Approval and Promulgation of Implementation Plans; California State Implementation Plan Revision, South Coast Air Quality Management District, Yolo-Solano Air Quality Management District, and Ventura County Air Pollution Control District

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

40 CFR Part 52

[CA 126-0082a FRL-6140-6]

Approval and Promulgation of Implementation Plans; California

State Implementation Plan Revision, South Coast Air Quality Management

District, Yolo-Solano Air Quality Management District, and Ventura

County Air Pollution Control District

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Direct final rule.

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

SUMMARY: EPA is taking direct final action on revisions to the

California State Implementation Plan. The revisions concern rules from

the following Districts: South Coast Air Quality Management District

(SCAQMD), Yolo-Solano Air Quality Management District (YSAQMD), and

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 volatile organic compounds (VOCs) in accordance with the

requirements of the Clean Air Act, as amended in 1990 (CAA or the Act).

The revised rules control VOCs from screen printing and graphic arts

operations. Thus, EPA is finalizing the approval of these revisions

into the California SIP under provisions of the CAA regarding EPA

action on SIP submittals, SIPs for national primary and secondary

ambient air quality standards and plan requirements for nonattainment

areas.

DATES: This rule is effective on October 20, 1998 without further

notice, unless EPA receives adverse comments by September 21, 1998. If

EPA received such comments, then it will publish a timely withdrawal in

the Federal Register informing the public that this rule will not take

effect.

ADDRESSES: Comments must be submitted to Andrew Steckel at the Region

IX office listed below. 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,

SW, Washington, DC 20460

California Air Resources Board, Stationary Source Division, Rule

Evaluation Section, 2020 ``L'' Street, Sacramento, CA 92123-1095

South Coast Air Quality Management District, 21865 E. Copley Drive,

Diamond Bar, CA 91765-4182

Yolo-Solano Air Quality Management District, 1947 Galileo Court, Suite

103, Davis, CA 95616.

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

Ventura, CA 93003.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Andrew Steckel, Rulemaking Office,

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

75 Hawthorne Street, San Francisco, CA 94105, Telephone: (415) 744-

1185.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

I. Applicability

The rules being approved into the California SIP include: SCAQMD

Rule 1130.1, Screen Printing Operations, YSAQMD Rule 2.29, Graphic Arts

Printing Operations, and VCAPCD Rule 74.19.1, Screen Printing

Operations. These rules were submitted by the California Air Resources

Board (CARB) to EPA on March 3, 1997 (1130.1), November 30, 1994

(2.29), and October 18, 1996 (74.19.1).

II. Background

On March 3, 1978, EPA promulgated a list of ozone nonattainment

areas under the provisions of the Clean Air Act, as amended in 1977

(1977 Act or pre-amended Act), that included the South Coast Air Basin,

the Sacramento Metro Area, and Ventura County. 43 FR 8964, 40 CFR

81.305. On May 26, 1988, EPA notified the Governor of California,

pursuant to section 110(a)(2)(H) of the 1977 Act, that the above

districts' portions of the California SIP were inadequate to attain and

maintain the ozone standard and requested that deficiencies in the

existing SIP be corrected (EPA's SIP-Call). On November 15, 1990, the

Clean Air Act Amendments of 1990 were enacted. Pub. L. 101-549, 104

Stat. 2399, codified at 42 U.S.C. 7401-7671q. In amended section

182(a)(2)(A) of the CAA, Congress statutorily adopted the requirement

that nonattainment areas fix their deficient reasonably available

control technology (RACT) rules for ozone and established a deadline of

May 15, 1991 for states to submit corrections of those deficiencies.

Section 182(a)(2)(A) applies to areas designated as nonattainment

prior to enactment of the amendments and classified as marginal or

above as of the date of enactment. It requires such areas to adopt and

correct RACT rules pursuant to pre-amended section 172(b) as

interpreted in pre-amendment guidance.1 EPA's SIP-Call used

that guidance to indicate the necessary corrections for specific

nonattainment areas. The South Coast Air Basin is classified as

extreme, the Sacramento

[[Page 44793]]

Metro Area and Ventura County are classified as severe,2 and

therefore, these areas were subject to the RACT fix-up requirement and

the May 15, 1991 deadline.

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

\1\ Among other things, the pre-amendment guidance consists of

those 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 was published in the

Federal Register on May 25, 1988); and the existing control

technique guidelines (CTGs).

\2\ The South Coast Air Basin, the Sacramento Metro Area, and

Ventura County retained their designation of nonattainment and were

classified by operation of law pursuant to sections 107(d) and

181(a) upon the date of enactment of the CAA. On April 25, 1995, EPA

published a final Rule granting the State's request to reclassify

the Sacramento Metro Area to severe from serious. 60 CFR 20237. This

reclassification became effective on June 1, 1995.

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

The State of California submitted many revised RACT rules for

incorporation into its SIP on March 3, 1997, November 30, 1994, and

October 18, 1996, including the rules being acted on in this document.

This document addresses EPA's direct-final action for SCAQMD Rule

1130.1, Screen Printing Operations, YSAQMD Rule 2.29, Graphic Arts

Printing Operations, and VCAPCD Rule 74.19.1, Screen Printing

Operations. SCAQMD amended Rule 1130.1 on December 13, 1996, YSAQMD

adapted Rule 2.29 on May 25, 1994, and VCAPCD adopted Rule 74.19.1 on

June 11, 1996. These submitted rules were found to be complete on

August 12, 1997 (1130.1), January 30, 1995 (2.29), and December 19,

1996 (74.19.1) pursuant to EPA's completeness criteria that are set

forth in 40 CFR part 51 Appendix V 3 and are being finalized

for approval into the SIP.

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

\3\ 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).

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

SCAQMD's Rule 1130.1 and VCAPCD's Rule 74.19.1 regulate emissions

of volatile organic compounds (VOCs) emanating from screen printing

operations, and YSAQMD's Rule 2.29 limits emissions of VOCs from

graphic arts facilities. VOCs contribute to the production of ground

level ozone and smog. These rules were originally adopted as part of

the above districts' efforts to achieve the National Ambient Air

Quality Standard (NAAQS) for ozone and in response to EPA's SIP-Call

and the section 182(a)(2)(A) CAA requirement. The following is EPA's

evaluation and final action for these rules.

III. EPA Evaluation and Action

In determining the approvability of a VOC rule, EPA must evaluate

the rule for consistency with the requirements of the CAA and EPA

regulations, as found in section 110 and part D of the CAA and 40 CFR

part 51 (Requirements for Preparation, Adoption, and Submittal of

Implementation Plans). The EPA interpretation of these requirements,

which forms the basis for today's action, appears in the various EPA

policy guidance documents listed in footnote 1. Among those provisions

is the requirement that a VOC rule must, at a minimum, provide for the

implementation of RACT for stationary sources of VOC emissions. This

requirement was carried forth from the pre-amended Act.

For the purpose of assisting state and local agencies in developing

RACT rules, EPA prepared a series of Control Technique Guideline (CTG)

documents. The CTGs are based on the underlying requirements of the Act

and specify the presumptive norms for what is RACT for specific source

categories. Under the CAA, Congress ratified EPA's use of these

documents, as well as other Agency policy, for requiring States to

``fix-up'' their RACT rules. See section 182(a)(2)(A). The CTG

applicable to YSAQMD Rule 2.29 is entitled, Control of Volatile Organic

Emissions from Existing Stationary Sources--Volume VIII: Graphic Arts--

Rotogravure and Flexography--EPA-450/2-78-033. SCAQMD Rule 1130.1 and

VCAPCD Rule 74.19.1 cover source categories for which EPA has not

published a CTG. Accordingly, these rules were evaluated for

consistency with the general RACT requirement of the Clean Air Act (CAA

Section 110 and part D). Further interpretations of EPA policy are

found in the Blue Book, referred to in footnote 1. In general, these

guidance documents have been set forth to ensure that VOC rules are

fully enforceable and strengthen or maintain the SIP.

There is currently no version of SCAQMD Rule 1130.1, Screen

Printing Operations in the SIP. The submitted rule includes the

following provisions:

Applicability section including a statement of the rule's

purpose;

Reference to Rule 102 for the exempt compound listing;

Option of using emission control equipment or using

reduced VOC content inks and coatings;

Test methods for VOC contents of coatings and inks;

Test methods for metal contents of inks;

Test methods for determining capture and control

efficiency of an emission control device;

Rule exemptions for firms emitting small quantities of

VOCs.

There is currently no version of YSAQMD's Rule 2.29, Graphic Arts

in the SIP. The submitted rule includes the following provisions:

Statement of applicability;

Exemptions for firms emitting small quantities of VOCs;

Operation specific standards limiting the VOC content of

inks and coatings;

Option of using an emission control system, or reduced VOC

content inks and coatings;

Test methods for determining the VOC content of inks and

coatings;

Test methods for determining the capture and control

efficiency of an emission control system;

Record keeping requirements.

There is currently no version of VCAPCD's Rule 74.19.1, Screen

Printing Operations in the SIP. The submitted rule includes the

following provisions:

Statement of applicability;

Reactive organic compound (ROC) limits for specific end-

use products and substrates;

Option to use an emission control system in lieu of using

low ROC coatings;

Cleaning methods and storage conditions of ROC containing

materials;

Record keeping requirements;

Exemption for firms using small quantities of ROC

containing material;

Test methods for measurement of ROC content of inks,

coatings, adhesives, resists, and solvents;

Test method to determine the metal content of metallic

ink;

Test method to measure capture and control efficiency of

an emission control system.

EPA has evaluated the submitted rules and has determined that they

are consistent with the CAA, EPA regulations, and EPA policy.

Therefore, SCAQMD Rule 1130.1, Screen Printing Operations, YSAQMD Rule

2.29, Graphic Arts Printing Operations, and VCAPCD Rule 74.19.1, Screen

Printing Operations are being approved under section 110(k)(3) of the

CAA as meeting the requirements of section 110(a) and part D.

Nothing in this action should be construed as permitting or

allowing or establishing a precedent for any future 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.

EPA is publishing this rule without prior proposal because the

Agency views this as a noncontroversial amendment and anticipates no

adverse comments. However, in the proposed rules section of this

Federal Register publication, EPA is publishing a separate document

that will serve as the proposal to approve the SIP revision should

relevant adverse comments be filed. This rule will be effective October

[[Page 44794]]

20, 1998 without further notice unless the Agency receives relevant

adverse comments by September 21, 1998.

If the EPA received such comments, then EPA will publish a timely

withdrawal of the direct final rule and informing the public that the

rule will not take effect. All public comments received will then be

addressed in a subsequent final rule based on the proposed rule. The

EPA will not institute a second comment period on this rule. Any

parties interested in commenting on this rule should do so at this

time. If no such comments are received, the public is advised that this

rule will be effective on October 20, 1998 and no further action will

be taken on the proposed rule.

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 final 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 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 impose any new requirements, the

Administrator certifies 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 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).

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 promulgated 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.

D. Submission to Congress and the General Accounting Office

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. This rule is not a

``major'' rule as defined by 5 U.S.C. 804(2).

E. 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 October 20, 1998. 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, Intergovernmental relations, Ozone,

Reporting and recordkeeping requirements, Volatile organic compounds.

Note: Incorporation by reference of the State Implementation

Plan for the State of California was approved by the Director of the

Federal Register on July 1, 1982.

Dated: July 28, 1998.

Sally Seymour,

Acting 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)(207)(i)(C)(6),(241)(i)(C) and (244)(i)(D), to read as follows:

Sec. 52.220 Identification of plan.

* * * * *

(c) * * *

(207) * * *

(i) * * *

(C) * * *

(6) Rule 2.29, adopted on May 25, 1994.

* * * * *

(241) * * *

(i) * * *

(C) Ventura County Air Pollution Control District.

(1) Rule 74.19.1, adopted on June 11, 1996.

* * * * *

(244) * * *

(i) * * *

(D) South Coast Air Quality Management District.

(1) Rule 1130.1, adopted on August 2, 1991 and amended on December

13, 1996.

* * * * *

[FR Doc. 98-22335 Filed 8-20-98; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6560-50-P