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

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

40 CFR Part 52

[CA-207-0088; FRL; 6211-2]

Approval and Promulgation of Implementation Plans; California

State Implementation Plan Revision, Antelope Valley Air Pollution

Control District

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Direct final rule.

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

SUMMARY: EPA is taking direct final action on a revision to the

California State Implementation Plan. This action is an administrative

change that revises three administrative rules in the Antelope Valley

Air Pollution Control District (AVAPCD or District). The intended

effect of approving this action is to federally recognize the newly

established AVAPCD and to notify the public that the AVAPCD has assumed

all air pollution control responsibilities from the South Coast Air

Quality Management District in the Los Angeles County portion of the

Mojave Desert Air Basin effective July 1, 1997.

DATES: This action is effective on March 1, 1999 unless adverse or

critical comments are received by February 1, 1999. If EPA receives

such comments,

[[Page 72198]]

then it will publish a timely withdrawal in the Federal Register

informing the public that this rule will not take effect.

ADDRESSES: Copies of the rule revisions and EPA's evaluation report 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 95814

Antelope Valley Air Pollution Control District, 315 West Pondera

Street, Suite C, Lancaster, CA 93539-1409

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Cynthia G. Allen, Rulemaking Office

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

75 Hawthorne Street, San Francisco, CA 94105, Telephone (415-744-1189).

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

I. Applicability

The rules being approved into the California SIP are: AVAPCD Rule

101, Title, Rule 102, Definition of Terms, and Rule 103, Definition of

Geographical Areas, submitted on March 10, 1998, by the California Air

Resources Board.

II. Background

Portions of the South Coast Air Basin are currently nonattainment

for ozone, particulate matter, and other national ambient air quality

standards (40 CFR 81.305). As a result, the South Coast AQMD has

submitted and EPA has approved many rules to fulfill the requirements

for nonattainment areas described in section 110 and elsewhere in the

Clean Air Act.

The AVAPCD assumed all air pollution control responsibilities from

the South Coast Air Quality Management District (SCAQMD) in the Los

Angeles County portion of the Mojave Desert Air Basin (previously in a

portion of the former Southeast Desert Air Basin) effective July 1,

1997. The AVAPCD adopted the SCAQMD Rulebook on July 1, 1997 when it

assumed the air pollution control responsibilities from SCAQMD in the

Antelope Valley. The amendments reflect Antelope Valley's air quality

designation and classification.

This document addresses EPA's direct-final action for the following

AVAPCD rules: Rule 101, Title; Rule 102, Definition of Terms; and Rule

103, Definition of Geographical Areas. The amendments to Rules 101 and

102 remove references to the SCAQMD and Executive Officer, and provide

certain cross-references in the AVAPCD Rule Book. These rules were

adopted by AVAPCD on August 19, 1997 and September 16, 1997, and

submitted by the State of California for incorporation into its SIP on

March 10, 1998. These rules were found to be complete on May 21, 1998,

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

part 51, Appendix V 1 and is being finalized for approval

into the SIP. These rules were originally adopted as part of efforts to

achieve the National Ambient Air Quality Standards (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.

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

\1\ EPA adopted the completeness criteria on February 16, 1990

(55 FR 5830) and, pursuant to section (110)(k)(1) of the CAA,

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

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

III. EPA Evaluation and Action

In determining the approvability of a 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

appears in various EPA policy guidance documents.2

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

\2\ 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 Deviation,

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).

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

EPA has previously reviewed many rules from AVAPCD's predecessor

agency, SCAQMD, and incorporated them into the federally approved SIP

for SCAQMD pursuant to section 110(k)(3) of the CAA. The AVAPCD

recognizes that all SIP revisions submitted by its predecessor agency

SCAQMD and approved by the United States Environmental Protection

Agency (USEPA) prior to July 1, 1997, remain in effect and are fully

enforceable in the AVAPCD jurisdiction until USEPA approves SIP

revisions submitted by AVAPCD to supersede them.

In a Resolution dated July 1, 1997, the AVAPCD Board affirms that

the Rules and Regulations of the SCAQMD will be effective in the AVAPCD

until AVAPCD adopts rules and regulations that supercede them.

EPA has evaluated the submitted rules and has determined that they

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

Therefore, AVAPCD Rule 101, Title; Rule 102, Definition of Terms; and

Rule 103, Definition of Geographical Areas, are being approved under

section 110(k)(3) of the CAA as meeting the requirements of section

110(a) and part D.

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 March

1, 1999 without further notice unless the Agency receives relevant

adverse comments by February 1, 1999.

If the EPA receives such comments, then EPA will publish a document

withdrawing the 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 the rule. Any parties interested

in commenting on the rule should do so at this time. If no such

comments are received, the public is advised that this rule will be

effective on March 1, 1999, and no further action will be taken on the

proposed rule.

IV. Administrative Requirements

A. Executive Order 12866

The Office of Management and Budget (OMB) has exempted this

regulatory action from Executive Order (E.O.) 12866, entitled

``Regulatory Planning and Review.''

B. Executive Order 12875

Under E.O. 12875, EPA may not issue a regulation that is not

required by statute and that creates a mandate upon a state, local, or

tribal government, unless the Federal government provides the funds

necessary to pay the direct compliance costs incurred by those

governments. If the mandate is unfunded, EPA must provide to the Office

of Management and Budget a description of the extent of EPA's prior

consultation with representatives of

[[Page 72199]]

affected state, local, and tribal governments, the nature of their

concerns, copies of written communications from the governments, and a

statement supporting the need to issue the regulation. In addition,

E.O. 12875 requires EPA to develop an effective process permitting

elected officials and other representatives of state, local, and tribal

governments ``to provide meaningful and timely input in the development

of regulatory proposals containing significant unfunded mandates.''

Today's rule does not create a mandate on state, local or tribal

governments. The rule does not impose any enforceable duties on these

entities. Accordingly, the requirements of section 1(a) of E.O. 12875

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 E.O.

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 E.O. 13045 because it does not involve

decisions intended to mitigate environmental health or safety risks.

D. Executive Order 13084

Under E.O. 13084, 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. This action does not involve

or impose any requirements that affect Indian Tribes. Accordingly, the

requirements of section 3(b) of E.O. 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. This rule is not a

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

H. 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 March 1, 1999. 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.

[[Page 72200]]

Date: December 4, 1998.

Laura Yoshii,

Acting Regional Administrator, EPA, Region IX.

Part 52, chapter I, title of 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 paragraph (c)(254)(i)(E) to

read as follows:

Sec. 52.220 Identification of plan.

* * * * *

(c) * * *

(254) * * *

(i) * * *

(E) Antelope Valley Air Pollution Control District.

(1) Resolution No. 97-01 dated July 1, 1997.

(2) Rules 101 and 102 amended on August 19, 1997 and Rule 103

amended on September 16, 1997.

* * * * *

[FR Doc. 98-34698 Filed 12-30-98; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6560-50-P