[Federal Register Volume 66, Number 101 (Thursday, May 24, 2001)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 28666-28668]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 01-13045]


=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

40 CFR Part 52

[CA 224-0279a; FRL-6982-6]


Revisions to the California and Arizona State Implementation 
Plans, Antelope Valley Air Pollution Control District and Maricopa 
County Environmental Services Department

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Direct final rule.

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

SUMMARY: EPA is taking direct final action to approve revisions to the 
Antelope Valley Air Pollution Control District (AVAPCD) and Maricopa 
County Environmental Services Department (MCESD) portions of the 
respective California and Arizona State Implementation Plans (SIPs). 
These revisions concern volatile organic compound (VOC) emissions from 
solvent cleaning operations and automotive windshield washer fluid use. 
We are approving local rules that regulate these emission sources under 
the Clean Air Act as amended in 1990 (CAA or the Act).

DATES: This rule is effective on July 23, 2001 without further notice, 
unless EPA receives adverse comments by June 25, 2001. If we receive 
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, 1001 ``I'' Street, Sacramento, CA 95814.
Arizona Department of Environmental Quality, 3033 North Central 
Avenue, Phoenix, AZ 85012.
Antelope Valley Air Pollution Control District, 43301 Division 
Street, Suite 206, Lancaster, CA 93539.
Maricopa County Environmental Services Department, Air Quality 
Division, 1001 North Central Avenue, Suite 201, Phoenix, AZ 85004.


FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Yvonne Fong, Rulemaking Office (AIR-
4), U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Region IX, (415) 744-1199.

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 States submit?
    B. Are there other versions of these rules?
    C. What is the purpose of 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. EPA recommendations to further improve the rules.
    D. 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 States Submit?

    Table 1 lists the rules we are approving with the dates that they 
were adopted by the local air agencies and submitted by the California 
Air Resources Board (CARB) and Arizona Department of Environmental 
Quality (ADEQ).

                                            Table 1.--Submitted Rules
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
            Local Agency              Rule No.                Rule Title                  Adopted     Submitted
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
AVAPCD.............................       1171  Solvent Cleaning Operations...........     11/17/98     02/16/99
MCESD..............................        344  Automotive Windshield Washer Fluid....     04/07/99     08/04/99
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    On April 23, 1999 and August 25, 1999, these respective rule 
submittals from the CARB and ADEQ were found to meet the completeness 
criteria in 40 CFR part 51, appendix V, which must be met before formal 
EPA review.

B. Are There Other Versions of These Rules?

    We approved a version of Rule 1171 into the California SIP on July 
14, 1995. The AVAPCD adopted revisions to the SIP-approved version on 
November 17, 1998 and CARB submitted them to us on February 16, 1999. 
There are no previous versions of Rule 344 in the Arizona SIP, although 
the MCESD adopted an earlier version of this rule on April 3, 1996, and 
ADEQ submitted it to us on February 26, 1997. While we can act on only 
the most recently submitted version, we have reviewed materials 
provided with previous submittals.

C. What Is the Purpose of the Submitted Rules?

    These rules limit the emissions of VOCs from solvent cleaning 
operations and automotive windshield washer fluid use. The TSDs have 
more information about these rules.

II. EPA's Evaluation and Action

A. How Is EPA Evaluating the Rules?

    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 
AVAPCD and MCESD regulate ozone nonattainment areas (see 40 CFR part 
81). Rule 1171 must fulfill RACT; because Rule 344 does not apply to 
major sources, it is not required to impose RACT.

[[Page 28667]]

    Guidance and policy documents that we used to define specific 
enforceability and RACT requirements include the following:
    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 Notice,'' (Blue Book), notice of availability published in the 
May 25, 1988 Federal Register.
    3. ``Guidance Document for Correcting VOC Rule Deficiencies,'' 
(Little Blue Book), April 1991.
    4. National Volatile Organic Compound Emissions Standards for 
Consumer Products, 40 CFR part 59, subpart C.
    5. Article 2, Consumer Products, of the California Code of 
Regulations Title 17, section 94507-94517.

B. Do the Rules Meet the Evaluation Criteria?

    We believe these rules are consistent with the relevant policy and 
guidance regarding enforceability, RACT, and SIP relaxations. The TSDs 
have more information on our evaluation.

C. EPA Recommendations To Further Improve the Rules

    The TSDs describe additional rule revisions that do not affect 
EPA's current action but are recommended for the next time the local 
agencies modify the rules.

D. Public Comment and Final Action

    As authorized in section 110(k)(3) of the Act, EPA is fully 
approving the submitted rules because we believe they fulfill all 
relevant requirements. We do not think anyone will object to this 
approval, so we are finalizing it without proposing it in advance. 
However, in the Proposed Rules section of this Federal Register, we are 
simultaneously proposing approval of the same submitted rules. If we 
receive adverse comments by June 25, 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 23, 2001. This will incorporate these 
rules into the federally enforceable SIP.

III. Background Information

Why Were These Rules 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 these local agency 
VOC rules.

                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 pre-existing 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). This rule also does not 
have a substantial direct effect on one or more Indian tribes, on the 
relationship between the Federal Government and Indian tribes, or on 
the distribution of power and responsibilities between the Federal 
Government and Indian tribes, as specified by Executive Order 13175 (65 
FR 67249, November 9, 2000), nor will it 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

[[Page 28668]]

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 23, 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, Hydrocarbons, 
Incorporation by reference, Intergovernmental relations, Ozone, 
Reporting and recordkeeping requirements, Volatile organic compounds.

    Dated: April 27, 2001.
Michael Schulz,
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 D--Arizona

    2. Section 52.120 is amended by adding paragraphs (c)(94)(i)(E) to 
read as follows:


Sec. 52.120  Identification of plan.

* * * * *
    (c) * * *
    (94) * * *
    (i) * * *
    (E) Rule 344, adopted on April 7, 1999.
* * * * *

Subpart F--California

    3. Section 52.220 is amended by adding paragraphs (c)(262)(i)(E)(2) 
to read as follows:


Sec. 52.220  Identification of plan.

* * * * *
    (c) * * *
    (262) * * *
    (i) * * *
    (E) * * *
    (2) Rule 1171, adopted on November 17, 1998.
* * * * *
[FR Doc. 01-13045 Filed 5-23-01; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-U