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 211-0116a; FRL-6214-1]

Approval and Promulgation of Implementation Plans; California

State Implementation Plan Revision, Antelope Valley Air Pollution

Control District

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

[[Page 2142]]

ACTION: Direct final rule.

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

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

California State Implementation Plan. The revisions concern the

recission of three rules for the Antelope Valley Air Pollution Control

District (AVAPCD). The intended effect of this action is to bring the

AVAPCD SIP up to date in accordance with the requirements of the Clean

Air Act, as amended in 1990 (CAA or the Act). EPA is finalizing the

approval of these recissions from 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 March 15, 1999 without further notice,

unless EPA receives adverse comments by February 12, 1999. If EPA

receives such comment, it will publish a timely withdrawal in the

Federal Register informing the public that this rule will not take

effect.

ADDRESSES: Written comments must be submitted to Andrew Steckel, Chief,

Rulemaking Office at the Region IX office listed below. 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 95812

Antelope Valley Air Pollution Control District, 43301 Division Street,

Suite 206, Lancaster, CA 93539-4409

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Julie A. Rose, Rulemaking Office, AIR-

4, Air Division, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Region IX, 75

Hawthorne Street, San Francisco, CA 94105, Telephone: (415) 744-1184

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

I. Applicability

The rules being approved for recission from the Antelope Valley Air

Pollution Control District (AVAPCD) portion of the California SIP

include: Rule 1106, Marine Coating Operations; Rule 1142, Marine Tank

Vessel Operations; and Rule 1148, Thermally Enhanced Oil Recovery

Wells. These rule recissions were submitted by the California Air

Resources Board to EPA on June 23, 1998.

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 Southeast Desert

Modified Air Quality Maintenance Area and the Los Angeles-South Coast

Air Basin Area. 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 district's portion of the California

SIP was 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 Southeast Desert Modified Air Quality

Maintenance Area is classified as Severe-17, therefore, this area was

subject to the RACT fix-up requirement and the May 15, 1991 deadline.

The Los Angeles-South Coast Air Basin Area is classified as Extreme and

was also subject to the RACT fix-up requirements 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).

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

The Antelope Valley Air Pollution Control District (AVAPCD) was

created pursuant to California Health and Safety Code (CHSC) section

40106 and assumed all air pollution control responsibilities of the

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

Valley region of Los Angeles County,2 effective July 1,

1997. AVAPCD is the successor agency to SCAQMD in the Antelope Valley

portion of the Southeast Desert Modified Air Quality Maintenance Area.

The AVAPCD remains subject to the RACT requirements. The AVAPCD has

rescinded Rules 1106, 1142, and 1148 and has submitted negative

declarations to certify that there are no sources covered by these

rules within the jurisdiction of the AVAPCD.

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

\2\ The Antelope Valley region of Los Angeles County is

contained within the Federal area known as the Southeast Desert

Modified Air Quality Management Area and the region identified by

the State of California as the Mojave Desert Air Basin.

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

The State of California submitted these rule recissions for

incorporation into its SIP on June 23, 1998. This document addresses

EPA's direct-final action for the recission of AVAPCD Rule 1106, Marine

Coating Operations; Rule 1142, Marine Tank Vessel Operations; and Rule

1148, Thermally Enhanced Oil Recovery Wells. AVAPCD adopted these rule

recissions on January 20, 1998. These submitted rule recissions were

found to be complete on August 25, 1998 pursuant to EPA's completeness

criteria that are set forth in 40 CFR part 51 Appendix V 3

and is 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).

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

Rules 1106 and 1142 establish limits on volatile organic compound

(VOC) emissions produced by marine coating operations and marine tank

vessel operations, respectively. Rule 1148 establishes limits on VOC

emissions produced by thermally enhanced oil recovery wells. These

rules were originally adopted as part of SCAQMD's effort 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 rule

recissions.

III. EPA Evaluation and Action

EPA has evaluated all the appropriate background and submittal

documentation and has determined that the recission of Rules 1106,

1142, and 1148 is approvable. The AVAPCD has certified with Negative

Declarations that the sources regulated by these rules are not present

in the AVAPCD. Further, the

[[Page 2143]]

AVAPCD also stated that they do not anticipate these types of sources

in the future.

The rule recissions are consistent with the CAA, EPA regulations,

and EPA policy. Therefore, the recission of AVAPCD Rule 1106, Marine

Coating Operations; Rule 1142, Marine Tank Vessel Operations; and Rule

1148, Thermally Enhanced Oil Recovery Wells is 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

adverse comments be filed. This rule will be effective March 15, 1999

without further notice unless the Agency receives adverse comments by

February 12, 1999.

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

withdrawal in the Federal Register 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 March 15, 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 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

[[Page 2144]]

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 15, 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.

Dated: December 17, 1998.

Laura 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 paragraphs (c)(127)(vii)(E),

(187)(i)(C)(3), and (215)(i)(A)(5) to read as follows:

Sec. 52.220 Identification of plan.

* * * * *

(c) * * *

(127) * * *

(vii) * * *

(E) Previously approved on October 19, 1984 and now deleted without

replacement for implementation in the Antelope Valley Air Pollution

Control District Rule 1148.

* * * * *

(187) * * *

(i) * * *

(C) * * *

(3) Previously approved on December 13, 1994 and now deleted

without replacement for implementation in the Antelope Valley Air

Pollution Control District Rule 1142.

* * * * *

(215) * * *

(i) * * *

(A) * * *

(6) Previously approved on July 14, 1995 and now deleted without

replacement for implementation in the Antelope Valley Air Pollution

Control District Rule 1106.

* * * * *

[FR Doc. 99-15 Filed 1-12-99; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6560-50-P