Revisions to the California State Implementation Plan, Monterey Bay United Air Pollution Control District, 60008-60010 [05-20603]

Agencies

• ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

[Federal Register Volume 70, Number 198 (Friday, October 14, 2005)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 60008-60010]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 05-20603]


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

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

40 CFR Part 52

[R09-OAR-2005-CA-0009; FRL-7975-1]


Revisions to the California State Implementation Plan, Monterey 
Bay United Air Pollution Control District

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Direct final rule.

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

SUMMARY: EPA is taking direct final action to approve revisions to the 
Monterey Bay United Air Pollution Control District (MBUAPCD) portion of 
the California State Implementation Plan (SIP). These revisions concern 
oxides of nitrogen (NOX) and sulfur compounds emitted by 
various sources. We are approving a local rule that regulates these 
emission sources under the Clean Air Act as amended in 1990 (CAA or the 
Act).

DATES: This rule is effective on December 13, 2005 without further 
notice, unless EPA receives adverse comments by November 14, 2005. If 
we receive such comments, we will publish a timely withdrawal in the 
Federal Register to notify the public that this direct final rule will 
not take effect.

ADDRESSES: Submit comments, identified by docket number R09-OAR-2005-
CA-0009, by one of the following methods:
    1. Agency Web site: https://docket.epa.gov/rmepub/. EPA prefers 
receiving comments through this electronic public docket and comment 
system. Follow the on-line instructions to submit comments.
    2. Federal eRulemaking Portal: https://www.regulations.gov. Follow 
the on-line instructions.
    3. E-mail: steckel.andrew@epa.gov.
    4. Mail or deliver: Andrew Steckel (Air-4), U.S. Environmental 
Protection Agency Region IX, 75 Hawthorne Street, San Francisco, CA 
94105-3901.
    Instructions: All comments will be included in the public docket 
without change and may be made available online at https://
docket.epa.gov/ rmepub/, including any personal information provided, 
unless the comment includes Confidential Business Information (CBI) or 
other information whose disclosure is restricted by statute. 
Information that you consider CBI or otherwise protected should be 
clearly identified as such and should not be submitted through the 
agency website, eRulemaking portal or e-mail. The agency website and 
eRulemaking portal are ``anonymous access'' systems, and EPA will not 
know your identity or contact information unless you provide it in the 
body of your comment. If you send e-mail directly to EPA, your e-mail 
address will be automatically captured and included as part of the 
public comment. If EPA cannot read your comment due to technical 
difficulties and cannot contact you for clarification, EPA may not be 
able to consider your comment.
    Docket: The index to the docket for this action is available 
electronically at https://docket.epa.gov/rmepub and in hard copy at EPA 
Region IX, 75 Hawthorne Street, San Francisco, California. While all 
documents in the docket are listed in the index, some information may 
be publicly available only at the hard copy location (e.g., copyrighted 
material), and some may not be publicly available in either location 
(e.g., CBI). To inspect the hard copy materials, please schedule an 
appointment during normal business hours with the contact listed in the 
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Francisco D[oacute][ntilde]ez, EPA 
Region IX, (415) 972-3956, Donez.Francisco@epa.gov.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Throughout this document, ``we,'' ``us'' and 
``our'' refer to EPA.

Table of Contents

I. The State's Submittal
    A. What Rule Did the State Submit?
    B. Are There Other Versions of This Rule?
    C. What is the Purpose of the Submitted Rule Revisions?
II. EPA's Evaluation and Action
    A. How is EPA Evaluating the Rule?
    B. Does the Rule Meet the Evaluation Criteria?
    C. EPA Recommendations to Further Improve the Rule
    D. Public Comment and Final Action
III. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews

I. The State's Submittal

A. What Rule Did the State Submit?

    Table 1 lists the rule we are approving with the respective dates 
that it was adopted by the local air agency and submitted by the 
California Air Resources Board (CARB).

                                            Table 1.--Submitted Rules
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                           Rule
             Local agency                           Rule title               Adopted        Submitted
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
MBUAPCD...............................       404   Sulfur Compounds and Nitrogen        12/15/04        01/13/05
                                                    Oxides.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    On February 16, 2005, this rule submittal was 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 This Rule?

    We approved a version of Rule 404 into the SIP on June 12, 2001 (66 
FR 31554). The MBUAPCD adopted revisions to the SIP-approved version on 
December 15, 2004, and CARB submitted them to us on January 13, 2005.

C. What Is the Purpose of the Submitted Rule Revisions?

    Revised Rule 404 exempts maintenance operations on crude oil 
production casing gas collection, treatment and destruction systems 
from Rule 404's sulfur limits. In addition, the exemption for 
agricultural operations is eliminated in the revised rule. EPA's 
technical support document (TSD) has more information about this rule.

[[Page 60009]]

II. EPA's Evaluation and Action

A. How Is EPA Evaluating the Rule?

    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 sections 182(a)(2)(A) and 
182(f)), and must not relax existing requirements (see sections 110(l) 
and 193). The MBUAPCD is listed as being in attainment for the national 
ambient air quality standards (see 40 CFR part 81). Therefore, for 
purposes of controlling sulfur compounds and nitrogen oxides, Rule 404 
needs only comply with the general provisions of Section 110 of the 
Act.
    Guidance and policy documents that we use to help evaluate 
enforceability requirements consistently include the following:
    1. ``State Implementation Plans; Nitrogen Oxides Supplement to the 
General Preamble; Clean Air Act Amendments of 1990 Implementation of 
Title I; Proposed Rule,'' (the NOX Supplement), 57 FR 55620, 
November 25, 1992.
    2. ``Issues Relating to VOC Regulation Cutpoints, Deficiencies, and 
Deviations,'' EPA, May 25, 1988 (the Bluebook).
    3. ``Guidance Document for Correcting Common VOC & Other Rule 
Deficiencies,'' EPA Region 9, August 21, 2001 (the Little Bluebook).

B. Does the Rule Meet the Evaluation Criteria?

    We believe this rule is consistent with the relevant policy and 
guidance regarding enforceability and SIP relaxations. The exemption 
for oil well casing gas will allow some emissions of methane 
(CH4) and hydrogen sulfide (H2S). Because these 
gases are not regulated under the National Ambient Air Quality 
Standards (NAAQS), the exemption of these emissions does not constitute 
a reason for rule disapproval. The TSD has more information on our 
evaluation.

C. EPA Recommendations to Further Improve the Rule

    EPA has no recommendations for further improvements to this rule.

D. Public Comment and Final Action

    As authorized in section 110(k)(3) of the Act, EPA is fully 
approving the submitted rule because we believe it fulfills 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 rule. If we 
receive adverse comments by November 14, 2005, 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 December 13, 2005. This will incorporate 
these rules into the federally enforceable SIP.

III. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews

    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. For this 
reason, this action is also not subject to Executive Order 13211, 
``Actions Concerning Regulations That Significantly Affect Energy 
Supply, Distribution, or Use'' (66 FR 28355, May 22, 2001). 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 (Pub. L. 104-4).
    This rule also does not have tribal implications because it will 
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). This action also does not have Federalism 
implications because it does 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 responsibilities among the 
various levels of government, as specified in Executive Order 13132 (64 
FR 43255, August 10, 1999). This action 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 
``Protection of Children from Environmental Health Risks and Safety 
Risks'' (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. 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 December 13, 2005. 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).)

[[Page 60010]]

List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52

    Environmental protection, Air pollution control, Incorporation by 
reference, Intergovernmental relations, Nitrogen dioxide, Ozone, 
Reporting and recordkeeping requirements.

    Dated: September 13, 2005.
Laura Yoshii,
Acting Regional Administrator, Region IX.

0
Part 52, Chapter I, Title 40 of the Code of Federal Regulations is 
amended as follows:

PART 52--[AMENDED]

0
1. The authority citation for part 52 continues to read as follows:

    Authority: 42 U.S.C. 7401 et seq.

Subpart F--California

0
2. Section 52.220 is amended by adding paragraph (c)(335)(i)(A)(3) to 
read as follows:


Sec.  52.220  Identification of plan.

* * * * *
    (c) * * *
    (335) * * *
    (i) * * *
    (A) * * *
    (3) Rule 404, adopted on December 15, 2004.
* * * * *
[FR Doc. 05-20603 Filed 10-13-05; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P