not impose an information collection burden under the provisions of the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.).

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. A major rule cannot take effect until 60 days after it is published in the Federal Register. This action is not a “major rule” as defined by 5 U.S.C. 804(2).

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 5, 2007. 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
• Incorporation by reference
• Intergovernmental relations
• Reporting and recordkeeping requirements

Dated: November 30, 2006.

Wayne Nastri,

Regional Administrator, Region IX.

Part 52, Chapter I, Title 40 of the Code of Federal Regulation 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)(279)(i)(A)( 12), (13), and (14) to read as follows:

§ 52.220

Identification of plan.

* * * * *

(c) * * *

(279) * * *

(i) * * *

(A) * * *

(12) Rule 201, adopted prior to October 15, 1979 and revised on September 14, 1999.

(13) Rule 208, adopted March 17, 1980 and revised on September 14, 1999.

(14) Rules 203, 205, and 206, adopted on November 19, 1985 and revised on September 14, 1999.

* * * * *