Approval and Promulgation of State Implementation Plans; CaliforniaSouth Coast

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

40 CFR Part 52

[CA 94-2-7235; FRL-5810-7]

Approval and Promulgation of State Implementation Plans;

California--South Coast

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM).

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

SUMMARY: EPA is proposing to approve a State Implementation Plan (SIP)

revision from the State of California demonstrating that the California

Low Emission Vehicle (LEV) program qualifies as a substitute for the

Clean Air Act Clean-Fuel Vehicle Fleet Program (CAA fleet program). The

CAA fleet program provisions require states, in order to opt-out of the

fleet program, to submit a substitute program for all or a portion of

the program which achieves at least equal long-term emission reductions

of ozone-producing and air toxic emissions. EPA is also proposing to

approve a SIP revision for the South Coast, establishing a parking

cash-out program as a contingency measure. The measure is part of the

South Coast plan for attaining the national ambient air quality

standards (NAAQS) for carbon monoxide (CO). The intended effect of

proposing approval of these rules is to regulate emissions of volatile

organic compound (VOC) and CO emissions in accordance with the CAA and

regarding EPA actions on SIP submittals.

DATES: EPA requests that comments be received in writing on or before

May 14, 1994.

ADDRESSES: Written comments should be submitted (in duplicate, if

possible) to: Julia Barrow, Air Planning Office (AIR-2), Air Division,

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Region IX, 75 Hawthorne Street,

San Francisco, CA 94105-3901.

Copies of the SIP submissions and Technical Support Documentation

are available for public inspection at EPA's San Francisco, Region 9

office on weekdays between 9 a.m. and 4 p.m.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Roxanne Johnson, Air Planning Office

(AIR-2), Air Division, U.S. EPA, Region IX, 75 Hawthorne Street, San

Francisco, California, 94105-3901; tel. (415) 744-1225.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: EPA proposes to approve two SIP

revisions submitted by the State of California: (1) Executive Order

G-125-145 supporting the State's opt-out from the Clean Air Act

(CAA or Act) Clean-Fuel Fleet Vehicle Program (fleet program), and

(2) South Coast Air Quality Management District (SCAQMD) Rule 1504,

establishing a parking cash-out program as a contingency measure.

On February 14, 1995, the Administrator signed direct final

approval of these two SIP revisions as part of a notice promulgating

Federal implementation plans (FIPs) for California. On April 10, 1995,

legislation was enacted mandating that these FIPs ``shall be rescinded

and shall have no further force and effect'' (Pub. L. 104-6, Defense

Supplemental Appropriation, H.R. 889), prior to publication of the FIP

and SIP actions in the Federal Register. On August 21, 1995 (60 FR

43468), EPA announced the FIP rescission. EPA is in this action

reissuing and proposing to approve the California SIP submissions to

opt-out from the Federal fleet program and the contingency measure in

SCAQMD Rule 1504.

Sections 182(c)(4)(A) and 246 of the Act require certain states,

including California, to submit for EPA approval a SIP revision that

includes measures to implement the Clean Fuel Fleet Program. Section

182(c)(4)(B) of the Act allows states to ``opt-out'' of the clean-fuel

vehicle fleet program by submitting for EPA approval a SIP revision

consisting of a program or programs that will result in at least

equivalent long term reductions in ozone-producing and toxic air

emissions.

On November 13, 1992, the California Air Resources Board (CARB)

submitted a request to EPA to opt-out of the CAA fleet program. On

November 29, 1993, EPA conditionally approved CARB's opt-out request

(58 FR 62532). On November 7, 1994, CARB submitted as a SIP revision

Executive Order G-125-145, formally adopting its request to opt-out of

the CAA fleet program, and attaching supporting materials demonstrating

that the State's LEV program achieves emission reductions at least as

large as the CAA fleet program's requirement would have. On January 30,

1995, the revision was found to be complete pursuant to EPA's

completeness criteria that are set forth in 40 CFR Part 51, Appendix

V.1 EPA now proposes to approve this submittal

[[Page 18072]]

and remove the condition on the approval of California's opt-out of the

CAA fleet program.

---------------------------------------------------------------------------

\1\ 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).

---------------------------------------------------------------------------

On May 13, 1994, the SCAQMD adopted Rule 1504, establishing a

parking cash-out program for parking not owned by the employer. On July

8, 1994, Rule 1504 was submitted as a SIP revision to help meet the

requirements of section 187(a)(3) of the Act, relating to carbon

monoxide (CO) SIP contingency measures. On January 8, 1995, the

revision became complete by operation of law.2

---------------------------------------------------------------------------

\2\ Section 110(k)(1)(B) provides that SIP revisions that have

not been determined by EPA to be incomplete by 6 months after

receipt shall on that date be deemed by operation of law to meet the

minimum criteria for completeness. EPA's completeness rule is set

forth in 40 CFR Part 51, Appendix V, which establishes the minimum

criteria that a plan revision must meet before EPA is required to

act on the submission.

---------------------------------------------------------------------------

The rule serves as a contingency measure to be triggered if the

South Coast CO SIP's annual estimates of vehicle miles traveled are

exceeded or EPA makes a finding, which is required by the CAA, that the

South Coast has failed to attain the CO NAAQS by the year 2000.

Regulatory Process

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 population of less than

50,000.

SIP approvals under sections 110 and 301(a) and subchapter I, Part

D of the CAA 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, I certify

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 regulatory flexibility analysis would

constitute Federal inquiry into the economic reasonableness of state

action. The CAA forbids EPA to base its actions concerning SIPs on such

grounds. Union Electric Co. v. U.S. E.P.A., 427 U.S. 246, 256-66 (S.

Ct. 1976); 42 U.S.C. 7410 (a)(2).

Unfunded Mandates

Under sections 202, 203, and 205 of the Unfunded Mandates Reform

Act of 1995 (``Unfunded Mandates Act''), signed into law on March 22,

1995, EPA must undertake various actions in association with proposed

or final rules that include a Federal mandate that may result in

estimated costs of $100 million or more to the private sector or to

State, Local, or tribal governments in the aggregate.

Through submission of this SIP or plan revision, the State and any

affected local or tribal governments have elected to adopt the program

provided for under Part D of the Act. These rules may bind State,

local, and tribal governments to perform certain actions and also

require the private sector to perform certain duties. The rules being

proposed for by this action will impose no new requirements because

affected sources are already subject to these regulations under State

law. Therefore, no additional costs to State, Local, or tribal

governments or to the private sector result from this action. EPA has

also determined that this proposed action does not include a mandate

that may result in estimated costs of $100 million or more to State,

local, or tribal governments in the aggregate or to the private sector.

This action has been classified as a Table 3 action for signature

by the Regional Administrator under the procedures published in the

Federal Register on January 19, 1989 (54 FR 2214-2225), as revised by a

July 10, 1995 memorandum from Mary Nichols, Assistant Administrator for

Air and Radiation. The Office of Management and Budget (OMB) has

exempted this regulatory action from Executive Order 12866 review.

List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52

Environmental protection, Administrative practice and procedure,

Air pollution control, Carbon monoxide, Hydrocarbons, Intergovernmental

relations, Oxides of nitrogen, Ozone, Reporting and recordkeeping

requirements, Volatile organic compounds.

Authority: 42 U.S.C. 7401-7671q.

Dated: March 31, 1997.

Felicia Marcus,

Regional Administrator.

[FR Doc. 97-9581 Filed 4-11-97; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6560-50-P