Federal Register / Vol. 60, No. 44 / Tuesday, March 7, 1995 / Rules and Regulations 12451

On November 12, 1993 the State

submitted a redesignation request.

Section 175(A) requires submittal of a

maintenance plan for areas that are

redesignating to attainment. This

maintenance plan must contain

contingency measures which shall be

implemented if a violation of the ozone

standard occurs. Consequently, if the

State’s redesignation request is

approved, the NOX requirements found

in the maintenance plan for that area

would, thereafter, apply as long as the

area is designated attainment for the

ozone standard.

This action will become effective on

April 6, 1995.

IV. Miscellaneous

A. Applicability to Future SIP Decisions

Nothing in this action should be

construed as permitting, allowing or

establishing a precedent for any future

request for revision to any SIP. The EPA

shall consider each request for revision

to the SIP in light of specific technical,

economic, and environmental factors

and in relation to relevant statutory and

regulatory requirements.

B. Executive Order 12866

This action has been classified as a

Table 2 action by the Regional

Administrator under the procedures

published in the Federal Register on

January 19, 1989 (54 FR 2214–2225), as

revised by an October 4, 1993

memorandum from Michael Shapiro,

Acting Assistant Administrator for Air

and Radiation. The OMB has exempted

this regulatory action from E.O. 12866

review.

C. Regulatory Flexibility

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.

This approval does not create any

new requirements. Therefore, I certify

that this action does not have a

significant impact on any small entities

affected. Moreover, due to the nature of

the Federal-State relationship under the

Act, preparation of the regulatory

flexibility analysis would constitute

Federal inquiry into the economic

reasonableness of the State action. The

Act forbids EPA to base its actions

concerning SIPs on such grounds.

Union Electric Co. v. U.S. E.P.A., 427

U.S. 246, 256–66 (1976).

D. Petitions for Judicial Review

Under section 307(b)(1) of the Act,

petitions for judicial review of this

action must be filed in the United States

Court of Appeals for the appropriate

circuit by May 8, 1995. 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, Oxides of nitrogen,

Incorporation by reference,

Intergovernmental relations, Ozone.

Dated: February 8, 1995.

Norman R. Niedergang,

Acting Regional Administrator.

40 CFR part 52 is amended as follows.

PART 52—[AMENDED]

1. The authority citation for part 52

continues to read as follows:

Authority: 42 U.S.C. 7401–7671(q).

Subpart X—Michigan

2. Section 52.1174 is amended by

adding paragraph (j) to read as follows:

§ 52.1174 Control strategy: Ozone.

* * * * *

(j) Approval—On November 12, 1993,

the Michigan Department of Natural

Resources submitted a petition for

exemption from the oxides of nitrogen

requirements of the Clean Air Act for

the Detroit-Ann Arbor ozone

nonattainment area. The submittal

pertained to the exemption from the

oxides of nitrogen requirements for

conformity, inspection and

maintenance, reasonably available

control technology, and new source

review. These are required by sections

176(c), 182(b)(4), and 182(f) of the 1990

amended Clean Air Act, respectively. If

a violation of the ozone standard occurs

in the Detroit-Ann Arbor ozone

nonattainment area, the exemption shall

no longer apply.

[FR Doc. 95–5444 Filed 3–6–95; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6560–50–P

40 CFR Part 52

[CA 102–8–6860a; FRL–5160–4]

Approval and Promulgation of

Implementation Plans; California State

Implementation Plan Revision, Bay

Area 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 concern rules from the Bay

Area Air Quality Management District

(BAAQMD). This approval action will

incorporate these rules into the federally

approved SIP. The intended effect of

approving these rules 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).

In addition, the final action on these

rules serves as a final determination that

any deficiencies in these rules noted in

prior proposed rulemakings have been

corrected. The rules control VOC

emissions from pump and compressor

seals at petroleum refineries, chemical

plants, bulk plants, and bulk terminals;

large commercial bakeries; and

polyester resin operations. Thus, EPA is

finalizing the approval of these rules

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 final rule is effective on

May 8, 1995 unless adverse or critical

comments are received by April 6, 1995.

If the effective date is delayed, a timely

notice will be published in the Federal

Register.

ADDRESSES: Copies of the rules 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 rules are

available for inspection at the following

locations:

Rulemaking Section (A–5–3), Air and

Toxics Division, U.S. Environmental

Protection Agency, Region IX, 75

Hawthorne Street, San Francisco, CA

94105.

Environmental Protection Agency, Air

Docket (6102), 401 ‘‘M’’ Street SW.,

Washington, DC 20460,

California Air Resources Board,

Stationary Source Division, Rule

Evaluation Section, 2020 ‘‘L’’ Street,

Sacramento, CA 95814.
12452 Federal Register / Vol. 60, No. 44 / Tuesday, March 7, 1995 / 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).

2The Bay Area 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 55 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).

Bay Area Air Quality Management

District, 939 Ellis Street, San

Francisco, CA 94109.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Christine Vineyard, Rulemaking Section

(A–5–3), Air and Toxics Division, U.S.

Environmental Protection Agency,

Region IX, 75 Hawthorne Street, San

Francisco, CA 94105, Telephone: (415)

744–1197.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Applicability

The BAAQMD rules being approved

into the California SIP include: 8–25,

Pump and Compressor Seals at

Petroleum Refineries, Chemical Plants,

Bulk Plants, and Bulk Terminals; 8–42,

Large Commercial Bakeries; and 8–50,

Polyester Resin Operations. These rules

were submitted by the California Air

Resources Board (CARB) to EPA on

September 28, 1994.

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

Bay Area. 43 FR 8964, 40 CFR 81.305.

Because this area was unable to meet

the statutory attainment date of

December 31, 1982, California requested

under section 172(a)(2), and EPA

approved, an extension of the

attainment date to December 31, 1987.

(40 CFR 52.222). 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 SIP-Call). On

November 15, 1990, the Clean Air Act

Amendments of 1990 were enacted.

Public Law 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-amendment

guidance.1 EPA’s SIP-Call used that

guidance to indicate the necessary

corrections for specific nonattainment

areas. The San Francisco-Bay Area (Bay

Area) is classified as moderate; 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 September

28, 1994, including the rules being acted

on in this document. This notice

addresses EPA’s direct-final action for

the BAAQMD’s Rules 8–25, Pump and

Compressor Seals at Petroleum

Refineries, Chemical Plants, Bulk

Plants, and Bulk Terminals; 8–42, Large

Commercial Bakeries; and 8–50,

Polyester Resin Operations. The

BAAQMD adopted Rules 8–25 and 8–42

on June 1, 1994 and Rule 8–50 on June

15, 1994.

These submitted rules were found to

be complete on November 22, 1994

pursuant to EPA’s completeness criteria

that are set forth in 40 CFR part 51,

appendix V 3 and are being finalized for

approval into the SIP.

Rule 8–25 controls volatile organic

compound (VOC) emissions from

pumps and compressors; Rule 8–42

controls VOC emissions from bakery

ovens; and Rule 8–50 controls VOC

emissions from manufacturing or

production operations using polyester

resins. VOCs contribute to the

production of ground level ozone and

smog. These rules were originally

adopted as part of the BAAQMD’s effort

to achieve the National Ambient Air

Quality Standard (NAAQS) for ozone

and in response to EPA’s SIP-Call and

the section 182(a)(2)(A) CAA

requirement. The following is EPA’s

evaluation and final action for these

rules.

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

1. Among those provisions is the

requirement that a VOC rule must, at a

minimum, provide 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

Rule 8–25 is entitled, ‘‘Control of

Volatile Organic Leaks from Synthetic

Organic Chemical and Polymer

Manufacturing’’ EPA–450/3–83–006),

U.S. EPA, March 1984. Further

interpretations of EPA policy are found

in the Blue Book, referred to in footnote

1. In general, these guidance documents

have been set forth to ensure that VOC

rules are fully enforceable and

strengthen or maintain the SIP. For

some source categories, such as large

commercial bakeries (BAAQMD Rule 8–

42) and polyester resin operations

(BAAQMD Rule 8–50), EPA did not

publish a CTG. In these cases, the

district may determine what controls are

required by reviewing the operation of

facilities subject to the regulation and

evaluating regulations for similar

sources in other areas. EPA did publish

an Alternative Control Technology

Document (ACT) entitled, ‘‘Alternative

Control Technology Document for

Bakery Oven Emissions’’, EPA 453/R–

92–017, December 1972 as guidance for

bakery sources.

BAAQMD Rule 8–25, Pump and

Compressor Seals at Petroleum

Refineries, Chemical Plants, Bulk

Plants, and Bulk Terminals improves

the current SIP rule by:

• Revising the compliance dates.

• Adding definitions to clarify the

rule.

• Adding visual inspection

requirements.

• Adding new test method

requirements.
Federal Register / Vol. 60, No. 44 / Tuesday, March 7, 1995 / Rules and Regulations 12453

• Adding recordkeeping

requirements.

• Adding a ‘‘burden of proof’’

requirement for exemptions.

BAAQMD Rule 8–42, Large

Commercial Bakeries, is a new rule

which was adopted to control emissions

of VOCs from large commercial bread

bakeries. However, Rule 8–42 has been

in effect in the Bay Area since 1989. The

rule requires:

• All ovens to be vented to an

emission control system.

• Sources to maintain records of the

emissions control system’s key

operating parameters on a daily basis.

• Sources claiming exemptions to

provide the necessary information to

substantiate the exemption.

• Sources to use district method ST–

32 for determination of emissions.

• The use of an emissions factor table

for calculation of emissions.

BAAQMD Rule 8–50, Polyester Resin

Operations, is a new rule which limits

the emission of VOCs from polyester

resin operations. The rule provides the

following:

• Standards which affect the

application and curing of resin, gel coat

application and curing, and clean-up

solvents.

• Standards for resins and gel coats

are not applicable to polyester resin

operations that choose to install and

operate emission control equipment.

• Storage requirements for surface

preparation and clean-up solvents.

• Recordkeeping requirements and

test methods.

EPA has evaluated the submitted

rules and has determined that they are

consistent with the CAA, EPA

regulations, and EPA policy. Therefore,

the BAAQMD’s Rule 8–25, Pump and

Compressor Seals at Petroleum

Refineries, Chemical Plants, Bulk

Plants, and Bulk Terminals; Rule 8–42,

Large Commercial Bakeries; and Rule 8–

50, Polyester Resin Operations are being

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

CAA as meeting the requirements of

section 110(a) and part D. The final

action on these rules serves as a final

determination that any deficiencies in

these rules noted in prior proposed

rulemakings have been corrected.

Nothing in this action should be

construed as permitting or allowing or

establishing a precedent for any future

implementation plan. Each request for

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 May 8, 1995,

unless, by April 6, 1995, 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 May 8, 1995.

Regulatory Process

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 population of less

than 50,000.

SIP approvals under sections 110 and

301(a) and subchapter I, part D of the

CAA 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, I certify 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 regulatory flexibility analysis would

constitute Federal inquiry into the

economic reasonableness of state action.

The CAA forbids EPA to base its

actions concerning SIPs on such

grounds. Union Electric Co. v. U.S.

E.P.A., 427 U.S. 256–66 (S. Ct. 1976); 42

U.S.C. 7410 (a)(2).

The Office of Management and Budget

has exempted this action from review

under Executive Order 12866.

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: February 10, 1995.

Felicia Marcus,

Regional Administrator.

Subpart F of 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. 7401–7671q.

Subpart F—California

2. Section 52.220 is amended by

adding paragraph (c)(199)(i)(A)(3) to

read as follows:

§ 52.220 Identification of plan.

* * * * *

(c) * * *

(199) * * *

(i) * * *

(A) * * *

(3) Rules 8–25 and 8–42, adopted on

June 1, 1994 and Rule 8–50, adopted on

June 15, 1994.

* * * * *

[FR Doc. 95–5348 Filed 3–6–95; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6560–50–W

40 CFR Parts 52 and 81

[TX–53–1–6843a; FRL–5163–5]

Approval and Promulgation of

Implementation Plans and Designation

of Areas for Air Quality Planning

Purposes; State of Texas; Approval of

the Maintenance Plan for Victoria

County and Redesignation of the

Victoria County Ozone Nonattainment

Area to Attainment

AGENCY: Environmental Protection

Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Direct final rule.

SUMMARY: On July 27, 1994 the State of

Texas submitted a maintenance plan

and a request to redesignate the Victoria

County, Texas ozone nonattainment

area to attainment. Under the Clean Air

Act (CAA), nonattainment areas may be

redesignated to attainment if sufficient

data are available to warrant the

redesignation and the area meets the

other CAA redesignation requirements.

In this action, EPA is approving Texas’

redesignation request because it meets

the maintenance plan and redesignation