[Federal Register Volume 64, Number 232 (Friday, December 3, 1999)] [Rules and Regulations] [Pages 67787-67789] From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov] [FR Doc No: 99-31212] [[Page 67787]] ----------------------------------------------------------------------- ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY 40 CFR Part 52 [CA 217-0192; FRL-6480-4] Approval and Promulgation of Implementation Plans; California State Implementation Plan Revision, South Coast Air Quality Management District and Ventura County Air Pollution Control District AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). ACTION: Final rule. ----------------------------------------------------------------------- SUMMARY: EPA is finalizing the approval of revisions to the California State Implementation Plan (SIP) proposed in the Federal Register on September 22, 1999. The revisions concern rules from the following districts: South Coast Air Quality Management District (SCAQMD) and the 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 sulfur dioxide (SO2 ) in accordance with the requirements of the Clean Air Act, as amended in 1990 (CAA or the Act). The revised rules control the sulfur content of fuels. Thus, EPA is finalizing the approval of these revisions into the California SIP under provisions of the CAA regarding EPA action on SIP submittals and SIPs for national primary and secondary ambient air quality standards. EFFECTIVE DATE: This action is effective on January 3, 2000. 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 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, S.W., Washington, D.C. 20460. California Air Resources Board, Stationary Source Division, Rule Evaluation Section, 2020 ``L'' Street, Sacramento, CA 95812. South Coast Air Quality Management District, 21865 E. Copley Dr., Diamond Bar, CA 91765-4182. Ventura County APCD, 669 County Square Dr., 2nd Fl., Ventura, CA 93003- 5417. 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. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: I. Applicability The rules being approved into the California SIP include: South Coast Air Quality Management District (SCAQMD) Rule 431.1, Sulfur Content of Gaseous Fuels and Ventura County Air Pollution Control District (VCAPCD) Rule 64, Sulfur Content of Fuels. These rules were submitted by the California Air Resources Board (CARB) to EPA on September 29, 1998 and June 3, 1999 respectively. II. Background On September 22, 1999 in 64 FR 51278, EPA proposed to approve the following rules into the California SIP: SCAQMD's Rule 431.1, Sulfur Content of Gaseous Fuels and VCAPCD's Rule 64, Sulfur Content of Fuels. Rule 431.1 was adopted by the SCAQMD on June 12, 1998. On September 29, 1998, this rule was submitted by the CARB to EPA. Rule 64 was adopted by the VCAPCD on April 13, 1999. On June 3, 1999, this rule was submitted by the CARB to EPA. VCAPCD Rule 64 was submitted in response to a limited approval/limited disapproval EPA published on January 15, 1999 in 64 FR 2575 for an earlier version of the rule. Both SCAQMD and VCAPCD are in attainment for the National Ambient Air Quality Standards for SO2 . A detailed discussion of the background for each of the above rules is provided in the Notice of Proposed Rulemaking (NPRM) cited above. EPA has evaluated both of the above rules for consistency with the requirements of the CAA and EPA regulations and EPA interpretation of these requirements as expressed in the various EPA policy guidance documents referenced in the NPRM cited above. EPA has found that the rules meet the applicable EPA requirements. A detailed discussion of the rule provisions and evaluations has been provided in 64 FR 51278 and in the technical support document (TSD) available at EPA's Region IX office (TSD dated 8/23/99). III. Response to Public Comments A 30-day public comment period was provided in 64 FR 51278. EPA received no comments on these rules. IV. EPA Action EPA is finalizing action to approve the above rules for inclusion into the California SIP. EPA is approving the submittal under section 110(k)(3) as meeting the requirements of section 110(a) of the CAA. This approval action will incorporate these rules into the federally approved SIP. The intended effect of approving these rules is to regulate emissions of SO2 in accordance with the requirements of the CAA. V. Administrative Requirements A. Executive Order 12866 The Office of Management and Budget (OMB) has exempted this regulatory action from Executive Order 12866, entitled ``Regulatory Planning and Review.'' B. Executive Order 13132 Federalism (64 FR 43255, August 10, 1999) revokes and replaces Executive Orders 12612, Federalism and 12875, Enhancing the Intergovernmental Partnership. Executive Order 13132 requires EPA to develop an accountable process to ensure ``meaningful and timely input by State and local officials in the development of regulatory policies that have federalism implications.'' ``Policies that have federalism implications'' is defined in the Executive Order to include regulations that 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.'' Under Executive Order 13132, EPA may not issue a regulation that has federalism implications, that imposes substantial direct compliance costs, and that is not required by statute, unless the Federal government provides the funds necessary to pay the direct compliance costs incurred by State and local governments, or EPA consults with State and local officials early in the process of developing the proposed regulation. EPA also may not issue a regulation that has federalism implications and that preempts State law unless the Agency consults with State and local officials early in the process of developing the proposed regulation. This final rule will 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. Thus, the requirements of section 6 of the [[Page 67788]] Executive Order 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 Executive Order 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 Executive Order 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 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. Accordingly, the requirements of section 3(b) of Executive Order 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. A major rule cannot take effect until 60 days after it is published in the Federal Register. This rule is not a ``major'' rule as defined by 5 U.S.C. 804(2). H. National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act Section 12 of the National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act (NTTAA) of 1995 requires Federal agencies to evaluate existing technical standards when developing a new regulation. To comply with NTTAA, EPA must consider and use ``voluntary consensus standards'' (VCS) if available and applicable when developing programs and policies unless doing so would be inconsistent with applicable law or otherwise impractical. The EPA believes that VCS are inapplicable to this action. Today's action does not require the public to perform activities conducive to the use of VCS. I. 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 February 1, 2000. 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, [[Page 67789]] Intergovernmental relations, Ozone, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements, Sulfur Oxides. Dated: November 9, 1999. Felicia Marcus, 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)(264)(i)(C) and (266)(i)(A)(2). Sec. 52.220 Identification of Plan. * * * * * (c) * * * (264) * * * (i) * * * (C) Ventura County Air Pollution Control District. (1) Rule 64, adopted on April 13, 1999. * * * * * (266) * * * (i) * * * (A) * * * (2) Rule 431.1, adopted on November 4, 1997 and amended on June 12, 1998. * * * * * [FR Doc. 99-31212 Filed 12-2-99; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6560-50-U
Document
Approval and Promulgation of Implementation Plans; California State Implementation Plan Revision, South Coast Air Quality Management District and Ventura County Air Pollution Control District
EPA is finalizing the approval of revisions to the California State Implementation Plan (SIP) proposed in the Federal Register on September 22, 1999. The revisions concern rules...
Legal Citation
Federal Register Citation
Use this for formal legal and research references to the published document.
64 FR 67787
Web Citation
Suggested Web Citation
Use this when citing the archival web version of the document.
“Approval and Promulgation of Implementation Plans; California State Implementation Plan Revision, South Coast Air Quality Management District and Ventura County Air Pollution Control District,” thefederalregister.org (December 3, 1999), https://thefederalregister.org/documents/99-31212/approval-and-promulgation-of-implementation-plans-california-state-implementation-plan-revision-south-coast-air-quality-.