36346 Federal Register / Vol. 65, No. 111 / Thursday, June 8, 2000 / Rules and Regulations

(w) Negative declarations—Aerospace

coating operations, industrial clean up

solvents, industrial wastewater

processes, offset lithography operations,

business plastics, automotive plastics,

and synthetic organic chemical

manufacturing industries (SOCMI) batch

processes, reactors and distillation units

categories. On November 8, 1999, and

January 10, 2000, 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 25 tons or more

of volatile organic compounds annually

are located in Lake or Porter Counties in

northwest Indiana.

[FR Doc. 00–13841 Filed 6–7–00; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6560–50–P

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION

AGENCY

40 CFR part 52

[IN112–1a, FRL–6708–5]

Approval and Promulgation of

Implementation Plans; Indiana

AGENCY: Environmental Protection

Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Direct final rule.

SUMMARY: The EPA is approving nine

negative declarations submitted by the

State of Indiana on November 8, 1999.

Each of these negative declarations

concerns sources located in Clark and

Floyd Counties, which are classified as

a moderate nonattainment area for the

pollutant ozone. Each of the negative

declarations indicates that the State has

searched its emissions source inventory

and permit files for Clark and Floyd

Counties and determined that there are

no sources with a potential to emit 100

tons per year or more of volatile organic

compounds (VOC) in the following

source categories: aerospace coating

operations, industrial clean up solvents,

industrial wastewater processes, offset

lithographic printing, business plastics,

automotive plastics, and synthetic

organic chemical manufacturing

industries (SOCMI) batch processes,

reactors and distillation units.

DATES: This rule is effective on August

7, 2000 unless EPA receives adverse

written comments by July 10, 2000. If

adverse comment is received, EPA will

publish a timely withdrawal of the rule

in the Federal Register and inform the

public that the rule will not take effect.

ADDRESSES: Written comments should

be sent to: J. Elmer Bortzer, Chief,

Regulation Development Section, Air

Programs Branch (AR–18J),

Environmental Protection Agency, 77

West Jackson Boulevard, Chicago,

Illinois 60604.

Copies of the negative declarations are

available for inspection at the

Environmental Protection Agency,

Region 5, Air and Radiation Division, 77

West Jackson Boulevard, Chicago,

Illinois 60604. (Please telephone

Randolph O. Cano at (312) 886-6036

before visiting the Region 5 Office.)

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Randolph O. Cano, Environmental

Protection Specialist, Regulation

Development Section, Air Programs

Branch (AR–18J), EPA, Region 5,

Chicago, Illinois 60604, (312) 886–6036.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Throughout this document wherever

‘‘we,’’ ‘‘us,’’ or ‘‘our’’ is used we mean

EPA.

Table of Contents

I. What is the background for this action?

II. What are negative declarations and what

is their purpose?

III. What types of sources are covered by

these negative declarations?

IV. If new sources are constructed in Clark

and Floyd Counties, will VOC emissions

from these source categories be

uncontrolled?

V. EPA Rulemaking Action.

VI. Administrative Requirements.

A. Executive Order 12866

B. Executive Order 13045

C. Executive Order 13084

D. Executive Order 13132

E. Regulatory Flexibility Act

F. Unfunded Mandates

G. Submission to Congress and the

Comptroller General

H. National Technology Transfer and

Advancement Act

I. Petitions for Judicial Review

I. What Is the Background for This

Action?

The Clean Air Act (Act), as amended

in 1977, required States to adopt

emission controls reflective of

reasonably available control technology

(RACT) for sources of VOC emissions in

ozone nonattainment areas.

Subsequently, EPA issued three sets of

control technique guidelines (CTGs)

documents, establishing a ‘‘presumptive

norm’’ for RACT for various categories

of VOC sources. The three sets of CTGs

were (1) Group I—issued before January

1978 (15 CTGs); (2) Group II—issued in

1978 (9 CTGs); and (3) Group III—issued

in the early 1980’s (5 CTGs). Those

sources not covered by a CTG were

called non-CTG sources. EPA

determined that an area’s State

Implementation Plan (SIP) approved

attainment date established which

RACT rules the State needed to adopt

and implement and for which areas. In

those areas where the State sought an

extension of the attainment date under

section 172(a)(2) to as late as December

31, 1987, RACT was required for all

CTG sources and for all major (100 tons

per year or more of VOC emissions

under the 1977 Act) non-CTG sources.

Indiana sought and received such an

extension from EPA for Clark and Floyd

Counties.

When Congress amended the Act in

1999, it included section 182(b)(2)

which required States to adopt RACT

rules for all areas designated

nonattainment for ozone and classified

as moderate or above. There are three

parts to the section 182(b)(2) RACT

requirement: (1) RACT for sources

covered by an existing CTG— i.e., a CTG

issued prior to the enactment of the

amended Act of 1990; (2) RACT for

sources covered by a post-enactment

CTG; and (3) all major sources not

covered by a CTG. These section

182(b)(2) RACT requirements are

referred to as the RACT ‘‘catch-up’’

requirements.

Section 183 of the 1990 Amendments

required EPA to issue CTGs for 13

source categories by November 15, 1993.

EPA published a CTG by this date for

the following source categories:

Synthetic Organic Chemical

Manufacturing Industry (SOCMI)

Reactors and Distillation, aerospace

manufacturing coating operation,

shipbuilding and ship repair coating

operations, and wood furniture coating

operation; however, EPA has not

completed the CTGs for the remaining

source categories. The amended Act

requires States to submit rules for

sources covered by a post-enactment

CTG in accordance with a schedule

specified in a CTG document.

The EPA created a CTG document as

appendix E to the General Preamble for

the Implementation of Title I of the

Clean Air Act Amendments of 1990. (57

FR 18070, 18077, April 28, 1992). In

appendix E, EPA interpreted the Act to

allow a State to submit a non-CTG rule

by November 15, 1992, or to defer

submittal of a RACT rule for sources

that the State anticipated would be

covered by a post-enactment CTG, based

on the list of CTGs EPA expected to

issue to meet the requirement in section

183. Appendix E states that if EPA fails

to issue a CTG by November 15, 1993

(which it did for 11 source categories),

the responsibility shifts to the State to

submit a non-CTG RACT rule for those

sources by November 15, 1994. In

accordance with section 182(b)(2),

implementation of that RACT rule

should occur by May 31, 1995.

Federal Register / Vol. 65, No. 111 / Thursday, June 8, 2000 / Rules and Regulations 36347

1Alternative Control Documents are prepared by

EPA to provide information on emissions, controls,

control options and costs which the State can use

in developing rules based on RACT.

II. What Are Negative Declarations and

What Is Their Purpose?

The EPA does not require States to

develop plans or regulations to control

emissions from major sources which are

not located in the planning area. In

order to determine whether this might

be the case, the State may examine its

emissions inventory before initiating the

planning and development process. If

the State finds no subject sources, then

it may prepare and submit to EPA, a

negative declaration stating there are no

sources in the planning area which

would be subject to the required rule,

rather than a control plan for sources in

a particular category. In addition to

reviewing its emissions inventory,

Indiana reviewed its permit files for

sources with a potential to emit 100 tons

or more of VOC annually located in

Clark and Floyd Counties.

III. What Types of Sources Are Covered

by These Negative Declarations?

The State negative declarations

addressed two CTG categories: Control

of Volatile Organic Compound

Emissions from Industrial Wastewater

(EPA Document Number: EPA–453/D–

93–056) and Control of Volatile Organic

Emissions from Coating Operations at

Aerospace Manufacturing and Rework

Facilities (EPA Document Number:

EPA–453/R–97–004, December, 1997).

The State’s negative declarations also

includes two source categories

addressed by the Alternative Control

Document 1: Surface Coating of

Automotive/Transportation and

Business Machine Plastic Parts (EPA

4531R–94–017, February 1994 including

page 4–3a as revised April 4, 1994). The

State negative declarations also

addressed five non-CTG source

categories because the State must

control VOC emissions from all sources

with a potential to emit 100 tons or

more of VOC annually located in Clark

and Floyd Counties. Indiana searched

its inventory and determined that no

sources with a potential to emit 100 tons

or more of VOC per year were located

in Clark and Floyd Counties in the

following five non-CTG source

categories: industrial clean up solvents,

offset lithography operations, and

SOCMI batch processes, reactors and

distillation units.

IV. If New Sources Are Constructed in

Clark and Floyd Counties, Will the VOC

Emissions From These Source

Categories Be Uncontrolled?

No, new major sources locating in a

nonattainment area are subject to the

more stringent emission control

requirements of New source Review

under part D of the Act.

V. EPA Rulemaking Action

EPA has examined the State’s

negative declarations regarding the lack

of need for regulations controlling

emissions from these source categories

from sources located in Clark and Floyd

Counties. EPA also examined the

supporting evidence provided by the

State. As a result, EPA approves

Indiana’s negative declarations for these

sources.

EPA is publishing this action without

prior proposal because EPA views this

as a noncontroversial revision and

anticipates no adverse comments.

However, in a separate document in this

Federal Register publication, EPA is

proposing to approve the State Plan

should adverse written comments be

filed. This action will be effective

without further notice unless EPA

receives relevant adverse written

comment by July 10, 2000. Should EPA

receive such comments, it will publish

a final rule informing the public that

this action will not take effect. 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 action will be

effective on August 7, 2000.

VI. Administrative Requirements

A. Executive Order 12866

The Office of Management and Budget

(OMB) has exempted this regulatory

action from Executive Order 12866,

entitled ‘‘Regulatory Planning and

Review.’’

B. 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 Executive

Order 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 Executive

Order 13045 because it does not involve

decisions intended to mitigate

environmental health or safety risks.

C. Executive Order 13084

Under Executive Order 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, 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. This action

does not involve or impose any

requirements that affect Indian Tribes.

Accordingly, the requirements of

section 3(b) of Executive Order 13084

do not apply to this rule.

D. Executive Order 13132

Federalism (64 FR 43255, August 10,

1999) revokes and replaces Executive

Orders 12612 (Federalism) and 12875

(Enhancing the Intergovernmental

Partnership). Executive Order 13132

requires EPA to develop an accountable

process to ensure ‘‘meaningful and

timely input by State and local officials

in the development of regulatory

policies that have federalism

implications.’’ ‘‘Policies that have

federalism implications’’ is defined in

the Executive Order to include

regulations that 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.’’ Under

36348 Federal Register / Vol. 65, No. 111 / Thursday, June 8, 2000 / Rules and Regulations

Executive Order 13132, EPA may not

issue a regulation that has federalism

implications, that imposes substantial

direct compliance costs, and that is not

required by statute, unless the Federal

government provides the funds

necessary to pay the direct compliance

costs incurred by State and local

governments, or EPA consults with

State and local officials early in the

process of developing the proposed

regulation. EPA also may not issue a

regulation that has federalism

implications and that preempts State

law unless the Agency consults with

State and local officials early in the

process of developing the proposed

regulation.

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, 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. Thus, the requirements of

section 6 of the Executive Order 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 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 sections 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 costs to State,

local, or tribal governments in the

aggregate; or to the private sector, of

$100 million or more. Under section

205, EPA must select the most costeffective 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 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. 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). This rule

will be effective August 7, 2000 unless

EPA receives adverse written comments

by July 10, 2000.

H. National Technology Transfer and

Advancement Act

Section 12 of the National Technology

Transfer and Advancement Act

(NTTAA) of 1995 requires Federal

agencies to evaluate existing technical

standards when developing a new

regulation. To comply with NTTAA,

EPA must consider and use ‘‘voluntary

consensus standards’’ (VCS) if available

and applicable when developing

programs and policies unless doing so

would be inconsistent with applicable

law or otherwise impractical.

The EPA believes that VCS are

inapplicable to this action. Today’s

action does not require the public to

perform activities conducive to the use

of VCS.

I. 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 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,

Administrative practice and procedure,

Air pollution control, Hydrocarbons,

Intergovernmental relations, Ozone,

Reporting and recordkeeping

requirements, Volatile organic

compounds.

Dated: May 24, 2000.

Francis X. Lyons,

Regional Administrator, Region 5.

For the reasons stated in the

preamble, 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 P—Indiana

2. Section 52.777 is amended by

adding paragraph (v) to read as follows:

§ 52.777 Control strategy: Photochemical

oxidants (hydrocarbons).

* * * * *

(v) Negative declarations—Aerospace

coating operations, industrial clean up

solvents, industrial wastewater

processes, offset lithography operations,

business plastics, automotive plastics,

and synthetic organic chemical

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