67002 Federal Register / Vol. 62, No. 246 / Tuesday, December 23, 1997 / Rules and Regulations

1Among 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).

2Mojave Desert retained its designation of

nonattainment and was classified by operation of

law pursuant to sections 107(d) and 181(a) upon the

date of enactment of the CAA. See 56 FR 56694

(November 6, 1991).

3EPA 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).

Federal Actions to State or Federal

Implementation Plans.

(i) Incorporation by reference.

(A) Illinois Administrative Code, Title

35: Environmental Protection, Subtitle

B: Air Pollution, Chapter 2:

Environmental Protection Agency, Part

255 General Conformity: Criteria and

Procedures. Adopted at 21 Ill. Reg.

effective March 6, 1997.

[FR Doc. 97–33322 Filed 12–22–97; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6560–50–P

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION

AGENCY

40 CFR Part 52

[CA179–0052a] [FRL–5911–2]

Approval and Promulgation of

Implementation Plans; California State

Implementation Plan Revision, Mojave

Desert Air Quality Management District

AGENCY: Environmental Protection

Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Direct final rule.

SUMMARY: EPA is taking direct final

action on a revision to the California

State Implementation Plan (SIP). The

revision concerns Rule 1115 from the

Mojave Desert Air Quality Management

District (MDAQMD). This approval

action will incorporate Rule 1115 into

the federally approved SIP. The

intended effect of approving this rule is

to regulate emissions of volatile organic

compounds (VOCs) in accordance with

the requirements of the Clean Air Act,

as amended in 1990 (CAA or the Act).

The revised rule controls VOC

emissions from metal parts and

products coating operations. Thus, EPA

is finalizing the approval of this revision

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 action is effective on

February 23, 1998, unless adverse or

critical comments are received by

January 22, 1998. If the effective date is

delayed, a timely notice will be

published in the Federal Register.

ADDRESSES: Comments must be

submitted to Andrew Steckel at the

Region IX office listed below. 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 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 92123–1095

Mojave Desert Air Quality Management

District, 15428 Civic Drive, Suite 200,

Victorville, CA 92392

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Jerald S. Wamsley, Rulemaking Office,

AIR–4, Air Division, U.S.

Environmental Protection Agency,

Region IX, 75 Hawthorne Street, San

Francisco, CA 94105, Telephone: (415)

744–1226.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

I. Applicability

The rule being approved into the

California SIP is Rule 1115, Metal Parts

and Products Coating Operations. This

rule was submitted by the California Air

Resources Board (CARB) to EPA on July

23, 1996.

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

Mojave Desert portion of San

Bernardino County, California (see 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 SIPCall). 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-amended

guidance.1 EPA’s SIP-Call used that

guidance to indicate the necessary

corrections for specific nonattainment

areas. The Mojave Desert portion of San

Bernardino County is classified as

‘‘severe’’.2 Therefore, this area was

subject to the RACT fix-up requirement

and the May 15, 1991 deadline.

The State of California submitted

many revised RACT rules for

incorporation into its SIP on July 23,

1996, including the rule being acted on

in this document. This document

addresses EPA’s direct-final action for

MDAQMD Rule 1115, Metal Parts and

Products Coating Operations. MDAQMD

revised and adopted Rule 1115 on April

22, 1996. This submitted rule was found

to be complete on October 30, 1996

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.

MDAQMD Rule 1115 is a prohibitory

rule governing the use and application

of coating compounds containing

photochemically reactive volatile

organic compounds (VOCs) in the metal

parts and products coating industry.

VOCs contribute to the production of

ground level ozone and smog. This rule

was originally adopted as part of the

MDAQMD effort to achieve the National

Ambient Air Quality Standard (NAAQS)

for ozone and in response to EPA’s SIPCall and the section 182(a)(2)(A) CAA

requirement.

Formerly, on January 5, 1993, EPA

proposed a limited approval/

disapproval of MDAQMD’s Rule 1115

(see 58 FR 322). This version of Rule

1115 was adopted by MDAQMD on

March 2, 1992 and submitted by the

CARB to EPA on June 19, 1992 as a

revision to the California SIP. EPA has

not taken final action on the January 5,

1993 proposal.

In response to EPA’s January 5, 1993

proposal, the MDAQMD Board amended

Rule 1115 and adopted these revisions
Federal Register / Vol. 62, No. 246 / Tuesday, December 23, 1997 / Rules and Regulations 67003

on April 22, 1996. The CARB submitted

the revised rule to EPA on July 23, 1996.

This revision of Rule 1115 is the subject

of today’s approval action. EPA’s

evaluation and final action for this rule

follows below.

III. EPA Evaluation and Action

In determining the approvability of a

VOC 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 today’s action,

appears in the various EPA policy

guidance documents listed in footnote

one. Among those provisions is the

requirement that a VOC rule must, at a

minimum, provided for the

implementation of RACT for stationary

sources of VOC emissions. This

requirement was carried forth from the

pre-amended Act.

For the purpose of assisting state and

local agencies in developing RACT

rules, EPA prepared a series of Control

Technique Guideline (CTG) documents.

The CTGs are based on the underlying

requirements of the Act and specify the

presumptive norms for what is RACT

for specific source categories. Under the

CAA, Congress ratified EPA’s use of

these documents, as well as other

Agency policy, for requiring States to

‘‘fix-up’’ their RACT rules. See section

182(a)(2)(A). The CTG applicable to this

rule is entitled, ‘‘Control of Volatile

Organic Emissions from Exist Stationary

Sources Volume VI: Surface Coating of

Miscellaneous Metal Parts and

Products,’’ USEPA, June 1978, EPA–

450/2–78–015. Further interpretations

of EPA policy are found in the Blue

Book, referred to in footnote one. In

general, these guidance documents have

been set forth to ensure that VOC rules

are fully enforceable and strengthen or

maintain the SIP.

Currently, there is no version of

MDAQMD Rule 1115, Miscellaneous

Metal Parts and Products Coating

Operations, in the SIP. The submitted

rule includes the following provisions:

rule applicability; definitions, coating

requirements; add-on emission control

device requirements; exceptions from

the rule; administrative requirements;

monitoring and records; and test

methods for determining compliance

with the rule.

EPA has evaluated the submitted rule

and has determined that it is consistent

with the CAA, EPA regulations, and

EPA policy. Therefore, MDAQMD Rule

1115, Miscellaneous Metal Parts and

Products Coating Operations, is being

approved under section 110(k)(3) of the

CAA as meeting the requirements of

section 110(a) and part D. For further

information, EPA’s review of the April

22, 1996 version of Rule 1115 can be

found in the ‘‘Technical Support

Document’’ for today’s rulemaking

action.

As discussed earlier, in response to

EPA’s January 5, 1993 proposed limited

approval/disapproval action, the

MDAQMD Board amended Rule 1115

on April 22, 1996. The MDAQMD Board

responded to EPA’s comments within

the proposed limited approval/

disapproval and subsequent

correspondence by correcting the listed

rule deficiencies and providing a rule

consistent with EPA regulations and

policy. Therefore, given today’s

approval action, EPA does not intend to

finalize the January 5, 1993 proposal.

Nothing in this action should be

construed as permitting or allowing or

establishing a precedent for any future

implementation plan. Each request

revision to the state implementation

plan shall be considered separately in

light of specific technical, economic,

and environmental factors and in

relation to relevant statutory and

regulatory requirements.

EPA is publishing this document

without prior proposal because the

Agency views this as a noncontroversial

amendment and anticipates no adverse

comments. However, in a separate

document in this Federal Register

publication, the EPA is proposing to

approve the SIP revision should adverse

or critical comments be filed. This

action will be effective February 23,

1998, unless, within 30 days of its

publication, adverse or critical

comments are received.

If the EPA receives such comments,

this action will be withdrawn before the

effective date by publishing a

subsequent document that will

withdraw the final action. All public

comments received will then be

addressed in a subsequent final rule

based on this action serving as a

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

action will be effective February 23,

1998.

IV. Administrative Requirements

A. Executive Order 12866

The Office of Management and Budget

(OMB) has exempted this regulatory

action from E.O. 12866 review.

B. Regulatory Flexibility Act

Under the Regulatory Flexibility Act,

5 U.S.C. 600 et seq., EPA must prepare

a regulatory flexibility analysis

assessing the impact of any proposed or

final rule on small entities. 5 U.S.C. 603

and 604. Alternatively, EPA may certify

that the rule will not have a significant

impact on a substantial number of small

entities. Small entities include small

businesses, small not-for-profit

enterprises, and government entities

with jurisdiction over populations of

less than 50,000.

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 impose any new requirements, the

Administrator certifies that it does not

have a significant impact on any small

entities affected. Moreover, due to the

nature of the Federal-State relationship

under the CAA, preparation of a

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).

C. 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 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 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 Federal requirements.

Accordingly, no additional costs to

State, local, or tribal governments, or to
67004 Federal Register / Vol. 62, No. 246 / Tuesday, December 23, 1997 / Rules and Regulations

the private sector, result from this

action.

D. Submission to Congress and the

General Accounting Office

Under 5 U.S.C. 801(a)(1)(A) as added

by the Small Business Regulatory

Enforcement Fairness Act of 1996, EPA

submitted 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 General Accounting

Office prior to publication of the rule in

today’s Federal Register. This rule is

not a ‘‘major’’ rule as defined by 5

U.S.C. 804(2).

E. 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 February 23,

1998. 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: September 27, 1997.

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 paragraph (c)(239)(i)(A)(2) to

read as follows:

§ 52.220 Identification of plan.

* * * * *

(c) * * *

(239) * * *

(i) * * *

(A) * * *

(2) Rule 1115, adopted on March 2,

1992 and amended on April 22, 1996.

* * * * *

[FR Doc. 97–33321 Filed 12–22–97; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6560–50–M

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION

AGENCY

40 CFR Part 52

[Region II Docket No. NY10–2–174; FRL–

5934–7]

Approval and Promulgation of

Implementation Plans; Revisions to the

New York State Implementation Plan

for Ozone

AGENCY: Environmental Protection

Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Final rule.

SUMMARY: The Environmental Protection

Agency is approving a revision to the

New York State Implementation Plan

(SIP) related to the control of volatile

organic compounds. The SIP revision

consists of amendments to Part 200,

‘‘General Provisions,’’ Part 201,

‘‘Permits and Certificates,’’ Part 228,

‘‘Surface Coating Processes,’’ Part 229,

‘‘Petroleum and Volatile Organic Liquid

Storage,’’ Part 233, ‘‘Pharmaceutical and

Cosmetic Manufacturing Processes,’’

and Part 234, ‘‘Graphic Arts.’’ The

amendments extend reasonably

available control technology rules to

enlarged nonattainment areas and to all

of New York State which is part of the

Northeast Ozone Transport Region as

required by the Clean Air Act. In

addition, the amendments to Part 228

correct deficiencies in New York’s

existing SIP, as required by the Clean

Air Act.

EFFECTIVE DATE: This rule is effective

January 22, 1998.

ADDRESSES: Copies of the State

submittal are available at the following

addresses for inspection during normal

business hours:

Environmental Protection Agency,

Region II Office, Air Programs Branch,

290 Broadway, 25th Floor, New York,

New York 10007–1866.

New York State Department of

Environmental Conservation, Division

of Air Resources, 50 Wolf Road, Albany,

New York 12233.

Environmental Protection Agency, Air

and Radiation Docket and Information

Center, Air Docket (6102), 401 M Street,

S.W., Washington, D.C. 20460.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Paul

R. Truchan, Air Programs Branch,

Environmental Protection Agency, 290

Broadway, 25th Floor, New York, New

York 10278, (212) 637–4249.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: On May

24, 1995, the Environmental Protection

Agency (EPA) published in the Federal

Register (60 FR 27464) a Notice of

Proposed Rulemaking (NPR) concerning

a revision to the New York State

Implementation Plan (SIP) for ozone.

The State requested the SIP be revised

to incorporate revised regulations

contained in Title 6 of the New York

Code of Rules and Regulations (NYCRR)

Part 200, ‘‘General Provisions,’’ Part 201

‘‘Permits and Certificates,’’ Part 228,

‘‘Surface Coating Processes,’’ Part 229

‘‘Petroleum and Volatile Organic Liquid

Storage and Transfer,’’ Part 233,

‘‘Pharmaceutical and Cosmetic

Manufacturing Processes,’’ and Part 234,

‘‘Graphic Arts.’’ These regulations were

adopted on February 26, 1993, and

became effective on April 4, 1993.

Final Action

The revisions and the rationale for

EPA’s action were explained in EPA’s

May 24, 1995 NPR and will not be

restated here since EPA’s final action

does not differ from that proposed in the

NPR. No comments were received on

EPA’s proposed action. EPA is

approving Parts 200, 201, 228, 229, 233

and 234 because they are consistent

with EPA policy and guidance and also

meet the requirements of sections 110,

182(a)(2)(A), 182(b)(2) and 184(b) of the

Clean Air Act.

It should be noted that sections

228.3(e), 229.3(g) and (h), 233.3(h), and

234.3(f) permit the Commissioner of the

New York State Department of

Environmental Conservation (NYSDEC)

to accept a lesser degree of control

(alternative requirements) upon

submission of satisfactory technical

and/or economic evidence that the

source has applied reasonably available

control technology. These provisions

also require that any lesser degree of

control must be submitted to the EPA as

a revision to the SIP. EPA views these

provisions as giving the Commissioner

the authority to permit alternative

requirements once they have been

submitted and approved by EPA as SIP

revisions. EPA will not recognize any

variance or alternate requirement as

being federally enforceable until it is

submitted to EPA by the State and is

approved by EPA as a source specific

SIP revision.

Sections 229.4(a)(4), 233.4(b)(4) and

234.4(b)(1)(iv) permits the

Commissioner and EPA to accept