![[logo] US EPA](http://www.epa.gov/epafiles/images/logo_epaseal.gif){kind=logo}
Approval and Promulgation of Implementation Plans; California State Implementation Plan Revision, Bay Area Air Quality Management District and Ventura County Air Pollution Control District
Related Material
Note: EPA no longer updates this information, but it may be useful as a reference or resource.
[Federal Register: March 29, 2001 (Volume 66, Number 61)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Page 17131-17134]
From the Federal Register Online via GPO Access [wais.access.gpo.gov]
[DOCID:fr29mr01-28]
=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
40 CFR Part 52
[CA 226-0226; FRL-6960-5]
Approval and Promulgation of Implementation Plans; California
State Implementation Plan Revision, Bay Area Air Quality Management
District and Ventura County Air Pollution Control District
AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).
ACTION: Proposed rule.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: We are proposing a limited approval to revisions to the
Ventura County Air Pollution Control District (VCAPCD) portion of the
California State Implementation Plan (SIP) concerning particulate
matter (PM-10) emissions and carbon monoxide (CO) emissions from
incineration and from fuel burning equipment.
The intended effect of proposing a limited approval of these rules
is to strengthen the federally approved SIP by incorporating this
revision. EPA's final action on this proposal will incorporate these
rules into the SIP. While strengthening the SIP, this revision contains
deficiencies which the VCAPCD must address before EPA can grant full
approval under section 110(k)(3).
We are also proposing full approval of a revision to the BAAQMD
portion of the California SIP concerning nitrogen oxide
(NOX) emissions from boilers, steam generators, and process
heaters.
We are following the CAA requirements for actions on SIP
submittals, SIPs for national primary and secondary ambient air quality
standards, and plan requirements for attainment and nonattainment
areas.
DATES: Any comments must arrive by April 30, 2001.
ADDRESSES: Mail comments to Andrew Steckel, Rulemaking Office Chief
(AIR-4), Air Division, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Region IX,
75 Hawthorne Street, San Francisco, CA 94105.
You can inspect copies of the submitted rule 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 rule
revisions at the following locations:
Environmental Protection Agency, Air Docket (6102), Ariel Rios
Building, 1200 Pennsylvania Avenue, NW., Washington, DC 20460
California Air Resources Board, Stationary Source Division, Rule
Evaluation Section, 1001 ``I'' Street, Sacramento, CA 95814
Bay Area Air Quality Management District, 939 Ellis Street, San
Francisco, CA 94105
Ventura County Air Pollution Control District, 669 County Square Drive,
Ventura, CA 93003
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Al Petersen, Rulemaking Office (AIR-
4), Air Division, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Region IX, 75
Hawthorne Street, San Francisco, CA 94105; (415) 744-1135.
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 State submit?
B. Are there other versions of these rules?
C. What are the purposes or changes in 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. What are the rule deficiencies?
D. EPA recommendations to further improve the rules
E. Proposed action and public comment
III. Background information
Why were these rules submitted?
IV. Administrative Requirements
I. The State's Submittal
A. What Rules did the State Submit?
Table 1 lists the rules addressed by this proposal with the dates
that they were adopted by the local air agency and submitted to us by
the California Air Resources Board (CARB).
Table 1.--Submitted Rules
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Local Agency Rule # Rule Title Adopted Submitted
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
BAAQMD......................... Manual of Procedures, Boiler, Steam 09/15/93 07/23/96
volume I, chapter 5. Generator, and
Process Heater Tuning
Procedure.
VCAPCD......................... 57..................... Combustion 06/14/77 01/21/00
Contaminants--Specifi
c.
VCAPCD......................... 68..................... Carbon Monoxide....... 06/14/77 01/21/00
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
On October 30, 1996, March 1, 2000, and March 1, 2000,
respectively, these rule submittals 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?
There are no previous versions of BAAQMD Manual of Procedures,
volume I, chapter 5 in the SIP.
We previously approved a version of VCAPCD Rule 57 into the SIP on
August 15, 1977 (42 FR 41121).
We previously approved a version of VCAPCD Rule 68 into the SIP on
September 22, 1972 (37 FR 19806).
C. What are the Purposes or Changes in the Submitted Rules?
BAAQMD Rule Manual of Procedures, volume I, chapter 5 is a step-
wise procedure for tuning boilers, steam generators, and process
heaters to provide sufficient oxygen for complete combustion, but not
too much oxygen for minimization of NOX formation. The
tuning procedure is required by BAAQMD Rule 9-7, Nitrogen Oxides
[[Page 17132]]
and Carbon Monoxide from Industrial, Institutional, and Commercial
Boilers, Steam Generators, and Process Heaters.
VCAPCD Rules 57 and 68 both add an exemption for jet engine and
rocket engine test stands to the fuel burning equipment sections of the
rules.
II. EPA's Evaluation and Action
A. How is EPA Evaluating the Rules?
We evaluated these rules for enforceability and consistency with
the CAA as amended in 1990, with 40 CFR part 51, and with EPA's RACT
Guidance, NOX policy, and PM-10 policy. BAAQMD is a
NOX attainment area and an ozone nonattainment area.\1\
Ozone nonattainment areas must meet the requirements of RACT according
to section 172(c)(1) of the CAA. VCAPCD is a PM-10 maintenance
attainment area and a CO attainment area.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ On July 10, 1998 (63 FR 37258), EPA published the final rule
redesignating the San Francisco Bay Area to nonattainment with the
federal 1-hour ozone NAAQS. The redesignation was authorized under
the general nonattainment provisions of subpart 1 of the Act. The
Bay Area, therefore, does not have a subpart 2 classification. When
comparing air quality in the Bay Area to the traditional subpart 2
classification system, the Bay Area's design value is equivalent to
that of a moderate area.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Guidance and policy documents that we used to evaluate the rules
are as follows:
PM-10 Guideline Document (EPA-452/R-93-008).
Sourcebook: NOX Control Technical Data (EPA-
600/2-91-029).
Issues Relating to VOC Regulation Cutpoints, Deficiencies,
and Deviations, Clarification to Appendix D of November 24, 1987
Federal Register (52 FR 45044) (The Blue Book).
B. Do the Rules Meet the Evaluation Criteria?
BAAQMD Manual of Procedures, volume I, chapter 5 meets the
evaluation criteria.
The adoption of revised VCAPCD Rules 57 and 68 improves the SIP by
bringing the SIP into conformance with long historical practice in the
District. Although, the addition of an exemption may, under certain
circumstances, lessen the stringency of the SIP, approval of the
revised Rules VCAPCD 57 and 68 is not inconsistent with sections 110(l)
and 193 of the CAA for the following reasons:
There are two sources of jet engine and rocket engine test
stand PM-10 emissions in the VCAPCD that are regulated by permit and
are allowed to emit up to 2.13 and 5.44 tons/year PM-10, respectively.
These small uncontrolled sources are included in the air quality
management plant for the District without any credit taken for
controls. Therefore, exempting these small sources from Rule 57 will
not cause a violation of the NAAQS for PM-10.
There are two sources of jet engine and rocket engine test
stand CO emissions in the VCAPCD that are regulated by permit are
allowed to emit up to 839 and 17 tons/year CO, respectively. These
uncontrolled sources are included in the air quality management plan
for the District without any credit taken for controls. In a letter
from CARB to EPA Region IX dated May 7, 1979, CARB concluded that the
exemption to Rule 68 would not prevent attainment or maintenance of the
NAAQS for CO. Therefore, we do not expect these sources to cause a
violation of the NAAQS for CO.
C. What are the Rule Deficiencies?
VCAPCD Rules 57 and 68 have the following deficiencies that prevent
full approval:
The enforceability is limited, because EPA-approved test
methods are not included in the rules.
The enforceability is limited, because monitoring is not
required by the rules.
The enforceability is limited, because recordkeeping is
not required by the rules.
D. EPA Recommendations to Further Improve the Rules
The TSD for VCAPCD Rule 68 describes an additional rule revision
that does not affect EPA's current action but is recommended for the
next time the local agency modifies the rules.
E. Proposed Action and Public Comment
As authorized in sections 110(k)(3) and 301(a) of the Act, we are
proposing a limited approval of VCAPCD Rules 57 and 68 to improve the
SIP. If finalized, this action would incorporate the submitted rules
into the SIP. No sanctions under section 179 are associated with this
proposed action.
As authorized in section 110(k) of the Act, we are proposing a full
approval of BAAQMD Manual of Procedures, volume I, chapter 5 to improve
the SIP.
We will accept comments from the public on the proposed full
approval and proposed limited approvals for the next 30 days.
III. Background Information
Why Were These Rules Submitted?
PM-10 harms human health and the environment. Section 110(a) of the
CAA requires states to submit regulations that control PM-10 emissions.
Table 2 lists some of the national milestones leading to the submittal
of local agency PM-10 rules.
Table 2.--PM-10 Nonattainment Milestones
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Date Event
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
March 3, 1978....................................... EPA promulgated a list of total suspended particulate
(TSP) nonattainment areas under the Clean Air Act, as
amended in 1977. 43 FR 8964; 40 CFR 81.305.
July 1, 1987........................................ EPA replaced the TSP standards with new PM standards
applying only up to 10 microns in diameter (PM-10). 52 FR
24672.
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.
November 15, 1990................................... PM-10 areas meeting the qualifications of section
107(d)(4)(B) of the CAA were designated nonattainment by
operation of law and classified as moderate or serious
pursuant to section 189(a). States are required by
section 110(a) to submit rules regulating PM-10 emissions
in order to achieve the attainment dates specified in
section 188(c).
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
CO harms human health and the environment. Section 110(a) of the
CAA requires states to submit regulations that control CO emissions.
Table 3 lists some of the national milestones leading to the submittal
of local agency CO rules.
[[Page 17133]]
Table 3.--CO Nonattainment Milestones
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Date Event
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
March 3, 1987....................................... EPA promulgated a list of CO nonattainment areas under the
Clean Air Act as amended in 1977. 40 CFR 81.305.
November 15, 1990................................... Clean Air Act Amendments of 1990 were enacted, Pub. L. 101-
549, 104 Stat. 2399, codified at 42 U.S.C. 7401-7671g.
November 15, 1990................................... CO areas meeting the qualifications of section
107(d)(4)(A) of the CAA were designated nonattainment by
operation of law and classified as moderate or serious
pursuant to section 186(a). States are required by
section 110(a) to submit rules regulating CO emissions in
order to achieve the attainment dates specified in
section 186(a)(1).
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
NOX helps produce ground-level ozone, smog and
particulate matter, which harm human health and the environment.
Section 110(a) of the CAA requires states to submit regulations that
control NOX emissions. Table 4 lists some of the national
milestones leading to the submittal of these local agency
NOX rules.
Table 4.--Ozone Nonattainment Milestones
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Date Event
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
March 3, 1987....................................... 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. 7401-7671g.
May 15, 1991........................................ Section 182(a)(2)(a) requires that ozone nonattainment
areas correct deficient RACT rules by this date.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
IV. Administrative Requirements
A. Executive Order 12866
The Office of Management and Budget (OMB) has exempted this
regulatory action from Executive Order 12866, Regulatory Planning and
Review.
B. Executive Order 13045
Executive Order 13045, entitled Protection of Children from
Environmental Health Risks and Safety Risks (62 FR 19885, April 23,
1997), applies to any rule that: (1) Is determined to be ``economically
significant'' as defined under Executive Order 12866, and (2) concerns
an environmental health or safety risk that EPA has reason to believe
may have a disproportionate effect on children. If the regulatory
action meets both criteria, the Agency must evaluate the environmental
health or safety effects of the planned rule on children, and explain
why the planned regulation is preferable to other potentially effective
and reasonably feasible alternatives considered by the Agency.
This rule is not subject to Executive Order 13045 because it does
not involve decisions intended to mitigate environmental health or
safety risks.
C. Executive Order 13132
Executive Order 13132, entitled Federalism (64 FR 43255, August 10,
1999) revokes and replaces Executive Orders 12612, Federalism and
12875, Enhancing the Intergovernmental Partnership. Executive Order
13132 requires EPA to develop an accountable process to ensure
``meaningful and timely input by State and local officials in the
development of regulatory policies that have federalism implications.''
``Policies that have federalism implications'' is defined in the
Executive Order to include regulations that 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.'' Under
Executive Order 13132, EPA may not issue a regulation that has
federalism implications, that imposes substantial direct compliance
costs, and that is not required by statute, unless the Federal
government provides the funds necessary to pay the direct compliance
costs incurred by State and local governments, or EPA consults with
State and local officials early in the process of developing the
proposed regulation. EPA also may not issue a regulation that has
federalism implications and that preempts State law unless the Agency
consults with State and local officials early in the process of
developing the proposed regulation.
This proposed rule will 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,
because it merely acts on 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. Thus, the
requirements of section 6 of the Executive Order do not apply to this
proposed rule.
D. Executive Order 13175
Executive Order 13175, entitled ``Consultation and Coordination
with Indian Tribal Governments'' (59 FR 22951, November 6, 2000),
requires EPA to develop an accountable process to ensure ``meaningful
and timely input by tribal officials in the development of regulatory
policies that have tribal implications.'' ``Policies that have tribal
implications'' is defined in the Executive Order to include regulations
that have ``substantial direct effects on one or more Indian tribes, on
the relationship between the Federal government and the Indian tribes,
or on the distribution of power and responsibilities between the
Federal government and Indian tribes.''
This proposed rule does not have tribal implications. It will not
have substantial direct effects on tribal governments, 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 in Executive Order 13175.
Thus, Executive Order 13175 does not apply to this rule. In the spirit
of Executive Order 13175, and consistent
[[Page 17134]]
with EPA policy to promote communications between EPA and tribal
governments, EPA specifically solicits additional comment on this
proposed rule from tribal officials.
E. Regulatory Flexibility Act
The Regulatory Flexibility Act (RFA) generally requires an agency
to conduct a regulatory flexibility analysis of any rule subject to
notice and comment rulemaking requirements unless the agency certifies
that the rule will not have a significant economic impact on a
substantial number of small entities. Small entities include small
businesses, small not-for-profit enterprises, and small governmental
jurisdictions.
This proposed rule will not have a significant impact on a
substantial number of small entities because SIP approvals under
section 110 and subchapter I, part D of the Clean Air Act do not create
any new requirements but simply act on requirements that the State is
already imposing. Therefore, because the Federal SIP approval does not
create any new requirements, I certify that this action will not have a
significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities.
EPA's proposed disapproval of the state request under section 110
and subchapter I, part D of the Clean Air Act does not affect any
existing requirements applicable to small entities. Any pre-existing
federal requirements remain in place after this disapproval. Federal
disapproval of the state submittal does not affect state
enforceability. Moreover, EPA's disapproval of the submittal does not
impose any new Federal requirements. Therefore, I certify that this
action will not have a significant economic impact on a substantial
number of small entities.
Moreover, due to the nature of the Federal-State relationship under
the Clean Air Act, preparation of flexibility analysis would constitute
Federal inquiry into the economic reasonableness of state action. The
Clean Air Act forbids EPA to base its actions concerning SIPs on such
grounds. Union Electric Co. v. U.S. EPA, 427 U.S. 246, 255-66 (1976);
42 U.S.C. 7410(a)(2).
F. Unfunded Mandates
Under section 202 of the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995
(``Unfunded Mandates Act''), signed into law on March 22, 1995, EPA
must prepare a budgetary impact statement to accompany any proposed or
final rule that includes a Federal mandate that may result in estimated
costs to State, local, or tribal governments in the aggregate; or to
private sector, of $100 million or more. Under section 205, EPA must
select the most cost-effective and least burdensome alternative that
achieves the objectives of the rule and is consistent with statutory
requirements. Section 203 requires EPA to establish a plan for
informing and advising any small governments that may be significantly
or uniquely impacted by the rule.
EPA has determined that the proposed action does not include a
Federal mandate that may result in estimated costs of $100 million or
more to either State, local, or tribal governments in the aggregate, or
to the private sector. This proposed Federal action acts on pre-
existing requirements under State or local law, and imposes no new
requirements. Accordingly, no additional costs to State, local, or
tribal governments, or to the private sector, result from this action.
G. National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act
Section 12 of the National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act
(NTTAA) of 1995 requires Federal agencies to evaluate existing
technical standards when developing a new regulation. To comply with
NTTAA, EPA must consider and use ``voluntary consensus standards''
(VCS) if available and applicable when developing programs and policies
unless doing so would be inconsistent with applicable law or otherwise
impractical.
EPA believes that VCS are inapplicable to today's proposed action
because it does not require the public to perform activities conducive
to the use of VCS.
List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52
Environmental protection, Air pollution control, Carbon monoxide,
Incorporation by reference, Intergovernmental relations, Nitrogen
oxide, Ozone, Particulate matter, Reporting and recordkeeping
requirements.
Authority: 42 U.S.C. 7401 et seq.
Dated: March 14, 2001.
Mike Schulz,
Acting Regional Administrator, Region IX.
[FR Doc. 01-7793 Filed 3-28-01; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P