Approval and Promulgation of Implementation Plans; California State Implementation Plan Revision; North Coast Unified Air Quality Management District and Northern Sonoma County Air Pollution Control District

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

40 CFR Part 52

[CA-011-0071; FRL-6229-5]

Approval and Promulgation of Implementation Plans; California

State Implementation Plan Revision; North Coast Unified Air Quality

Management District and Northern Sonoma County Air Pollution Control

District

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Direct final rule.

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

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

California State Implementation Plan (SIP). This action is an

administrative change which revises the definitions in North Coast

Unified Air Quality Management District (NCUAQMD) and Northern Sonoma

County Air Pollution Control District (NSCAPCD) Rules 130, Definitions.

The intended effect of approving this action is to incorporate changes

to the definitions for clarity and consistency with revised federal and

state definitions. This approval action will incorporate these

definitions into the Federally approved SIP. 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 April 12, 1999, without further

notice, unless EPA receives relevant adverse comments by March 11,

1999. If EPA receives such comment, then it will publish a timely

withdrawal in the Federal Register informing the public that this rule

will not take effect.

ADDRESSES: Written comments on this action should be addressed to:

Andrew

[[Page 6224]]

Steckel, Rulemaking Office (AIR-4), Air Division, U.S. Environmental

Protection Agency, Region 9, 75 Hawthorne Street, San Francisco, CA

94105-3901. Copies of the rule revisions and EPA's existing SIP

approved rule is 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 95812.

North Coast Unified Air Quality Management District, 2300 Myrtle

Avenue, Eureka, CA 95501.

Northern Sonoma County Air Pollution Control District, 150

Matheson, Healdsburg, CA 95448.

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 94105-3901, Telephone: (415)

744-1189.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

I. Applicability

The rules being approved into the California SIP include: North

Coast Unified Air Quality Management District, Rule 130 and Northern

Sonoma County Air Pollution Control District, Rule 130. These rules

were submitted by the California Air Resources Board to EPA on December

31, 1990 and May 18, 1998 (North Coast Unified) and March 10, 1998

(Northern Sonoma).

II. Background

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

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

or pre-amended Act), that listed NCUAQMD and NSCAPCD as attainment or

unclassifiable for all pollutants, see 43 FR 8964, 40 CFR 81.305. In

response to Section 110(a) of the Act and other requirements, the

NCUAQMD and NSCAPCD submitted many rules which EPA approved into the

SIP.

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

NCUAQMD and NSCAPCD rules: Rule 130, Definitions. These rules were

adopted by NCUAQMD on December 7, 1989 and September 26, 1997 and by

NSCAPCD on July 25, 1995, and submitted by the State of California for

incorporation into its SIP on December 31, 1990 and May 18, 1998 (North

Coast Unified) and on March 10, 1998 (Northern Sonoma). These rules

were found to be complete on February 28, 1991 and July 17, 1998 (North

Coast Unified) and on May 21, 1998 (Northern Sonoma), pursuant to EPA's

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

\1\ and are being finalized for approval into the SIP. These rules were

originally adopted as part of NCUAQMD and NSCAPCD's efforts to achieve

and maintain the National Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS).

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

\1\ 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).

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

The following are EPA's summary and final action for these rules.

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,

which forms the basis for this action, 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 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).

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

EPA previously reviewed many rules from the NCUAQMD and NSCAPCD and

incorporated them into the federally approved SIP pursuant to section

110(k)(3) of the CAA. Those definitions that are being superseded by

today's action are as follows:

North Coast Unified AQMD. Rule 130, Definitions (submitted

11/10/76, 05/23/79, 03/23/81, 03/14/84, 08/14/84, 10/19/84)

Northern Sonoma County APCD. Rule 130, Definitions

(submitted 11/10/76, 10/19/84, 10/16/85)

NCUAQMD Rule 130, Definitions, has been revised to include the

following new definitions: (b1) Baseline/Impact Area, (b2) Baseline

Concentration, (b2) Best Available Control Technology (BACT), (e2)

Episode Alert, (n1) Net Increase In Emissions, (p2) Permit, (p4)

Potential to Emit, (p6) Precursor, (s3) Smelt Dissolving Tank, (s4)

Stacking, and (t2) Toxic Air Contaminants. Administrative and other

minor changes have also been made to some SIP approved definitions for

clarity and consistency with revised federal and state definitions.

NSCAPCD Rule 130, Definitions, has been revised to include the

following new definitions: (b1) Baseline Concentration, (b2) Base Unit,

(b3) Best Available Control Technology (BACT), (e2) Episode Alert, (m1)

Modeling, (n1) Net Increase In Emissions, (p2) Permit, (p4) Potential

to Emit, (p6) Precursor, (p7) Prevention of Significant Deterioration

(PSD) Increment, (s2) Significant, (s3) Small Business, (s4) Smelt

Dissolving Tank, (s5) Stacking, (s9) Steam Generating Unit, and (t2)

Toxic Air Contaminant (TAC). Administrative and other minor changes

have also been made to some SIP approved definitions for clarity and

consistency with revised federal and state definitions.

EPA has evaluated the submitted rules and has determined that they

allow proper implementation of rules previously approved into the SIP,

and do not relax the requirements of those rules. Therefore, NCUAQMD

and NSCAPCD Rules 130, Definitions, are being approved under section

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

part D. Future action by EPA on prohibitory, new source review, or

other NCUAQMD and NSCAPCD rules may require changes to these

definitions. We are not, however, aware of any such necessary change at

this time.

EPA is publishing these rules 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 April

12, 1999 without further notice unless the Agency receives relevant

adverse comments by March 11, 1999.

If the EPA received 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 this action. Any parties

interested in commenting on this action should do so at this time. If

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

[[Page 6225]]

rule will be effective on April 12, 1999 and no further action will be

taken on the proposed rule.

IV. Administrative Requirements

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 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

[[Page 6226]]

States Court of Appeals for the appropriate circuit by April 12, 1999.

Filing a petition for reconsideration by the Administration 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, Nitrogen

dioxide, Ozone, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements, Volatile

organic compound.

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: January 4, 1999.

Laura Yoshii,

Regional Administrator, EPA 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: 41 U.S.C. 7401 et seq.

2. Section 52.220 is amended by adding paragraphs (c)(254)(i)(B)(1)

and (255)(i)(B)(1).

Sec. 52.220 Identification of plan.

* * * * *

(c) * * *

(254) * * *

(i) * * *

(B) Northern Sonoma County Air Pollution Control District.

(1) Rule amended on July 25, 1995.

* * * * *

(255) * * *

(i) * * *

(B) North Coast Unified Air Quality Management District.

(1) Rule 130 amended September 26, 1997.

* * * * *

[FR Doc. 99-2793 Filed 2-8-99; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6560-50-M