Approval and Promulgation of Implementation Plans; California State Implementation Plan Revision, South Coast Air Quality Management District, San Joaquin Valley Unified Air Pollution Control District, Siskiyou County Air Pollution Control District, and Bay Area Air Quality Management District

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

40 CFR Part 52

[CA 011-0146; FRL-6353-1]

Approval and Promulgation of Implementation Plans; California

State Implementation Plan Revision, South Coast Air Quality Management

District, San Joaquin Valley Unified Air Pollution Control District,

Siskiyou County Air Pollution Control District, and Bay Area Air

Quality Management District

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Final rule.

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

SUMMARY: EPA is finalizing limited approvals of revisions to the

California State Implementation Plan (SIP) proposed in the Federal

Register on March 18, 1999. This final action will incorporate these

rules into the federally approved SIP. The intended effect of

finalizing this action 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 rules control the sulfur

content of fuels within the South Coast Air Quality Management District

and the Siskiyou County Air Pollution Control District, emissions of

sulfuric acid mist within the San Joaquin Valley Unified Air Pollution

Control District and emissions of sulfur dioxide in the Bay Area Air

Quality Management District. Thus, EPA is finalizing a limited approval

under CAA provisions 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. There will be no sanctions clock as South Coast Air

Quality Management District, San Joaquin Valley Unified Air Pollution

Control District, Siskiyou County Air Pollution Control District, and

Bay Area Air Quality Management District are in attainment for

SO2.

EFFECTIVE DATE: This action is effective on July 8, 1999.

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 also 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 95814

Bay Area Air Quality Management District, 939 Ellis Street, San

Francisco, CA 94109-7714.

San Joaquin Valley Unified Air Pollution Control District, 1990 E.

Gettysburg Ave., Fresno, CA 93726.

Siskiyou County Air Pollution Control District, 525 South Foothill Dr.,

Yreka, CA 96097

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

Diamond Bar, CA 91765-4182.

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.

[[Page 30397]]

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

I. Applicability

The rules being approved into the California SIP include: South

Coast Air Quality Management District (SCAQMD) Rule 431.2, Sulfur

Content of Liquid Fuels, San Joaquin Valley Unified Air Pollution

Control District (SJVUAPCD) Rule 4802, Sulfuric Acid Mist, Siskiyou

County Air Pollution Control District (SCAPCD) Rule 4.14, Sulfur

Content of Fuels and Bay Area Air Quality Management District (BAAQMD)

Regulation 9 Rule 1, Sulfur Dioxide. SCAQMD Rule 431.2 and SCAPCD Rule

4.14 were submitted by the California Air Resources Board (CARB) to EPA

on December 31, 1990, BAAQMD Regulation 9 Rule 1 was submitted by CARB

to EPA on September 14, 1992, and SJVUAPCD Rule 4802 was submitted by

CARB to EPA on November 18, 1993.

II. Background

On March 18, 1999 in 64 FR 13379, EPA proposed granting limited

approval of the following rules into the California SIP: SCAQMD Rule

431.2, SJVUAPCD Rule 4802, SCAPCD Rule 4.14, and BAAQMD Regulation 9

Rule 1. SCAQMD Rule 431.2 was adopted by SCAQMD on May 4, 1990 and

SCAPCD Rule 4.14 was adopted by SCAPCD on July 11, 1989. These rules

were submitted by the CARB to EPA on December 31, 1990. SJVUAPCD Rule

4802 was adopted by SJVUAPCD on December 17, 1992 and was submitted by

the CARB to EPA on November 18, 1993. BAAQMD Regulation 9 Rule 1 was

adopted on May 20, 1992 and was submitted by the CARB to EPA on

September 14, 1992. A detailed discussion of the proposed action for

each of the above rules is provided in the proposed rule 1

(PR).

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

\1\ The proposed rule was published on March 18, 1999 in 64 FR

13379.

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

EPA has evaluated all of the above rules for consistency with the

requirements of the CAA and EPA regulations and EPA's interpretation of

these requirements as expressed in the various EPA policy guidance

documents referenced in the PR. EPA is finalizing the limited approval

of these rules in order to strengthen the SIP. The PR identified the

following rule deficiencies which should be corrected.

SCAQMD's Rule 431.2 should be corrected to remove Executive Officer

discretion in approving alternate test methods. EPA also recommends

that a reference to a CARB specification for motor vehicle diesel fuel

be updated.

SJVUAPCD's Rule 4802 should be corrected to incorporate

recordkeeping requirements. EPA also recommends correction of a

typographical error found in the rule.

SCAPCD's Rule 4.14 should be corrected to incorporate recordkeeping

requirements and test methods to determine compliance.

BAAQMD's Regulation 9 Rule 1 should be corrected to incorporate

recordkeeping requirements, update the ground level sulfur dioxide

limits and to update a cited test method which has been deleted.

SCAQMD, SJVUAPCD and SCAPCD should also include information on the

length of time records are to be retained. A detailed discussion of the

rule provisions and evaluations has been provided in the PR and in

technical support documents (TSDs) available at EPA's Region IX office

(TSD dated 2/12/99 for SCAQMD Rule 431.2 and TSD dated 2/19/99 for

SJVUAPCD Rule 4802, SCAPCD Rule 4.14 and BAAQMD Regulation 9 Rule 1.)

III. Response to Public Comments

A 30-day public comment period was provided in 64 FR 13379. EPA

received one comment letter on the PR from the South Coast Air Quality

Management District. The comment has been evaluated by EPA and EPA's

response is set forth below.

Comment: SCAQMD indicated that staff will address EPA's comments

and consider the suggestions for strengthening the rule.

Response: EPA will work with SCAQMD in response to EPA's comments.

IV. EPA Action

EPA is finalizing a limited approval of the above-referenced rules.

The limited approval of these rules is being finalized 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 in the sense that the rules strengthen the

SIP. However, the rules do not meet the section 182(a)(2)(A) CAA

requirement because of the rule deficiencies which were discussed in

the PR. Thus, in order to strengthen the SIP, EPA is granting limited

approval of these rules under sections 110(k)(3) and 301(a) of the CAA.

This action approves the rules into the SIP as federally enforceable

rules.

As stated in the proposed rule, there is no sanctions clock as

SCAQMD, SJVUAPCD, SCAPCD, and BAAQMD are in attainment for

SO2. It should be noted that the rules covered by this FR

have been adopted by the SCAQMD, SJVUAPCD, SCAPCD, and BAAQMD and are

currently in effect in those districts. EPA's limited approval action

will not prevent SCAQMD, SJVUAPCD, SCAPCD, BAAQMD or EPA from enforcing

these rules.

V. Administrative Requirements

A. Executive Order 12866

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

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

Planning and Review.

B. Executive Order 12875

Under Executive Order 12875, Enhancing the Intergovernmental

Partnership, 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, or

EPA consults with those governments. If EPA complies by consulting,

Executive Order 12875 requires EPA to provide to the Office of

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

consultation with representatives of affected State, local and tribal

governments, the nature of their concerns, copies of any written

communications from the governments, and a statement supporting the

need to issue the regulation. In addition, Executive Order 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

[[Page 30398]]

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 Executive Order 13084, Consultation and Coordination with

Indian Tribal Governments, EPA may not issue a regulation that is not

required by statute, that significantly 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, or EPA consults with those

governments. If EPA complies by consulting, Executive Order 13084

requires EPA to 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 officials 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

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 August 9, 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).)

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.

Laura K. Yoshii,

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 paragraph (c)(182)(i)(A)(5)

and (c)(182)(i)(G), (c)(189)(i)(C)(2), and (c)(194)(i)(C)(3) to read as

follows:

Sec. 52.220 Identification of plan.

* * * * *

(c) * * *

(182) * * *

(i) * * *

(A) * * *

(5) Rule 431.2, amended on May 4, 1990.

* * * * *

(G) Siskiyou County Air Pollution Control District.

(1) Rule 4.14, adopted on July 11, 1989.

* * * * *

(189) * * *

(i) * * *

(C) * * *

(2) Regulation 9 Rule 1, amended on May 20, 1992.

* * * * *

(194) * * *

(i) * * *

(C) * * *

(3) Rule 4802, adopted on May 21, 1992, and amended on December 17,

1992.

* * * * *

[FR Doc. 99-14222 Filed 6-7-99; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6560-50-P