Federal Register / Vol. 65, No. 111 / Thursday, June 8, 2000 / Rules and Regulations 36349

manufacturing industries (SOCMI) batch

processes, reactors and distillation units

categories. On November 8, 1999, the

State of Indiana certified to the

satisfaction of the Environmental

Protection Agency that no major sources

categorized as part of the nine categories

listed above and have a potential to emit

100 tons or more of volatile organic

compounds annually are located in

Clark or Floyd Counties in southeast

Indiana, adjacent to Louisville,

Kentucky.

[FR Doc. 00–13839 Filed 6–7–00; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6560–50–P

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION

AGENCY

40 CFR Part 52

[CA241–0238a; FRL–6709–1]

Revisions to the California State

Implementation Plan, Santa Barbara

County Air Pollution Control District

AGENCY: Environmental Protection

Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Direct final rule.

SUMMARY: EPA is taking direct final

action to approve a revision to the Santa

Barbara County Air Pollution Control

District (SBCAPCD) portion of the

California State Implementation Plan

(SIP). This revision concerns volatile

organic compound (VOC) emissions

from metal parts coating operations.

EPA is approving a local rule, Rule 330,

Surface Coating of Metal Parts and

Products, that regulates these emission

sources under the Clean Air Act as

amended in 1990 (CAA or the Act).

DATES: This rule is effective on August

7, 2000 without further notice, unless

EPA receives adverse comments by July

10, 2000. If EPA receives such comment,

we will publish a timely withdrawal in

the Federal Register to notify the public

that this rule will not take effect.

ADDRESSES: Mail comments to Andy

Steckel, Rulemaking Office Chief (AIR–

4), U.S. Environmental Protection

Agency, Region IX, 75 Hawthorne

Street, San Francisco, CA 94105–3901.

You can inspect copies of the

submitted SIP revisions and EPA’s

technical support documents (TSDs) at

our Region IX office during normal

business hours. You may also see copies

of the submitted SIP revisions at the

following locations:

Environmental Protection Agency, Air

Docket (6102), Ariel Rios Building,

1200 Pennsylvania Avenue, N.W.,

Washington, D.C. 20460;

California Air Resources Board,

Stationary Source Division, Rule

Evaluation Section, 2020 ‘‘L’’ Street,

Sacramento, CA 95812; and,

Santa Barbara County Air Pollution

Control District 26, Castilian Drive,

Suite B–23, Goleta, CA 93117

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Jerald S. Wamsley, Rulemaking Office

(AIR–4), U.S. Environmental Protection

Agency, Region IX, (415) 744–1226.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Throughout this document, ‘‘we,’’ ‘‘us’’

and ‘‘our’’ refer to EPA.

Table of Contents

I. The State’s Submittal

A. What rule did the State submit?

B. Are there other versions of this rule?

C. What is the purpose of the rule

revisions?

II. EPA’s Evaluation and Action

A. How is EPA evaluating this rule?

B. Does the rule meet the evaluation

criteria?

C. EPA’s recommendations to further

improve the rule.

D. Public comment and final action.

III. Background Information

A. Why was this rule submitted?

IV. Administrative Requirements

I. The State’s Submittal

A. What Rule Did the State Submit?

Table 1 lists the rule we are approving

with the date that it was adopted by the

local air agency and submitted by the

California Air Resources Board (CARB).

TABLE 1.—SUBMITTED RULE

Local agency Rule No. Rule title Adopted Submitted

SBCAPCD ............. 330 Surface Coating of Metal Parts and Products ............................................................. 01/20/00 03/28/00

On May 19, 2000, EPA determined

that this rule submittal met the

completeness criteria in 40 CFR part 51,

appendix V, which must be met before

formal EPA review.

B. Are There Other Versions of This

Rule?

We published a limited approval and

limited disapproval of Rule 330 and

incorporated the rule into the SIP on

December 3, 1998. The SBCAPCD

adopted this version of Rule 330 on

April 21, 1995. SBCAPCD has not

submitted to EPA any versions of Rule

330 prior to the January 20, 2000

version we are acting on today.

C. What Is the Purpose of the Rule

Revisions?

SBCAPCD’s January 20, 2000

amendments to Rule 330 included these

significant changes to its 1995 adopted

version:

—The 200 gallon per year allowance for

non-compliant coating use was

lowered to 55 gallons per year

(section B.1, Exemptions);

—Daily recordkeeping of non-compliant

coating use is required (H.6,

Requirements-Recordkeeping); and,

—Test methods for determining capture

efficiency have been updated (section

I.3–Test Methods).

SBCAPCD adopted these amendments

primarily to address the deficiencies

described in EPA’s December 3, 1998

limited disapproval action. EPA’s

Technical Support Document (TSD) for

this rulemaking has more information

about these rule amendments.

II. EPA’s Evaluation and Action

A. How Is EPA Evaluating This Rule?

Generally, SIP rules must be

enforceable (see section 110(a) of the

Act), must require Reasonably Available

Control Technology (RACT) for major

sources in nonattainment areas (see

section 182(a)(2)(A)), and must not relax

existing requirements (see sections

110(l) and 193). The SBCAPCD regulates

an ozone nonattainment area (see 40

CFR part 81), so Rule 330 must fulfill

RACT.

Guidance and policy documents that

we used to define specific enforceability

and RACT requirements include the

materials listed below.

1. Portions of the proposed post-1987

ozone and carbon monoxide policy that

concern RACT, 52 FR 45044, November

24, 1987.

2. ‘‘Issues Relating to VOC Regulation

Cutpoints, Deficiencies, and Deviations;

Clarification to Appendix D of

November 24, 1987 Federal Register

document,’’ (Blue Book), notice of

availability published in the May 25,

1988 Federal Register.

3. ‘‘Control of Volatile Organic

Emissions from Existing Stationary

Sources Volume VI: Surface Coating of

Miscellaneous Metal Parts and

36350 Federal Register / Vol. 65, No. 111 / Thursday, June 8, 2000 / Rules and Regulations

Products,’’ USEPA, June 1978, EPA–

450/2–78–015.

B. Does the Rule Meet the Evaluation

Criteria?

We believe this rule is consistent with

the relevant policy and guidance

regarding enforceability, RACT, and SIP

relaxations. On December 3, 1998, EPA

gave a limited approval and limited

disapproval of Rule 330 identifying

several deficiencies within the rule that

required correction. The deficiencies

identified within EPA’s limited

disapproval have been either corrected

or addressed adequately by the

SBCAPCD’s January 20, 2000

amendments to Rule 330.

EPA’s approval action will

incorporate the revised Rule 330 into

the federally approved SIP. Our

approval action will stop the sanctions

process and Federal Implementation

Plan clock, which were started on

December 3, 1998 when EPA published

its limited disapproval action in the

Federal Register (see 63 FR 66758.)

EPA’s TSD provides more information

concerning our evaluation.

C. EPA Recommendations to Further

Improve the Rule

Our TSD does not describe additional

rule revisions recommended for the next

time the local agency modifies the rule.

D. Public Comment and Final Action

As authorized in section 110(k)(3) of

the Act, EPA is fully approving the

submitted Rule 330 because we believe

it fulfills all relevant requirements. We

do not think anyone will object to this

action, so we are finalizing the approval

without proposing it in advance.

However, in the Proposed Rules section

of this Federal Register, we are

simultaneously proposing approval of

the same submitted Rule 330. If we

receive adverse comments by July 10,

2000, we will publish a timely

withdrawal in the Federal Register to

notify the public that the direct final

approval will not take effect and we will

address the comments in a subsequent

final action based on the proposal. If we

do not receive timely adverse

comments, this direct final approval

will be effective without further notice

on August 7, 2000. This final approval

will incorporate SBCAPCD Rule 330

into the federally enforceable SIP.

III. Background Information

A. Why Was This Rule Submitted?

VOCs help produce ground-level

ozone and smog, which harm human

health and the environment. Section

110(a) of the CAA requires states to

submit regulations that control VOC

emissions. Table 2 lists some of the

national milestones leading to the

submittal of this local agency VOC rule.

TABLE 2.—OZONE NONATTAINMENT MILESTONES

Date Event

March 3, 1978 ............... EPA promulgated a list of ozone nonattainment areas under the Clean Air Act as amended in 1977. 43 FR 8964; 40

CFR 81.305.

May 26, 1988 ................ EPA notified Governors that parts of their SIPs were inadequate to attain and maintain the ozone standard and requested that they correct the deficiencies (EPA’s SIP-Call). See section 110(a)(2)(H) of the pre-amended Act.

November 15, 1990 ...... Clean Air Act Amendments of 1990 were enacted. Pub. L. 101–549, 104 Stat. 2399, codified at 42 U.S.C. 7401–

7671q.

May 15, 1991 ................ Section 182(a)(2)(A) requires that ozone nonattainment areas correct deficient RACT rules by this date.

IV. Administrative Requirements

Under Executive Order 12866 (58 FR

51735, October 4, 1993), this action is

not a ‘‘significant regulatory action’’ and

therefore is not subject to review by the

Office of Management and Budget. This

action merely approves state law as

meeting federal requirements and

imposes no additional requirements

beyond those imposed by state law.

Accordingly, the Administrator certifies

that this rule will not have a significant

economic impact on a substantial

number of small entities under the

Regulatory Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 601

et seq.). Because this rule approves preexisting requirements under state law

and does not impose any additional

enforceable duty beyond that required

by state law, it does not contain any

unfunded mandate or significantly or

uniquely affect small governments, as

described in the Unfunded Mandates

Reform Act of 1995 (Public Law 104–4).

For the same reason, this rule also does

not significantly or uniquely affect the

communities of tribal governments, as

specified by Executive Order 13084 (63

FR 27655, May 10, 1998). This rule will

not have substantial direct effects on the

States, on the relationship between the

national government and the States, or

on the distribution of power and

responsibilities among the various

levels of government, as specified in

Executive Order 13132 (64 FR 43255,

August 10, 1999), because it merely

approves a state rule implementing a

federal standard, and does not alter the

relationship or the distribution of power

and responsibilities established in the

Clean Air Act. This rule also is not

subject to Executive Order 13045 (62 FR

19885, April 23, 1997), because it is not

economically significant.

In reviewing SIP submissions, EPA’s

role is to approve state choices,

provided that they meet the criteria of

the Clean Air Act. In this context, in the

absence of a prior existing requirement

for the State to use voluntary consensus

standards (VCS), EPA has no authority

to disapprove a SIP submission for

failure to use VCS. It would thus be

inconsistent with applicable law for

EPA, when it reviews a SIP submission,

to use VCS in place of a SIP submission

that otherwise satisfies the provisions of

the Clean Air Act. Thus, the

requirements of section 12(d) of the

National Technology Transfer and

Advancement Act of 1995 (15 U.S.C.

272 note) do not apply. As required by

section 3 of Executive Order 12988 (61

FR 4729, February 7, 1996), in issuing

this rule, EPA has taken the necessary

steps to eliminate drafting errors and

ambiguity, minimize potential litigation,

and provide a clear legal standard for

affected conduct. EPA has complied

with Executive Order 12630 (53 FR

8859, March 15, 1988) by examining the

takings implications of the rule in

accordance with the ‘‘Attorney

General’s Supplemental Guidelines for

the Evaluation of Risk and Avoidance of

Unanticipated Takings’’ issued under

the executive order. This rule does not

impose an information collection

burden under the provisions of the

Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44

U.S.C. 3501 et seq.).

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

Federal Register / Vol. 65, No. 111 / Thursday, June 8, 2000 / Rules and Regulations 36351

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. A major rule

cannot take effect until 60 days after it

is published in the Federal Register.

This action is not a ‘‘major rule’’ as

defined by 5 U.S.C. 804(2).

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 7, 2000.

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.

Dated: May 23, 2000.

Felicia Marcus,

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)(277) to read as

follows:

§ 52.220 Identification of plan.

* * * * *

(c) * * *

(277) New and amended regulations

for the following APCDs were submitted

on March 28, 2000, by the Governor’s

designee.

(i) Incorporation by reference.

(A) Santa Barbara County Air

Pollution Control District.

(1) Rule 330, adopted on June 11,

1979 and amended on January 20, 2000.

* * * * *

[FR Doc. 00–14173 Filed 6–7–00; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6560–50–P

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION

AGENCY

40 CFR Part 52

[WI88–01–7319a; FRL–6706–3]

Approval and Promulgation of State

Implementation Plans; Wisconsin;

Site-Specific Revision for Uniroyal

Engineered Products

AGENCY: Environmental Protection

Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Direct final rule.

SUMMARY: The EPA is approving a

revision to the volatile organic

compound (VOC) control requirements

for Uniroyal Engineered Products, Inc.,

located in Stoughton, Wisconsin. The

Wisconsin Department of Natural

Resources (WDNR) submitted this State

Implementation Plan (SIP) revision on

October 30, 1999 and revised it on

February 17, 2000. Our approval of this

revision makes federally enforceable the

State’s February 7, 2000, Consent Order

AM–99–900, which establishes alternate

control requirements for Uniroyal.

If we receive adverse comments on

this action, we will publish a timely

withdrawal of the direct final rule in the

Federal Register informing the public

that the rule will not take effect.

DATES: This ‘‘direct final’’ rule will be

effective August 7, 2000, unless we

receive adverse or critical comments by

July 10, 2000. If the rule is withdrawn,

timely notice will be published in the

Federal Register.

ADDRESSES: Send written comments to

Carlton Nash, Chief, Regulation

Development Section, Air Programs

Branch (AR–18J), United Environmental

Protection Agency, 77 West Jackson

Boulevard, Chicago, Illinois 60604. (We

recommend that you telephone

Kathleen D’Agostino, at (312) 886–1767,

before visiting the Region 5 Office.)

A copy of this SIP revision is

available for inspection at the Office of

Air and Radiation (OAR) Docket and

Information Center (Air Docket 6102),

United States Environmental Protection

Agency, Ariel Rios Building, 1200

Pennsylvania Avenue, NW, Washington,

DC 20460, (202) 260–7548.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Kathleen D’Agostino, Regulation

Development Section (AR–18J), Air

Programs Branch, Air and Radiation

Division, United States Environmental

Protection Agency, Region 5, 77 West

Jackson Boulevard, Chicago, Illinois

60604, (312) 886–1767.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

This Supplementary Information

section is organized as follows:

A. What Action is EPA Taking?

B. How Does this Action Change Pollution

Control Requirements for Uniroyal?

C. Will this Action Adversely Impact Air

Quality in the Area?

D. What is EPA’s Final Determination?

A. What Action Is EPA Taking?

EPA is approving a revision to

Wisconsin’s SIP to relax VOC control

requirements for Uniroyal.

B. How Does This Action Change

Pollution Control Requirements for

Uniroyal?

In the early 1980s Wisconsin adopted

Reasonably Available Control

Technology (RACT) regulations for the

entire state. We approved these

regulations and incorporated them into

Wisconsin’s SIP for ozone. Uniroyal

manufactures vinyl coated fabrics and,

under these rules, is subject to a limit

of 3.8 pounds of VOC per gallon of

coating, excluding water, for coatings

used on vinyl coating lines.

Our approval of alternate control

requirements for Uniroyal exempts the

company from the 3.8 pounds of VOC

per gallon of coating limit for its vinyl

coating lines and requires the following:

1. At least 95% of all vinyl yardage

requiring topcoats must be coated with

waterborne topcoats on a monthly basis

or if the 95% requirement is not met, an

incinerator must control emissions to

the level that would have been attained

had the 95% requirement been met.

2. No more than 65,630 pounds of

VOC may be released into the ambient

air per month.

3. No more than 5,435 pounds of VOC

may be released into the ambient air per

day.

4. Specific records and monitoring

data must be kept and compliance

testing must be performed.

C. Will This Action Adversely Impact

Air Quality in the Area?

Uniroyal is located in Dane County

which is designated as attainment for

ozone. The county is, and has been

monitoring attainment of both the 1-

hour and 8-hour ozone standards. Since

1987, Uniroyal has been operating

under a State-approved variance which

allows emissions equivalent to the

emissions allowed under the SIP

revision that we are approving with this

action. Consequently, our approval of

the alternate control requirements for