Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).
Direct final rule.
EPA is taking direct final action to approve revisions to the Ventura County Air Pollution Control District portion of the California State Implementation Plan (SIP). These revisions concern volatile organic compound (VOC) emissions from the following source categories: metal parts and products coating, aerospace assembly and component manufacturing, motor vehicle and mobile equipment coating, graphic arts, marine coatings, and wood products coatings. We are approving local rules that regulate these emission sources under the Clean Air Act as amended in 1990 (CAA or the Act).
This rule is effective on June 18, 2001 without further notice, unless EPA receives adverse comments by May 21, 2001. 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.
Mail comments to Andy Steckel, Rulemaking Office Chief (AIR-4), U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Region IX, 75 Hawthorne Street, San Francisco, CA 94105-3901.
You can inspect copies of the submitted SIP revisions and EPA's technical support documents (TSDs) at our Region IX office during normal business hours. You may also see copies of the submitted SIP revisions at the following locations:
Environmental Protection Agency, Air Docket (6102), Ariel Rios Building, 1200 Pennsylvania Avenue, NW, Washington D.C. 20460;
California Air Resources Board, Stationary Source Division, Rule Evaluation Section, 1001 “I” Street, Sacramento, CA 95814; and,
Ventura County Air Pollution Control District, 669 County Square Drive, Ventura, CA 93003.Start Further Info
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Jerald S. Wamsley, Rulemaking Office (AIR-4), U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Region IX, (415) 744-1226.End Further Info End Preamble Start Supplemental Information
Throughout this document, “we,” “us” and “our” refer to EPA.Start Printed Page 20087
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 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. Public comment and final action.
III. Background information.
A. Why were these rules submitted?
IV. Administrative Requirements
I. The State's Submittal
A. What Rules Did the State Submit?
Table 1 lists the rules we are approving with the date that they were adopted by the Ventura County Air Pollution Control District (VCAPCD) and submitted by the California Air Resources Board (CARB).
|Local agnecy||Rule No.||Rule title||Adopted||Submitted|
|VCAPCD||74.12||Surface Coating of Metal Parts & Products||9/10/96||3/3/97|
|74.13||Aerospace Assembly & Component Manufacturing||9/10/96||3/3/97|
|74.18||Motor Vehicle and Mobile Equipment Coating||9/10/96||3/3/97|
|74.30||Wood Products Coatings||9/10/96||3/3/97|
On August 12, 1997, EPA found that these rule submittals met the completeness criteria in 40 CFR Part 51 Appendix V. These criteria must be met before formal EPA review begins.
B. Are There Other Versions of These Rules?
There are previous versions of these rules within the SIP. Since their incorporation within the SIP, CARB has not submitted amended versions of these rules prior to this current submittal.
C. What Is the Purpose of the Rule Revisions?
VCAPCD made the following revisions to the above listed rules:
—vapor pressure calculations, low usage exemptions, and spray gun washing requirements were standardized;
—definitions, requirements, and test methods concerning spray gun cleaning were standardized;
—a daily recordkeeping requirement for noncompliant coating, solvent, ink, or adhesive use was added;
—Rules 74.12, 74.13, 74.20, 74.24, and 74.30 were revised to exempt coating operations emitting less than 200 pounds of reactive organic compound per rolling 12 month period; and,
—clean-up solvent limits were added to Rules 74.12, 74.18, and 74.24.
The Technical Support Document (TSD) reviewing each rule provides a more detailed discussion of the amendments to these rules.
II. EPA's Evaluation and Action
A. How Is EPA Evaluating the Rules?
Generally, SIP rules must be enforceable (see section 110(a) of the Act), must require Reasonably Available Control Technology (RACT) for major sources in nonattainment areas (see section 182(a)(2)(A)), and must not relax existing requirements (see sections 110(l) and 193). The VCAPCD regulates an ozone nonattainment area (see 40 CFR part 81), so Rules 74.12, 74.13, 74.18, 74.24, and 74.30 must fulfill RACT.
Guidance and policy documents that we used to define specific enforceability and RACT requirements include the following:
—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 published in the May 25, 1988 Federal Register.
—“Control of Volatile Organic Emissions from Existing Stationary Sources Volume VI: Surface Coating of Miscellaneous Metal Parts and Products,” USEPA, June 1978, EPA-450/2-78-015.
—“Control of Volatile Organic Compound Emissions from Coating Operations at Aerospace Manufacturing and Rework Operations,” EPA-453/R-97-004.
—“National Volatile Organic Compound Emission Standards for Automobile Refinish Coatings,” at 40 CFR (Code of Federal Regulations) Part 59, Subpart B.
—“Control Techniques Guidelines (CTG) for Shipbuilding and Ship Repair Operations (Surface Coating), USEPA, 61 Federal Register 44050-44057, August 27, 1996.
—“Guideline Series: Control of Volatile Organic Compound Emissions from Wood Furniture Manufacturing Operations,” USEPA, April, 1996.
B. Do the Rules Meet the Evaluation Criteria?
We believe these rules are consistent with the relevant policy and guidance regarding enforceability, RACT, and SIP relaxations. Please see the relevant TSD reviewing a given rule for more detailed information concerning our evaluation.
C. EPA Recommendations To Further Improve the Rules
Each TSD describes additional rule revisions that do not affect EPA's current action but are recommended for the next time the local agency modifies the rules. The most common correction needed is to incorporate the most recent EPA guidance and methodologies for determining VOC capture and control efficiency.
D. Public Comment and Final Action
As authorized in section 110(k)(3) of the Act, EPA is fully approving the submitted rules 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 May 21, 2001, 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 June 18, 2001. This will incorporate these rules into the federally enforceable SIP. Start Printed Page 20088
III. Background Information
A. Why Were These Rules Submitted?
VOCs help produce ground-level ozone and smog, which harm human health and the environment. Section 110(a) of the CAA requires states to submit regulations that control VOC emissions. Table 2 lists some of the national milestones leading to the submittal of these local agency VOC rules.
|March 3, 1978||EPA promulgated a list of ozone nonattainment areas under the Clean Air Act as amended in 1977. 43 FR 8964; 40 CFR 81.305.|
|May 26, 1988||EPA notified Governors that parts of their SIPs were inadequate to attain and maintain the ozone standard and requested that they correct the deficiencies (EPA's SIP-Call). See section 110(a)(2)(H) of the pre-amended Act.|
|November 15, 1990||Clean Air Act Amendments of 1990 were enacted. Pub. L. 101-549, 104 Stat. 2399, codified at 42 U.S.C. 7401-7671q.|
|May 15, 1991||Section 182(a)(2)(A) requires that ozone nonattainment areas correct deficient RACT rules by this date.|
IV. Administrative Requirements:
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. 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 (Public Law 104-4). This rule also does 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), nor will it 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), because it 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 (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. As required by section 3 of Executive Order 12988 (61 FR 4729, February 7, 1996), in issuing this rule, EPA has taken the necessary steps to eliminate drafting errors and ambiguity, minimize potential litigation, and provide a clear legal standard for affected conduct. EPA has complied with Executive Order 12630 (53 FR 8859, March 15, 1988) by examining the takings implications of the rule in accordance with the “Attorney General's Supplemental Guidelines for the Evaluation of Risk and Avoidance of Unanticipated Takings” issued under the executive order. 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. section 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. section 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 June 18, 2001. 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).)Start List of Subjects Start Printed Page 20089
List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52
- Environmental protection
- Air pollution control
- Incorporation by reference
- Intergovernmental relations
- Reporting and recordkeeping requirements
- Volatile organic compounds
Dated: March 19, 2001.
Acting Regional Administrator, Region IX.
Part 52, Chapter I, Title 40 of the Code of Federal Regulations is amended as follows:End Amendment Part Start Part
PART 52—[AMENDED]End Part Start Amendment Part
1. The authority citation for Part 52 continues to read as follows:End Amendment Part
Subpart F—CaliforniaStart Amendment Part
2. Section 52.220 is amended by adding paragraph (c)(244) (i)(G) to read as follows:End Amendment Part
(c) * * *
(244) * * *
(i) * * *
(G) Ventura County Air Pollution Control District.
(1) Rules 74.12, 74.13, 74.18, 74.19, 74.24, and 74.30, amended on September 10, 1996.
[FR Doc. 01-9590 Filed 4-18-01; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-U