18962 Federal Register / Vol. 61, No. 84 / Tuesday, April 30, 1996 / Rules and Regulations

received, the public is advised that this

action will be effective July 1, 1996.

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. 246, 256–66 (S. Ct. 1976); 42 U.S.C.

7410(a)(2).

Unfunded Mandates

Under Sections 202, 203, and 205 of

the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of

1995 (‘‘Unfunded Mandates Act’’),

signed into law on March 22, 1995, EPA

must undertake various actions in

association with proposed or final rules

that include a Federal mandate that may

result in estimated costs of $100 million

or more to the private sector or to State,

local, or tribal governments in the

aggregate.

Through submission of this state

implementation plan or plan revision,

the State and any affected local or tribal

governments have elected to adopt the

program provided for under Part D of

the Clean Air Act. These rules may bind

State, local, and tribal governments to

perform certain actions and also require

the private sector to perform certain

duties. The rules being approved by this

action will impose no new requirements

because affected sources are already

subject to these regulations under State

law. Therefore, no additional costs to

State, local, or tribal governments or to

the private sector result from this action.

EPA has also determined that this final

action does not include a mandate that

may result in estimated costs of $100

million or more to State, local, or tribal

governments in the aggregate or to the

private sector.

This action has been classified as a

Table 3 action for signature by the

Regional Administrator under the

procedures published in the Federal

Register on January 19, 1989 (54 FR

2214–2225), as revised by a July 10,

1995 memorandum from Mary Nichols,

Assistant Administrator for Air and

Radiation. The Office of Management

and Budget (OMB) has exempted this

regulatory action from Executive Order

12866 review.

List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52

Environmental protection, Air

pollution control, Hydrocarbons,

Incorporation by reference,

Intergovernmental relations, Oxides of

nitrogen, 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: April 1, 1996.

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 paragraphs (c)(195)(i)(B),

(202)(E)(i)(2), and (222)(i)(C)(3) to read

as follows:

§ 52.220 Identification of plan.

* * * * *

(c) * * *

(195) * * *

(i) * * *

(B) Ventura County Air Pollution

Control District.

(1) Rule 74.22, adopted on November

9, 1993.

* * * * *

(202) * * *

(i) * * *

(E) * * *

(2) Rule 233, adopted on October 6,

1994.

* * * * *

(222) * * *

(i) * * *

(C) * * *

(3) Rule 412, adopted on June 1, 1995.

* * * * *

[FR Doc. 96–10566 Filed 4–29–96; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6560–50–W

40 CFR Part 52

[CA 095–0006a; FRL–5454–9]

Approval and Promulgation of

Implementation Plans; California State

Implementation Plan Revision, Placer

County Air Pollution Control District,

El Dorado County Air Pollution Control

District, Ventura County Air Pollution

Control District, Yolo-Solano Air

Quality Management District, and

Mojave Desert 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 (SIP). The

revisions concern rules from the

following districts: Placer County Air

Pollution Control District (PLCAPCD),

El Dorado County Air Pollution Control

District (EDCAPCD), Ventura County

Air Pollution Control District

(VTCAPCD), Yolo-Solano Air Quality

Management District (YSAQMD), and

Mojave Desert Air Quality Management

District (MDAQMD). 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). The revised rules

control VOC emissions from automotive

refinishing, solvent cleaning and

degreasing, wood coating and graphic

arts operations. Thus, EPA is finalizing

the approval of these revisions into the

California SIP under provisions of the

CAA regarding EPA action on SIP

submittal, SIPs for national primary and

secondary ambient air quality standards

and plan requirements for

nonattainment areas.

DATES: This action is effective on July 1,

1996, unless adverse or critical

comments are received by May 30, 1996.

If the effective date is delayed, a timely

notice will be published in the Federal

Register.

ADDRESSES: 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
Federal Register / Vol. 61, No. 84 / Tuesday, April 30, 1996 / Rules and Regulations 18963

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).

2 Ventura County and a portion of the Southeast

Desert Air Basin retained their designation of

nonattainment and were 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). The Sacramento Metro Area

was reclassified from serious to severe on June 1,

1995. See 60 FR 20237 (April 25, 1995)

3California did not make the required SIP

submittal for Mojave Desert AQMD’s Rule 1104,

Graphic Arts, by November 15, 1992. On January

15, 1993, the EPA made a finding of failure to make

a submittal pursuant to section 179(a)(1), which

started an 18 month sanction clock. The rule being

acted on in this direct final rule was submitted in

response to the EPA finding of failure to submit.

4EPA 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).

rule revisions 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, S.W.,

Washington, D.C. 20460

California Air Resources Board, Stationary

Source Division, Rule Evaluation Section,

2020 ‘‘L’’ Street, Sacramento, CA 95812–

2815

Placer County Air Pollution Control District,

11464 B Avenue, Auburn, CA 95603

El Dorado County Air Pollution Control

District, 2850 Fairlane Court, Placerville,

CA 95667

Ventura County Air Pollution Control

District, 669 County Square Drive, Ventura,

CA 93003

Yolo Solano Air Quality Management

District, 1947 Galileo Court, Suite 103,

Davis, CA 95616

Mojave Desert Air Quality Management

District, 15428 Civic Drive, Suite 200,

Victorville, CA 92392–2383

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Daniel A. Meer, Chief Rulemaking

Section (A–5–3), Air and Toxics

Division, U.S. Environmental Protection

Agency, Region 9, 75 Hawthorne Street,

San Francisco, CA 94105–3901,

Telephone: (415) 744–1185

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Applicability

The rules being approved into the

California SIP include: PLCAPCD’s Rule

216, Organic Solvent Cleaning and

Degreasing Operations, and Rule 236,

Wood Products Coating Operations;

EDCAPCD’s Rule 225, Organic Solvent

Cleaning and Degreasing Operations,

Rule 230, Motor Vehicle and Mobile

Equipment Coating Operations and Rule

235, Surface Preparation and Cleanup;

VTCAPCD’s Rule 74.18 Motor Vehicle

and Mobile Equipment Coating

Operations and Rule 74.30, Wood

Products Coatings; YSAQMD’s Rule

2.13, Organic Solvents and Rule 2.26,

Motor Vehicle and Mobile Equipment

Coating Operations; MDAQMD’s Rule

1104, Organic Solvent Degreasing

Operations, Rule 1114, Wood Products

Coating Operations and Rule 1117,

Graphic Arts. These rules were

submitted by the California Air

Resources Board (CARB) to EPA on July

13, 1994 (Rules 74.30 and 1117),

November 30, 1994 (Rules 225, 230,

1104, and 2.13), February 24, 1995 (Rule

74.18 and 2.26), March 31, 1995 (Rule

1114), May 24, 1995 (Rule 236) and

October 13, 1995 (Rules 216 and 235).

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

Ventura County, part of the Southeast

Desert Air Basin, and the Sacramento

Metro area, which includes portions of

Placer, Yolo, and El Dorado County. 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

PLCAPCD, EDCAPCD, VTCAPCD,

YSAQMD and the MDAQMD portions

of the California SIP were 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. Public Law 101–549, 104 Stat.

2399, codified at 42 U.S.C. 7401–7671q.

In amended section 182 of the CAA,

Congress statutorily adopted the

requirements that nonattainment areas

both fix their deficient reasonably

available control technology (RACT)

rules for ozone and submit RACT rules

for other stationary sources of VOCs (the

RACT fix-up and catch-up

requirements). Congress established a

deadline of May 15, 1991 for States to

submit corrections to deficient rules and

a deadline of November 15, 1992 for

States to submit rules for other VOC

source categories.

Section 182 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. Ventura County, a portion of the

Southeast Desert Air Basin, the

Sacramento Metro area, which includes

portions of Placer, Yolo and El Dorado

County are classified as severe;2

therefore, these areas were subject to the

RACT fix-up and catch-up requirements

and the deadlines cited above.3

The State of California submitted

many revised RACT rules for

incorporation into its SIP on July 13,

1994, November 30, 1994, February 24,

1995, March 31, 1995, May 24, 1995,

and October 13, 1995, including the

rules being acted on in this document.

This document addresses EPA’s directfinal action for PLCAPCD’s Rule 216,

Organic Solvent Cleaning and

Degreasing Operations, and 236, Wood

Products Coating Operations;

EDCAPCD’s Rules 225, Organic Solvent

Cleaning and Degreasing Operations,

230, Motor Vehicle and Mobile

Equipment Coating Operations, and 235,

Surface Preparation and Cleanup;

VTCAPCD’s Rules 74.18 Motor Vehicle

and Mobile Equipment Coating

Operations, and 74.30, Wood Products

Coatings; YSAQMD’s Rules 2.13,

Organic Solvents, and 2.26, Motor

Vehicle and Mobile Equipment Coating

Operations; MDAQMD’s Rules 1104,

Organic Solvent Degreasing Operations,

1114, Wood Products Coating

Operations and 1117, Graphic Arts.

These submitted rules were found to be

complete on July 22, 1994 (1117),

September 12, 1994 (74.30), January 3,

1995 (1104), January 30, 1995 (2.13, 225,

and 230), March 10, 1995 (74.18, 2.26,),

May 2, 1995 (1114), July 24, 1995 (236),

and November 28, 1995 (216, 235)

pursuant to EPA’s completeness criteria

that are set forth in 40 CFR part 51

Appendix V 4 and are being finalized for

approval into the SIP.

VTCAPCD’s Rule 74.18, EDCAPCD’s

Rule 230, and YSAQMD’s Rule 2.26

control emissions of VOCs from

refinishing of motor vehicles and mobile

equipment, YSAQMD’s Rule 2.13

controls emissions of VOCs from the

usage of organic solvents, EDCAPCD’s

Rule 235 controls emissions of VOCs

from surface preparation and cleanup

using organic solvents, EDAPCD’s Rule

225, PLCAPCD’s Rule 216 and

MDAQMD’s Rule 1104 control

emissions of VOCs from organic solvent

degreasing operations, PLCAPCD’s Rule

236, MDAQMD’s Rule 1114 and

VTCAPCD’s Rule 74.30 control

emissions of VOCs from coating of wood

products and MDAQMD’s Rule 1117
18964 Federal Register / Vol. 61, No. 84 / Tuesday, April 30, 1996 / Rules and Regulations

controls emissions of VOCs from

graphic arts operations. VOCs contribute

to the production of ground level ozone

and smog. These rules were originally

adopted by the respective districts as

part of their 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

EDCAPCD’s Rule 225, PLCAPCD’s Rule

216 and MDAQMD’s Rule 1104 is

entitled, Control of Volatile Organic

Emissions From Solvent Metal Cleaning.

EPA–450/2–77–022, U.S. Environmental

Protection Agency, Office of Air Quality

Planning and Standards, November

1977, and the CTG applicable to

MDAQMD’s Rule 1117 is entitled,

Control of Volatile Organic Emissions

from Stationary Sources—Volume VIII:

Graphic Arts—Rotogravure and

Flexography, U.S. Environmental

Protection Agency, Office of Air Quality

And Standards, December 1978, EPA–

450/2–78–033. MDAQMD’s Rule 1114

and VTCAPCD’s Rule 74.30 limit

emissions from a source category for

which EPA has published a draft CTG

entitled, Control Techniques Guideline

Document; Wood Furniture Finishing

and Cleaning Operation, see 60 FR

46595, September 7, 1995, which was

used as guidance in the evaluation.

VTCAPCD’s Rule 74.18, EDCAPCD’s

Rules 230 and 235, and YSAQMD’s Rule

2.26, and 2.13 are applicable to source

categories for which EPA has not

published a CTG. Accordingly, these

rules were evaluated against the

interpretation of EPA policy found in

the Blue Book, referred to in Footnote 1

and against other EPA policy including

the EPA Region 9/CARB document

entitled: Guidance Document for

correcting VOC rule deficiencies, (April

1991). In general, these guidance

documents have been set forth to ensure

that VOC rules are fully enforceable and

strengthen or maintain the SIP.

PLCAPCD’s submitted Rule 216,

Organic Solvent Cleaning and

Degreasing Operations, includes the

following significant changes from the

current SIP:

• Updated format of rule to be

consistent with other district rules, and

to enhance clarity,

• Expanded section 200, to include

definitions of exempt compounds,

VOCs, leaks, wipe cleaning, stationary

source and lip exhaust,

• Regrouped requirements and

standards to enhance clarity and

enforceability of the rule,

• Revised section 500, to cite test

methods that have been approved by the

EPA.

PLCAPCD’s submitted Rule 236,

Wood Products Coating Operations, is a

new rule containing the following

significant provisions:

• Limits VOC emissions from coating

and surface preparation of wood

products including furniture, cabinets

and custom replica furniture, but

exempts application of coatings to

wooden musical instruments, and

exempts facilities using less than 20

gallons of coatings per year,

• The rule applies only to facilities

located in the Sacramento Valley Air

Basin portion of Placer County.

EDCAPCD’S submitted Rule 225,

Organic Solvent Cleaning and

Degreasing Operations, includes the

following significant changes from the

current SIP:

• Corrected the deficiencies noted in

EPA’s SIP call of September 7, 1988 (53

FR 34500)

• Incorporates the provisions of the

RACT/BARCT determination developed

by the California Air Resources Board

(CARB).

EDCAPCD’s submitted Rule 230,

Automotive Refinishing Operations, is a

new rule containing the following

significant provisions:

• Limits the VOC contents of

numerous coatings and solvents utilized

in the automotive refinishing industry,

• Implements the provisions of

RACT/BARCT developed by the

California Air Resources Board,

• Requires the use of high efficiency

transfer equipment for the application of

all coatings, such as High Volume Low

Pressure (HVLP), electrostatic or other

coating application methods having a

transfer efficiency of 65% or greater,

• Requires add-on abatement

equipment when non-compliant

coatings are being used,

• Specifies testmethods for analysis

of samples, determination of emissions,

transfer efficiency, capture efficiency,

metallic particle content in metallic

coatings and acid concentration in

pretreatment wash primer,

• Defines recordkeeping

requirements.

EDCAPCD’s submitted Rule 235,

Surface Preparation and Cleanup is a

new rule containing the following

significant provisions:

• Limits the emissions of VOCs from

solvent cleaning operations in

production, repair, maintenance or

servicing of parts, products, tools,

machinery, equipment, or general work

areas,

• Exempts facilities using less than 10

gallons of solvents in any one calendar

year, provided that the daily use does

not exceed one liter,

• Defines cleaning devices and

methods to be used when performing

solvent cleaning,

• Defines recordkeeping requirements

and test methods.

VTCAPCD’s Rule 74.18, Motor

Vehicles and Mobile Equipment

Coatings Operations, includes the

following significant changes from the

current SIP:

• Sets the standard for pretreatment

wash primer at 780 grams of VOC per

liter, and limits the use of this coating

to 10% of all undercoats used, averaged

over one month,

• Deletes the category of precoat,

• Changes the implementation date of

the primer sealer VOC standard to

January 1, 1997,

• Changes the implementation date of

the multistage topcoat VOC limit to

January 1, 1996,

• Limits the use of specialty coatings

to no more than 5% of total coating

usage.

VTCAPCD’s Rule 74.30, Wood

Products Coatings, is a new rule

containing the following significant

provisions:

• Limits the VOC content of coatings

applied to wood products,

• Establishes two categories of wood

coating operations: new wood products

and refinishing wood products,
Federal Register / Vol. 61, No. 84 / Tuesday, April 30, 1996 / Rules and Regulations 18965

• Allows add-on control equipment

as an alternative to using low VOC

coatings,

• Requires operators of wood coating

facilities to use coating application

methods yielding at least 65% transfer

efficiency,

• Defines the test methods to be used

and specifies recordkeeping provisions.

YSAQMD’s Rule 2.13, Organic

Solvents, includes the following

changes from the current SIP:

• Reformatting of the entire rule,

• Added section 101, Purpose

• Added section 102, Applicability

• Deleted the sections concerning

asphalt paving and graphic arts. These

sources are now covered in Rule 2.28

and 2.29 respectively,

• Added section 502, test methods.

YSAQMD’s Rule 2.26, Motor Vehicle

and Mobile Equipment Coating

Operations, is a new rule containing the

following significant provisions:

• Limits the VOC content of coatings

applied to group I and group II vehicles,

• Specifies the application method to

be used to achieve a transfer efficiency

of 65% or greater,

• Limits the VOC contents of surface

preparation and clean-up solvents,

• Limits use of specialty coatings to

no more than 5% of all coatings applied,

on a monthly basis,

• Limits use of precoat to no more

than 25%, by volume, of the amount of

primer surfacer used,

• Includes a prohibition of

specification and sale clause,

• Defines test methods to be used and

specifies records to be kept.

MDAQMD’s Rule 1104, Organic

Solvent Degreasing Operations, is a new

rule containing the following significant

provisions:

• Limits emissions of VOCs from

wipe cleaning and degreasing

operations using organic solvents,

• Applies to any facility engaged in

wipe cleaning, cold solvent cleaning

(degreasing) operations for metal/non

metal parts/products or electronic

circuit boards, which utilize organic

solvents,

• Defines equipment requirements for

remote reservoir cleaners, cold solvent

degreasers, conveyorized cold solvent

degreasers, batch loaded vapor

degreasers, and conveyorized vapor

degreasers,

• Defines operating requirements for

all degreasers in general, and batch

loaded, conveyorized degreasers, and

remote reservoir degreasers specifically,

• Provides recordkeeping

requirements and specifies test

methods.

MDAQMD’s Rule 1114, Wood

Products Coating Operations, is a new

rule containing the following significant

provisions:

• Limits emissions of VOCs from the

coating operations of wood products,

• Provides limits of VOC content for

topcoats, fillers stains, inks, mold-seal,

multi-colored and pigmented coatings,

sealers, strippers and adhesives.

• Defines application methods to be

used when applying coatings to achieve

a transfer efficiency of 65% or more,

• Defines the VOC limits of clean-up

and equipment cleaning solvents,

• Allows the use of add-on control

devices to comply with the rule,

• Exempts facilities using less than

one gallon of coating material in any

one day, or have maximum actual

emissions of 3 lbs of VOCs per day and

not more than 200 lbs of VOCs per

calendar year,

• Specifies test methods to be used

and records to be kept.

MDAQMD’s Rule 1117, Graphic Arts,

is a new rule containing the following

significant provisions:

• Applies to rotogravure and

flexographic printing sources, but

exempts facilities that emit less than

2500 pounds of VOC per month,

• Requires sources to maintain daily

records of coatings, inks, and adhesives

used by the facility. If an emission

control system is used, the facility must

continuously monitor its operating

parameters,

• Limits VOC content of inks,

coatings, and adhesives to 300 grams

per liter of coating as applied,

• Defines capture and control

efficiency requirements of 75% by

weight for publication rotogravure, of

65% by weight for packaging

rotogravure, and of 60% by weight for

flexographic printing,

• Defines test methods to be used and

records to be kept.

EPA has evaluated the submitted

rules and has determined that they are

consistent with the CAA, EPA

regulations, and EPA policy. Therefore,

PLCAPCD’s Rules 216, Organic Solvent

Cleaning and Degreasing Operations,

and 236, Wood Products Coating

Operations, EDCAPCD’s Rules 225,

Organic Solvent Cleaning and

Degreasing Operations, 230, Motor

Vehicle and Mobile Equipment Coating

Operations, and 235, Surface

Preparation and Cleanup, VTCAPCD’s

Rules 74.18, Motor Vehicle and Mobile

Equipment Coating Operations, and

74.30, Wood Products Coating,

YSAQMD’s Rules 2.13, Organic

Solvents, and 2.26, Motor Vehicles and

Mobile Equipment Coating Operations,

and MDAQMD’s Rules 1104, Organic

Solvent Degreasing Operations, 1114,

Wood Products Coating, and 1114,

Graphic Arts, are being approved under

section 110(k)(3) of the CAA as meeting

the requirements of section 110(a) and

part D.

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 July 1, 1996,

unless, by May 30, 1996, 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 July 1, 1996.

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
18966 Federal Register / Vol. 61, No. 84 / Tuesday, April 30, 1996 / Rules and Regulations

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. 246, 256–66 (S. Ct. 1976); 42 U.S.C.

7410 (a)(2).

Unfunded Mandates

Under Sections 202, 203, and 205 of

the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of

1995 (‘‘Unfunded Mandates Act’’),

signed into law on March 22, 1995, EPA

must undertake various actions in

association with proposed or final rules

that include a Federal mandate that may

result in estimated costs of $100 million

or more to the private sector or to State,

local, or tribal governments in the

aggregate.

Through submission of this state

implementation plan or plan revision,

the State and any affected local or tribal

governments have elected to adopt the

program provided for under Part D of

the Clean Air Act. These rules may bind

State, local, and tribal governments to

perform certain actions and also require

the private sector to perform certain

duties. The rules being [proposed for

approval/approved] by this action will

impose no new requirements because

affected sources are already subject to

these regulations under State law.

Therefore, no additional costs to State,

local, or tribal governments or to the

private sector result from this action.

EPA has also determined that this

[proposed or final] action does not

include a mandate that may result in

estimated costs of $100 million or more

to State, local, or tribal governments in

the aggregate or to the private sector.

This action has been classified as a

Table 3 action for signature by the

Regional Administrator under the

procedures published in the Federal

Register on January 19, 1989 (54 FR

2214–2225), as revised by a July 10,

1995 memorandum from Mary Nichols,

Assistant Administrator for Air and

Radiation. The Office of Management

and Budget (OMB) has exempted this

regulatory action from Executive Order

12866 review.

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: March 26, 1996.

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 paragraphs (c)(198)(i)(E)(2) and

(i)(J)(2), (207)(i)(B)(4), (i)(C)(4) and

(i)(D)(2),(215)(i)(B)(3) and (i)(D)(1),

(216)(i)(A)(4), (220)(i)(B)(2) and

(225)(i)(B)(5) and (i)(C)(2) to read as

follows:

§ 52.220 Identification of plan.

* * * * *

(c) * * *

(198) * * *

(i) * * *

(E) * * *

(2) Rule 1117 adopted June 22, 1994.

* * * * *

(J) * * *

(2) Rule 74.30 adopted May 17, 1994.

* * * * *

(207) * * *

(i) * * *

(B) * * *

(4) Rules 225 and 230 adopted

September 27, 1994.

(C) * * *

(4) Rule 2.13 adopted May 25, 1994.

(D) * * *

(2) Rule 1104 adopted September 28,

1994.

* * * * *

(215) * * *

(i) * * *

(B) * * *

(3) Rule 74.18 adopted December 13,

1994.

* * * * *

(D) * * *

(1) Rule 2.26 adopted November 9,

1994.

* * * * *

(216) * * *

(i) * * *

(A) * * *

(4) Rule 1114 adopted February 22,

1995.

* * * * *

(220) * * *

(i) * * *

(B) * * *

(2) Rule 236 adopted on February 9,

1995.

* * * * *

(225) * * *

(i) * * *

(B) * * *

(5) Rule 216 adopted on June 8, 1995.

(C) * * *

(2) Rule 235 adopted on June 27,

1995.

* * * * *

[FR Doc. 96–10563 Filed 4–29–96; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6560–50–W

40 CFR Part 70

[TN–KNOX–95–01; FRL–5464–1]

Clean Air Act Final Full Approval of

Operating Permits Program; Knox

County Department of Air Pollution

Control, Knox County, Tennessee

AGENCY: Environmental Protection

Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Final full approval.

SUMMARY: The EPA is promulgating full

approval of the title V operating permits

program submitted by the State of

Tennessee on behalf of the Department

of Air Pollution Control (‘‘Knox

County’’ or ‘‘the County’’), located in

the geographic area of Knox County.

The County’s program was submitted

for the purpose of complying with

Federal requirements which mandate

that states or local authorities develop,

and submit to EPA, programs for issuing

operating permits to all major stationary

sources, and to certain other sources.

EFFECTIVE DATE: May 30, 1996.

ADDRESSES: Copies of the Knox County

submittal and other supporting

information used in developing the final

full approval are available for inspection

during normal business hours at the

following location: U.S. Environmental

Protection Agency, Region 4, 345

Courtland Street NE, Atlanta, Georgia

30365, on the 3rd floor of the Tower

Building. Interested persons wanting to

examine these documents, contained in

EPA docket number TN-KNOX–95–01,

should make an appointment at least 24

hours before the visiting day.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Gracy R. Danois, Title V Program

Development Team, Air Programs

Branch, Air, Pesticides & Toxics

Management Division, U.S.

Environmental Protection Agency,

Region 4, 345 Courtland Street, NE,

Atlanta, Georgia 30365, (404) 347–3555,

Ext. 4150.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

I. Background and Purpose

A. Introduction

Title V of the 1990 Clean Air Act

Amendments (sections 501–507 of the