• Embed Doc
  • Copy Link
  • Readcast
  • Collections
  • CommentGo Back
Download
 
34981
Federal Register
/Vol. 69, No. 120/Wednesday, June 23, 2004/Proposed Rules
1
The reader may refer to the Notice of ProposedRulemaking, December 5, 1991 (56 FR 63774), andthe preamble to the final rule promulgatedSeptember 4, 1992 (57 FR 40792) for further background and information on the OCSregulations.
Floor, 79 Elm Street, Hartford,Connecticut 06106
–
5127 during theState
’
s comment period. For additionalinformation on Connecticut
’
s publicparticipation process please contact Ms.Patricia Downes, ConnecticutDepartment of EnvironmentalProtection, Bureau of Air ManagementPlanning and Standards Division, 5thFloor, 79 Elm Street, Hartford,Connecticut 06106
–
5127 at (860) 424
–
3027.
IV. Statutory and Executive OrderReviews
Under Executive Order 12866 (58 FR51735, October 4, 1993), this action isnot a
‘‘
significant regulatory action
’’
andtherefore is not subject to review by theOffice of Management and Budget. Forthis reason, this action is also notsubject to Executive Order 13211,
‘‘
Actions Concerning Regulations ThatSignificantly Affect Energy Supply,Distribution, or Use
’’
(66 FR 28355, May22, 2001). This action merely approvesState law as meeting Federalrequirements and imposes no additionalrequirements beyond those imposed byState law. Accordingly, theAdministrator certifies that this rulewill not have a significant economicimpact on a substantial number of smallentities under the Regulatory FlexibilityAct (5 U.S.C. 601
et seq.
). Because thisrule approves pre-existing requirementsunder State law and does not imposeany additional enforceable duty beyondthat required by State law, it does notcontain any unfunded mandate orsignificantly or uniquely affect smallgovernments, as described in theUnfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995(Public Law 104
–
4).This rule also does not have tribalimplications because it will not have asubstantial direct effect on one or moreIndian tribes, on the relationship between the Federal government andIndian tribes, or on the distribution of power and responsibilities between theFederal government and Indian tribes,as specified by Executive Order 13175(65 FR 67249, November 9, 2000). Thisaction also does not have federalismimplications because it does not havesubstantial direct effects on the States,on the relationship between the nationalgovernment and the States, or on thedistribution of power andresponsibilities among the variouslevels of government, as specified inExecutive Order 13132 (64 FR 43255,August 10, 1999), because it merelyapproves a State rule implementing aFederal standard, and does not alter therelationship or the distribution of powerand responsibilities established in theClean Air Act. This rule also is notsubject to Executive Order 13045
‘‘
Protection of Children fromEnvironmental Health Risks and SafetyRisks
’’
(62 FR 19885, April 23, 1997), because it is not economicallysignificant.In reviewing SIP submissions, EPA
’
srole is to approve State choices,provided that they meet the criteria of the Clean Air Act. In this context, in theabsence of a prior existing requirementfor the State to use voluntary consensusstandards (VCS), EPA has no authorityto disapprove a SIP submission forfailure to use VCS. It would thus beinconsistent with applicable law forEPA, when it reviews a SIP submission,to use VCS in place of a SIP submissionthat otherwise satisfies the provisions of the Clean Air Act. Thus, therequirements of section 12(d) of theNational Technology Transfer andAdvancement Act of 1995 (15 U.S.C.272 note) do not apply. This rule doesnot impose an information collection burden under the provisions of thePaperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44U.S.C. 3501
et seq.
)
List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52
Environmental protection, Airpollution control, Carbon monoxide,Intergovernmental relations.
Authority:
42 U.S.C. 7401
et seq.
Dated: June 15, 2004.
Robert W. Varney,
Regional Administrator, EPA New England.
[FR Doc. 04
–
14219 Filed 6
–
22
–
04; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560
–
50
–
P
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTIONAGENCY40 CFR Part 55
[FRL
–
7778
–
1]
Outer Continental Shelf AirRegulations; Consistency Update forCalifornia
AGENCY
:
Environmental ProtectionAgency (
‘‘
EPA
’’
).
ACTION
:
Proposed rule
—
ConsistencyUpdate.
SUMMARY
:
EPA is proposing to update aportion of the Outer Continental Shelf (
‘‘
OCS
’’
) Air Regulations. Requirementsapplying to OCS sources located within25 miles of States
’
seaward boundariesmust be updated periodically to remainconsistent with the requirements of thecorresponding onshore area (
‘‘
COA
’’
), asmandated by section 328(a)(1) of theClean Air Act, as amended in 1990 (
‘‘
theAct
’’
). The portion of the OCS airregulations that is being updatedpertains to the requirements for OCSsources for which the South Coast AirQuality Management District (SouthCoast AQMD) and Ventura County AirPollution Control District (VenturaCounty APCD) are the designated COAs.The intended effect of approving theOCS requirements for the aboveDistricts is to regulate emissions fromOCS sources in accordance with therequirements onshore. The change tothe existing requirements discussed below is proposed to be incorporated byreference into the Code of FederalRegulations and is listed in theappendix to the OCS air regulations.
DATES
:
Comments on the proposedupdate must be received on or before July 23, 2004.
ADDRESSES
:
Comments must be mailed(in duplicate if possible) to AndySteckel, Rulemaking Office Chief (Air
–
4), Attn: Docket No. A
–
93
–
16 sectionXXX, Environmental Protection Agency,Air Division, Region 9, 75 HawthorneSt., San Francisco, CA 94105
–
3901 or e-mail to
steckel.andrew@epa.gov 
.
Docket:
Supporting information usedin developing the rules and copies of the document EPA is proposing toincorporate by reference are containedin Docket No. A
–
93
–
16 section XXX.This docket is available for publicinspection and copying Monday
–
Fridayduring regular business hours at thefollowing locations:EPA Air Docket (Air
–
4), Attn: DocketNo. A
–
93
–
16 section XXX,Environmental Protection Agency, AirDivision, Region 9, 75 Hawthorne St.,San Francisco, CA 94105.EPA Air Docket (LE
–
131), Attn: AirDocket No. A
–
93
–
16 section XXX,Environmental Protection Agency, AirDocket (6102), Ariel Rios Building, 1200Pennsylvania Avenue, NW., WashingtonDC 20460.A reasonable fee may be charged forcopying.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT
:
 Christine Vineyard, Air Division (Air
–
4), U.S. EPA Region 9, 75 HawthorneStreet, San Francisco, CA 94105, (415)947
–
4125,
vineyard.christine@epa.gov 
.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION
:
I. Background information
A. Why Is EPA Taking This Action? 
On September 4, 1992, EPApromulgated 40 CFR part 55,
1
whichestablished requirements to control airpollution from OCS sources in order to
VerDate jul<14>2003 16:17 Jun 22, 2004 Jkt 203001 PO 00000 Frm 00019 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\23JNP1.SGM 23JNP1
 
34982
Federal Register
/Vol. 69, No. 120/Wednesday, June 23, 2004/Proposed Rules
2
Each COA which has been delegated theauthority to implement and enforce part 55, willuse its administrative and procedural rules asonshore. However, in those instances where EPAhas not delegated authority to implement andenforce part 55, EPA will use its own administrativeand procedural requirements to implement thesubstantive requirements. 40 CFR 55.14 (c)(4).
attain and maintain Federal and Stateambient air quality standards and tocomply with the provisions of part C of title I of the Act. Part 55 applies to allOCS sources offshore of the Statesexcept those located in the Gulf of Mexico west of 87.5 degrees longitude.Section 328 of the Act requires that forsuch sources located within 25 miles of a State
’
s seaward boundary, therequirements shall be the same as would be applicable if the sources were locatedin the COA. Because the OCSrequirements are based on onshorerequirements, and onshore requirementsmay change, section 328(a)(1) requiresthat EPA update the OCS requirementsas necessary to maintain consistencywith onshore requirements.Pursuant to
§
55.12 of the OCS rule,consistency reviews will occur (1) atleast annually; (2) upon receipt of aNotice of Intent under
§
55.4; or (3)when a State or local agency submits arule to EPA to be considered forincorporation by reference in part 55.This proposed action is being taken inresponse to the submittal of rules by twolocal air pollution control agencies.Public comments received in writingwithin 30 days of publication of thisdocument will be considered by EPA before publishing a final rule.Section 328(a) of the Act requires thatEPA establish requirements to controlair pollution from OCS sources locatedwithin 25 miles of States
’
seaward boundaries that are the same as onshorerequirements. To comply with thisstatutory mandate, EPA mustincorporate applicable onshore rulesinto part 55 as they exist onshore. Thislimits EPA
’
s flexibility in decidingwhich requirements will beincorporated into part 55 and preventsEPA from making substantive changesto the requirements it incorporates. Asa result, EPA may be incorporating rulesinto part 55 that do not conform to allof EPA
’
s State implementation plan(SIP) guidance or certain requirementsof the Act. Consistency updates mayresult in the inclusion of State or localrules or regulations into part 55, eventhough the same rules may ultimately bedisapproved for inclusion as part of theSIP. Inclusion in the OCS rule does notimply that a rule meets the requirementsof the Act for SIP approval, nor does itimply that the rule will be approved byEPA for inclusion in the SIP.
II. EPA
’
s Evaluation
A. What Criteria Were Used To EvaluateRules Submitted To Update 40 CFR Part 55? 
In updating 40 CFR part 55, EPAreviewed the rules submitted forinclusion in part 55 to ensure that theyare rationally related to the attainmentor maintenance of Federal or Stateambient air quality standards or part Cof title I of the Act, that they are notdesigned expressly to preventexploration and development of theOCS and that they are applicable to OCSsources. 40 CFR 55.1. EPA has alsoevaluated the rules to ensure they arenot arbitrary or capricious. 40 CFR 55.12(e). In addition, EPA has excludedadministrative or procedural rules,
2
andrequirements that regulate toxics whichare not related to the attainment andmaintenance of Federal and Stateambient air quality standards.
B. What Rule Revisions Were Submitted To Update 40 CFR Part 55? 
1. After review of the rules submitted by South Coast AQMD against thecriteria set forth above and in 40 CFRpart 55, EPA is proposing to making thefollowing rules applicable to OCSsources for which the South CoastAQMD is designated as the COA:
Rule No. Rule nameAdoptiondate1162 ........................................................... Polyester Resin Operations ............................................................................................ 7/11/031168 ........................................................... Adhesive Sealant Applications ....................................................................................... 10/3/031105.1 ........................................................ Reduction of PM
10
and Ammonia Emissions from Fluid Catalytic Cracking Units ........ 11/7/031171 ........................................................... Solvent Cleaning Operations .......................................................................................... 11/7/031113 ........................................................... Architectural Coatings ..................................................................................................... 12/5/03
2. After review of the rules submitted by Ventura County APCD against thecriteria set forth above and in 40 CFRpart 55, EPA is proposing to make thefollowing rules applicable to OCSsources for which the Ventura CountyAPCD is designated as the COA:
Rule No. Rule nameAdoptiondate23 ............................................................... Exemptions from Permit ................................................................................................. 11/11/0356 ............................................................... Open Burning .................................................................................................................. 11/11/0374.20 .......................................................... Adhesives and Sealants ................................................................................................. 09/09/0374.6 ............................................................ Surface Cleaning and Degreasing (Now includes Cold Cleaning Operations pre-viously Rule 74.6.1).
1
11/11/0374.6.1 ......................................................... Batch Loaded Vapor Degreasers
—
previously 74.6.2 repealed and renamed 74.6.1;(74.6.1 previously named Cold Cleaning Operations is now included in Rule 74.6).
1
11/11/0374.12 .......................................................... Surface Coating of Metal Parts and Products ................................................................ 11/11/0374.24 .......................................................... Marine Coating Operations ............................................................................................. 11/11/0374.30 .......................................................... Wood Products Coatings ................................................................................................ 11/11/03
1
Effective 7/1/04.
VerDate jul<14>2003 16:17 Jun 22, 2004 Jkt 203001 PO 00000 Frm 00020 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\23JNP1.SGM 23JNP1
 
34983
Federal Register
/Vol. 69, No. 120/Wednesday, June 23, 2004/Proposed Rules
EPA is repealing the following rulesapplicable to OCS sources for which theVentura County APCD is designated asthe COA:
Rule No. Rule nameDate re-pealed60 ............................................................... New Non-Mobile Equipment-Sulfur Dioxide, Nitrogen Oxides, and Particulate Matter 4/13/04100 ............................................................. Analytical Methods .......................................................................................................... 4/13/04
III. Administrative Requirements
A. Executive Order 12866, Regulatory Planning and Review 
The Office of Management and Budget(OMB) has exempted this regulatoryaction from Executive Order 12866,entitled
‘‘
Regulatory Planning andReview.
’’
 
B. Paperwork Reduction Act 
This rule does not impose aninformation collection burden under theprovisions of the Paperwork ReductionAct of 1995 (44 U.S.C. 3501
et seq.
)
C. Regulatory Flexibility Act 
The Regulatory Flexibility Act (RFA)generally requires an agency to conducta regulatory flexibility analysis of anyrule subject to notice and commentrulemaking requirements unless theagency certifies that the rule will nothave a significant economic impact ona substantial number of small entities.Small entities include small businesses,small not-for-profit enterprises, andsmall governmental jurisdictions.This rule will not have a significantimpact on a substantial number of smallentities because SIP approvals undersection 110 and subchapter I, part D of the Clean Air Act do not create any newrequirements but simply approverequirements that the State is alreadyimposing. Therefore, because theFederal SIP approval does not createany new requirements, I certify that thisaction will not have a significanteconomic impact on a substantialnumber of small entities.Moreover, due to the nature of theFederal-State relationship under theClean Air Act, preparation of flexibilityanalysis would constitute Federalinquiry into the economicreasonableness of state action. TheClean Air Act forbids EPA to base itsactions concerning SIPs on suchgrounds.
Union Electric Co.
v.
U.S. EPA,
 427 U.S. 246, 255
–
66 (1976); 42 U.S.C.7410(a)(2).
D. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act 
Under sections 202 of the UnfundedMandates Reform Act of 1995(
‘‘
Unfunded Mandates Act
’’
), signedinto law on March 22, 1995, EPA mustprepare a budgetary impact statement toaccompany any proposed or final rulethat includes a Federal mandate thatmay result in estimated costs to State,local, or tribal governments in theaggregate; or to the private sector, of $100 million or more. Under section205, EPA must select the most cost-effective and least burdensomealternative that achieves the objectivesof the rule and is consistent withstatutory requirements. Section 203requires EPA to establish a plan forinforming and advising any smallgovernments that may be significantlyor uniquely impacted by the rule.EPA has determined that the approvalaction proposed does not include aFederal mandate that may result inestimated costs of $100 million or moreto either State, local, or tribalgovernments in the aggregate, or to theprivate sector. This Federal actionproposes to approve pre-existingrequirements under State or local law,and imposes no new requirements.Accordingly, no additional costs toState, local, or tribal governments, or tothe private sector, result from thisaction.
E. Executive Order 13132, FederalismFederalism
(64 FR 43255, August 10,1999) revokes and replaces ExecutiveOrders 12612 (Federalism) and 12875(Enhancing the IntergovernmentalPartnership). Executive Order 13132requires EPA to develop an accountableprocess to ensure
‘‘
meaningful andtimely input by State and local officialsin the development of regulatorypolicies that have federalismimplications.
’’
 
‘‘
Policies that havefederalism implications
’’
is defined inthe Executive Order to includeregulations that have
‘‘
substantial directeffects on the States, on the relationship between the national government andthe States, or on the distribution of power and responsibilities among thevarious levels of government.
’’
UnderExecutive Order 13132, EPA may notissue a regulation that has federalismimplications, that imposes substantialdirect compliance costs, and that is notrequired by statute, unless the Federalgovernment provides the fundsnecessary to pay the direct compliancecosts incurred by State and localgovernments, or EPA consults withState and local officials early in theprocess of developing the proposedregulation. EPA also may not issue aregulation that has federalismimplications and that preempts Statelaw unless the Agency consults withState and local officials early in theprocess of developing the proposedregulation.This rule will not have substantialdirect effects on the States, on therelationship between the nationalgovernment and the States, or on thedistribution of power andresponsibilities among the variouslevels of government, as specified inExecutive Order 13132, because itmerely approves a State ruleimplementing a Federal standard, anddoes not alter the relationship or thedistribution of power andresponsibilities established in the CleanAir Act. Thus, the requirements of section 6 of the Executive Order do notapply to this rule.
F. Executive Order 13175, CoordinationWith Indian Tribal Governments
Executive Order 13175, entitled
‘‘
Consultation and Coordination withIndian Tribal Governments
’’
(65 FR67249, November 9, 2000), requires EPAto develop an accountable process toensure
‘‘
meaningful and timely input bytribal officials in the development of regulatory policies that have tribalimplications.
’’
This proposed rule doesnot have tribal implications, as specifiedin Executive Order 13175. It will nothave substantial direct effects on tribalgovernments, on the relationship between the Federal government andIndian tribes, or on the distribution of power and responsibilities between theFederal government and Indian tribes.Thus, Executive Order 13175 does notapply to this rule.EPA specifically solicits additionalcomment on this proposed rule fromtribal officials.
G. Executive Order 13045, Protection of Children From Environmental HealthRisks and Safety RisksProtection of Children fromEnvironmental Health Risks and Safety Risks
(62 FR 19885, April 23, 1997),applies to any rule that: (1) isdetermined to be
‘‘
economically
VerDate jul<14>2003 16:17 Jun 22, 2004 Jkt 203001 PO 00000 Frm 00021 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\23JNP1.SGM 23JNP1
of 00

Leave a Comment

You must be to leave a comment.
Submit
Characters: ...
You must be to leave a comment.
Submit
Characters: ...