Federal Register / Vol. 66, No. 85 / Wednesday, May 2, 2001 / Rules and Regulations 21875

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION

AGENCY

40 CFR Part 52

[CA 153–0195a; FRL–6958–1]

Revisions to the California State

Implementation Plan, Butte County Air

Quality Management District

AGENCY: Environmental Protection

Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Direct final rule.

SUMMARY: EPA is taking direct final

action on revisions to the California

State Implementation Plan. The

revisions are rules from the Butte

County Air Quality Management District

(BCAQMD) portion of the California

State Implementation Plan (SIP). Under

authority of the Clean Air Act as

amended in 1990 (CAA or the Act), we

are approving or rescinding local rules

that address general permitting

requirements for stationary sources in

the BCAQMD.

DATES: These revisions are effective on

July 2, 2001 without further notice,

unless EPA receives adverse comments

by June 1, 2001. If EPA receives such

comment, it will publish a timely

withdrawal Federal Register informing

the public that this rule will not take

effect.

ADDRESSES: Mail comments to Gerardo

Rios, Permits Office Chief (AIR–3), Air

Division, U.S. Environmental Protection

Agency, Region IX, 75 Hawthorne

Street, San Francisco, CA 94105.

You can inspect copies of the

submitted rule 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 rule revisions at the

following locations:

Permits Office (AIR–3), Air Division,

Environmental Protection Agency,

Region IX, 75 Hawthorne Street, San

Francisco, CA 94105.

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, 1001 ‘‘I’’ Street,

Sacramento, CA 95814.

Butte County Air Quality Management

District, 2525 Dominic Drive, Suite J,

Chico, CA 95928.

A courtesy copy of the rules may be

available via the Internet at http://

www.arb.ca.gov/drdb/drdbltxt.htm.

However, these versions of the rules

may be different than the versions

submitted to EPA for approval. Readers

are cautioned to verify that the adoption

date of the rule listed is the same as the

rule submitted to EPA for approval. The

official submittal is only available at the

agency addresses listed above.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

David Wampler, Permits Office, (Air–3),

Air Division, U.S. Environmental

Protection Agency, Region IX, 75

Hawthorne Street, San Francisco, CA

94105; (415) 744–1256.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

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

and ‘‘our’’ refer to EPA.

Table of Contents

I. The State’s Submittal

A. What rules did the State submit?

B. Are there other versions of these rules?

C. What are the changes in the submitted

rules?

II. EPA’s Evaluation and Action

A. How is EPA evaluating the rules?

B. Do the rules meet the evaluation

criteria?

C. Public comment and final action

III. Background information

Why were these rules submitted?

IV. Administrative Requirements

I. The State’s Submittal

A. What Rules Did the State Submit?

Table 1 lists the rules we are

approving with the dates that they were

adopted or rescinded by the local air

agencies and submitted by the

California Air Resources Board (CARB).

TABLE 1.—SUBMITTED RULES

Local agency Rule

No. Rule title Adopted or rescinded Submitted

BCAQMD ..... 403 Permit to Operate .......................................................................................................... 11/09/93 .................... 06/16/95

BCAQMD ..... 422 Required Information ..................................................................................................... 09/18/90 .................... 03/26/96

BCAQMD ..... 424 State Implementation Plan ............................................................................................ 08/06/85 .................... 03/26/96

BCAQMD ..... 1105 Request for Designated Non-Major Source Status ...................................................... 02/15/96 .................... 05/10/96

BCAQMD ..... 4–3 Permit Fee ..................................................................................................................... 08/20/85 ....................

Rescinded .................

05/10/96

BCAQMD ..... 4.5A Standards for Granting Applications ............................................................................. 08/06/85 ....................

Rescinded .................

05/10/96

BCAQMD ..... 4.5B Conditional Approval ..................................................................................................... 08/06/85 ....................

Rescinded .................

05/10/96

BCAQMD ..... 4.6 State Ambient Air Quality Standards ............................................................................ 07/26/83 ....................

Rescinded .................

05/10/96

BCAQMD ..... 4–6A State Implementation Plan ............................................................................................ 07/26/83 ....................

Rescinded .................

05/10/96

BCAQMD ..... 4.9 Action on Applications ................................................................................................... 08/06/85 ....................

Rescinded .................

05/10/96

BCAQMD ..... 4–11 Appeals ......................................................................................................................... 08/20/85 ....................

Rescinded .................

05/10/96

On July 31, 1995, the submittal of

Rule 403 was found to meet the

completeness criteria in 40 CFR part 51,

appendix V, which must be met before

formal EPA review. On May 15, 1996,

the submittal of Rules 422 and 424 were

found to meet the completeness criteria.

On July 19, 1996, the submittal of Rule

1105 and the recision submittals of

Rules 4–3, 4.5A, 4.5B, 4–6, 4–6A, 4.9,

and 4–11 were found to meet the

completeness criteria.

Rules 4–3 and 4–11 were previously

submitted on April 11, 1983 and

approved on November 18, 1983. Rules

4.5A and 4.5B were previously

submitted on February 25, 1980 and

approved on May 27, 1982. Rules 4–6

and 4–6A were previously submitted on

August 6, 1982 and approved on June 1,

1983. Rule 4.9 was previously submitted

on July 10, 1980 and approved on May

27, 1982.

21876 Federal Register / Vol. 66, No. 85 / Wednesday, May 2, 2001 / Rules and Regulations

B. Are There Other Versions of These

Rules?

On February 3, 1987, EPA approved

into the SIP versions of Rules 403 and

422. Today’s action will approve the

only revision to these rules since our

1987 action.

On June 1, 1983, EPA approved into

the SIP Rule 4.6. This rule is not

required in the SIP, because it only

relates to non-SIP Rule 4–5.

On June 1, 1983, EPA approved into

the SIP Rule 4.6A. Submitted Rule 424

revises and recodifies SIP-approved

Rule 4.6A. There are no other versions

of Rules 424 or 4.6A that have been

submitted to us since our 1983 approval

of Rule 4.6A. Today’s action will

rescind Rule 4.6A and replace it with

Rule 424.

There is currently no version of Rule

1105 in the SIP, nor has there been

earlier versions of 1105 submitted for

SIP-approval.

On November 18, 1983, EPA

approved into the SIP Rule 4–3. Rule 4–

3 is submitted for recision without

replacement, because the collection of

local fees by BCAQMD is inappropriate

for EPA to enforce in the SIP.

On May 27, 1982, EPA approved into

the SIP Rules 4.5A, 4.5B, and 4.9.

BCAQMD revised and recodified these

rules with new Rules 420, 421, and 423,

respectively, which were approved into

the SIP on February 3, 1987.

On November 18, 1983, EPA

approved into the SIP Rule 4–11.

BCAQMD revised and recodified this

rule with new Rule 425, which was SIPapproved on February 3, 1987.

BCAQMD has not revised this rule since

that time.

C. What Are the Changes in the

Submitted Rules?

Rule 403 includes the following

significant additions to the current SIP

Rule 403:

• Any equipment in existence prior to

June 15, 1982 emitting a controlled

pollutant must obtain a permit to

operate.

• Equipment subject to Title V of the

CAA of 1990 must obtain a Title V

permit.

Rule 422 includes the following

significant additions to the current SIP

Rule 422:

• The APCO may require information

that will disclose the nature, extent,

quantity, or degree of air contaminants

that may be discharged into the

atmosphere.

Rule 424 includes the following

change to the current SIP Rule 4–6A:

• The rule references Rule 430

instead of Rule 4.5.

Rule 1105 is a new rule that includes

the following provisions:

• The owner or operator of a specified

stationary source, that would otherwise

be a major source, would be allowed

under Rule 1105 to request and accept

federally-enforceable limits such that

the annual potential to emit would be

below major-source thresholds in order

to allow the source to be considered a

‘‘designated non-major source.’’

• The limits to the potential to emit

must be approved by EPA and must be

permanent, quantifiable, and

practically-enforceable.

• A designated non-major source

would not be subject to the permitting

requirements of Rule 1101, Title V—

Federal Operating Permits or of Title V

of the Clean Air Act of 1990.

The TSD has more information about

these rules.

II. EPA’s Evaluation and Action

A. How Is EPA Evaluating the Rules?

All of the Rules in today’s action

except Rule 1105 describe

administrative provisions and

definitions that support the New Source

Review permitting rules found in other

BCAQMD requirements. In combination

with the other requirements, these rules

must be enforceable (see section 110(a)

of the CAA) and must not relax existing

requirements (see sections 110(l) and

193). In general, EPA evaluated these

rules and has determined that each rule

is consistent with the CAA, EPA

regulations and EPA policy.

Rule 1105 was evaluated using EPA

policy describing options sources have

for limiting their potential under section

112 and Title V of the CAA. This policy

is generally described in EPA’s 1995

‘‘Transition Policy’’—a January 25, 1995

policy memorandum entitled, ‘‘Options

for Limiting the Potential to Emit of a

Stationary Source Under section 112

and Title V of the Clean Air Act’’ from

John Seitz, Director of EPA’s Office of

Air Quality Planning and Standards, to

EPA’s Regional Air Division Directors.

B. Do the Rules Meet the Evaluation

Criteria?

We believe these rules and recisions

are consistent with the relevant policy

and guidance regarding enforceability

and SIP relaxations. The TSD has more

information on our evaluation.

C. Public Comment and Final Action

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

the Act, EPA is fully approving the

submitted rules and recisions because

we believe they fulfill all relevant

requirements. We do not think anyone

will object to this, so we are finalizing

the approval without proposing it in

advance. However, in the Proposed rule

section of this Federal Register, we are

simultaneously proposing approval of

the same submitted rules. If we receive

adverse comments by June 1, 2001, 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, the

direct final approval will be effective

without further notice on July 2, 2001.

This will incorporate these rules into or

rescind rules from the federally

enforceable SIP.

III. Background Information

Why Were These Rules Submitted?

Sections 172 and 173 of the CAA

require that permits be obtained for

affected sources, major sources, and any

sources required by parts C and D of the

CAA. CARB submitted revised and

updated administrative rules to support

this permitting requirement, and

submitted for recision redundant

administrative rules that were already

replaced with revised SIP rules. CARB

also submitted a rule that allows a

source to be not considered a major

source.

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

Federal Register / Vol. 66, No. 85 / Wednesday, May 2, 2001 / Rules and Regulations 21877

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

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 July 2, 2001.

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, Incorporation by

reference, Intergovernmental relations,

Permitting, and Reporting and

recordkeeping requirements.

Dated: February 9, 2001.

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)(54)(viii)(C),

(c)(86)(ii)(B), (c)(124)(xii)(B),

(c)(138)(i)(B), (c)(168)(i)(A)(4),

(c)(222)(i)(E), (c)(230)(i)(E), and

(c)(231)(i)(D) to read as follows:

§ 52.220 Identification of plan.

* * * * *

(c) * * *

(54) * * *

(viii) * * *

(C) Previously approved on May 27,

1982 in paragraph (viii)(B) of this

section and now deleted Rules 4.5A and

4.5B.

* * * * *

(86) * * *

(ii) * * *

(B) Previously approved on May 27,

1982 in paragraph (ii)(A) of this section

and now deleted Rule 4.9.

* * * * *

(124) * * *

(xii) * * *

(B) Previously approved on June 1,

1983 in paragraph (xii)(A) of this section

and now deleted Rules 4–6 and 4–6A.

* * * * *

(138) * * *

(i) * * *

(B) Previously approved on November

18, 1983 in paragraph (i)(A) of this

section and now deleted without

replacement Rules 4–3 and Rule 4–11.

* * * * *

(168) * * *

(i) * * *

(A) * * *

(4) Rule 424, adopted on August 6,

1985.

* * * * *

(222) * * *

(i) * * *

(E) Butte County Air Quality

Management District.

(1) Rule 403, adopted on November 9,

1993.

* * * * *

(230) * * *

(i) * * *

(E) Butte County Air Quality

Management District.

(1) Rule 422, adopted on September

18, 1990.

* * * * *

(231) * * *

(i) * * *

(D) Butte County Air Quality

Management District.

(1) Rule 1105, adopted on February

15, 1996.

* * * * *

[FR Doc. 01–10649 Filed 5–1–01; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6560–50–P

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION

AGENCY

40 CFR Part 261

[FRL–6968–6]

Hazardous Waste Management

System; Identification and Listing of

Hazardous Waste; Final Exclusion

AGENCY: Environmental Protection

Agency.

ACTION: Final rule.

SUMMARY: The Environmental Protection

Agency (EPA or Agency) today is

granting a petition submitted by BMW

Manufacturing Corporation, Greer,

South Carolina (BMW), to exclude (or

‘‘delist’’) a certain hazardous waste from

the lists of hazardous wastes. BMW will

generate the petitioned waste by treating

wastewater from BMW’s automobile

assembly plant when aluminum is one

of the metals used to manufacture

automobile bodies. The waste so

generated is a wastewater treatment

sludge that meets the definition of F019.

BMW petitioned EPA to grant a

‘‘generator-specific’’ delisting because

BMW believes that its F019 waste does