Approval and Promulgation of Implementation Plans; California State Implementation Plan Revision, Ventura County Air Pollution Control District

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

40 CFR Part 52

[CA 095-0083; FRL-6133-7]

Approval and Promulgation of Implementation Plans; California

State Implementation Plan Revision, Ventura County Air Pollution

Control District

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Proposed rule.

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

SUMMARY: EPA is proposing a limited approval and limited disapproval of

revisions to the California State Implementation Plan (SIP) which

concern the control of the sulfur content of fuels within the Ventura

County Air Pollution Control District.

The intended effect of proposing limited approval and limited

disapproval of this rule 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). EPA's final action on this

proposed rule will incorporate it into the federally approved SIP. EPA

has evaluated the rule and is proposing a simultaneous limited approval

and limited disapproval under provisions of the CAA regarding EPA

action on SIP submittals and general rulemaking authority because these

revisions, while strengthening the SIP, also do not fully meet the CAA

provisions regarding plan submissions.

DATES: Comments must be received on or before September 2, 1998.

ADDRESSES: Comments may be mailed to: Andrew Steckel, Rulemaking Office

[AIR-4], Air Division, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Region IX,

75 Hawthorne Street, San Francisco, CA 94105-3901.

Copies of the rule and EPA's evaluation report of the rule is

available for public inspection at EPA's Region IX office during normal

business hours. Copies of the submitted rule are also available for

inspection at the following locations:

Environmental Protection Agency, Air Docket, 401 ``M'' Street, SW.,

Washington, DC 20460.

California Air Resources Board, Stationary Source Division, Rule

Evaluation Section, 2020 ``L'' Street, Sacramento, CA 95812.

Ventura County Air Pollution Control District, 669 County Square Drive,

Ventura, CA 93003.

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 94105-3901; Telephone: (415) 744-

1191.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

I. Applicability

The rule being proposed for approval into the California SIP is

Ventura County Air Pollution Control District (VCAPCD) Rule 64, Sulfur

Content of Fuels. This rule was submitted by the California Air

Resources Board (CARB) to EPA on July 13, 1994.

II. Background

40 CFR 81.305 provides the attainment status designations for air

districts in California. Ventura County Air Pollution Control District

is listed as being in attainment for the national ambient air quality

standards for sulfur dioxide (SO2). Sulfur dioxide is formed

by the combustion of fuels containing sulfur compounds.

VCAPCD adopted Rule 64, Sulfur Content of Fuels, on June 14, 1994.

On July 13, 1994 the State of California submitted many rules for

incorporation into its SIP, including the rule being acted on in this

document. VCAPCD Rule 64 was found to be complete on September 12, 1994

pursuant to EPA's completeness criteria that are set forth in 40 CFR

part 51, appendix V 1 and is being proposed for limited

approval and limited disapproval. The following is EPA's evaluation and

proposed action for this rule.

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

\1\ EPA adopted completeness criteria on February 16, 1990 (55

FR 5824) and, pursuant to section 110(k)(1)(A) of the CAA, revised

the criteria on August 26, 1991 (56 FR 42216).

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

III. EPA Evaluation and Proposed Action

In determining the approvability of an SO2 rule, EPA

must evaluate the rule for consistency with the requirements of the CAA

and EPA regulations, as found in section 110 and 40 CFR part 51

(Requirements for Preparation, Adoption, and Submittal of

Implementation Plans).

While the VCAPCD is in attainment with the SO2 NAAQS,

many of the

[[Page 41221]]

general SIP requirements regarding enforceability, for example, are

still appropriate for the rule. In determining the approvability of

this rule, EPA evaluated it in light of the ``SO2 Guideline

Document'', EPA-452/R-94-008.

On April 17, 1987, EPA approved into the SIP a version of Rule 64,

Sulfur Content of Fuels, that had been adopted by the VCAPCD on July 5,

1983. VCAPCD submitted an amendment to Rule 64 on July 13, 1994 which

includes the following significant changes from the current SIP:

Adds a section on applicability of the rule.

Adds a section on test methods for determining the sulfur

content of fuels.

Removes incineration of waste gases whose gross heating

value is less than 300 BTUs per cubic foot from the list of exemptions

to Rule 64.

Exempts flare gas combustion and places it under the

requirements of Rule 54: Sulfur Compounds.

EPA has evaluated VCAPCD's submitted Rule 64 for consistency with

the CAA, EPA regulations, and EPA policy and has found that the

revisions result in a clearer, more enforceable rule. Although VCAPCD's

Rule 64 will strengthen the SIP, this rule contains the following

deficiency which should be corrected.

The rule does not explicitly state those records which

sources are required to keep on site and made available to inspectors

to assess compliance. The rule also does not state the minimum length

of time for retaining data on site.

A detailed discussion of the rule deficiency can be found in the

Technical Support Document for Rule 64 (7/1/98), which is available

from the U.S. EPA, Region IX office. Because of this deficiency, the

rule is not approvable and may lead to rule enforceability problems.

Because of the above deficiency, EPA cannot grant full approval of

this rule under section 110(k)(3). Also, because the submitted rule is

not composed of separable parts which meet all the applicable

requirements of the CAA, EPA cannot grant partial approval of the rule

under section 110(k)(3). However, EPA may grant a limited approval of

the submitted rule under section 110(k)(3) in light of EPA's authority

pursuant to section 301(a) to adopt regulations necessary to further

air quality by strengthening the SIP. The approval is limited because

EPA's action also contains a simultaneous limited disapproval. In order

to strengthen the SIP, EPA is proposing a limited approval of VCAPCD

Rule 64 under sections 110(k)(3) and 301(a) of the CAA. At the same

time, EPA is also proposing a limited disapproval of this rule because

it contains a deficiency. There will be no sanctions clock as VCAPCD is

in attainment for SO2.

It should be noted that the rule covered by this proposed

rulemaking has been adopted by the VCAPCD and is currently in effect in

the VCAPCD. EPA's final limited disapproval action will not prevent the

VCAPCD or EPA from enforcing this rule.

Nothing in this action should be construed as permitting or

allowing or establishing a precedent for any future request for

revision to any state 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.

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 proposed 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 sections 110 and 301, 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 flexibility analysis would constitute

Federal inquiry into the economic reasonableness of state action. The

Clean Air Act forbids EPA to base its action 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 proposed 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.

List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52

Environmental protection, Air pollution control, Incorporation by

reference, Intergovernmental relations, Reporting and recordkeeping

requirements, sulfur oxides.

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

Dated: July 22, 1998.

Sally Seymour,

Acting Regional Administrator, Region IX.

[FR Doc. 98-20609 Filed 7-31-98; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6560-50-P