Revisions to the California State Implementation Plan, San Joaquin Valley Unified Air Pollution Control District

Related Material

Other Related Documents

Note: EPA no longer updates this information, but it may be useful as a reference or resource.

[Federal Register: April 24, 2002 (Volume 67, Number 79)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Page 20078-20080]
From the Federal Register Online via GPO Access [wais.access.gpo.gov]
[DOCID:fr24ap02-29]

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

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
40 CFR Part 52
[CA 262-0338b; FRL-7174-3]

Revisions to the California State Implementation Plan, San
Joaquin Valley Unified Air Pollution Control District

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).
ACTION: Proposed rule.

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

SUMMARY: EPA is proposing to approve revisions to the San Joaquin
Valley Unified Air Pollution Control District (SJVUAPCD) portion of the
California State Implementation Plan (SIP). These revisions concern
SJVUAPCD Rule 4354, which controls oxides of nitrogen (NO_X)
emissions from glass melting furnaces. We are proposing to approve a
local rule to regulate these emission sources under the Clean Air Act
as amended in 1990 (CAA or the Act). We are taking comments on this
proposal and plan to follow with a final action.

DATES: Any comments must arrive by May 24, 2002.

ADDRESSES: Mail comments to Andy Steckel, Rulemaking Office Chief (AIR-
4), U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Region IX, 75 Hawthorne
Street, San Francisco, CA 94105-3901.
You can inspect copies of the submitted SIP revisions and EPA's
technical support document (TSD) at our Region IX office during normal
business hours. You may also see copies of the submitted SIP revisions
at the following locations:

California Air Resources Board, Stationary Source Division, Rule
Evaluation Section, 1001 ``I'' Street, Sacramento, CA 95814.
San Joaquin Valley Unified Air Pollution Control District, 1990 E.
Gettysburg Ave., Fresno, CA 93726.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Charnjit Bhullar, Rulemaking Office
(AIR-4), U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Region IX, (415) 972-
3960.

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?
II. EPA's Evaluation and Action
A. How Is EPA Evaluating This Rule?
B. Does This Rule Meet the Evaluation Criteria?
C. EPA Recommendations To Further Improve This rule.
D. Public Comment and Final Action.
III. Background Information
Why was this rule submitted?
IV. Administrative Requirements

I. The State's Submittal

A. What Rule Did the State Submit?

Table 1 lists the rule addressed by this proposal with the dates
that it was adopted by the local air agency and submitted by the
California Air Resources Board (CARB).

[[Page 20079]]

Table 1.--Submitted Rules
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Local agency Rule # Rule title Adopted Submitted
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
SJVUAPCD 4354 Glass Melting 02/21/02............. 03/05/02
Furnaces.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

On March 27, 2002, 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 Version of This Rule?

On September 1, 2000, EPA published a limited approval and limited
disapproval of a version of rule 4354 that was submitted to EPA on
September 29, 1998.

C. What Is the Purpose of the Submitted Rule?

The EPA published a limited approval and limited disapproval of a
previous version of this rule because some rule provisions conflicted
with section 110 and part D of the Clean Air Act. Those provisions
included the following:
1. Section 3.17.3 and 4.2 allowed unlimited exemption periods as
long as the furnace operated below 60% capacity.
2. The equation to calculate the Tier 1 emission limit in section
5.3 needed to be clarified.
3. Section 7.1 did not specify a final date for major
NO_X sources to adopt CEMS or alternate continuous monitoring
methods to prevent avoidance of continuous monitoring by running
forever without an official ``rebuild''.
4. Section 7.2.3 did not specify a final date for facilities to
achieve full Tier 2 compliance.
5. Section 9.0, 9.4, and 9.7 provided an Alternate Emission Control
Plan (AECP) which was not consistent with the EPA Emissions Trading
Policy Statement (ETPS), the Economic Incentive Program Rules (EIP),
and EPA policies regarding equivalency provisions.
The TSD has more information about this rule.

II. EPA's Evaluation and Action

A. How Is EPA Evaluating This 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 section 182(a)(2)(A) and
182(f)), and must not relax existing requirements (see sections 110(l)
and 193). The SJVUAPCD regulates an ozone nonattainment area (see 40
CFR part 81), so Rule 4354 must fulfill RACT.
Guidance and policy documents that we used to help evaluate the
criteria consistently include the following:
1. Issues Relating to VOC Regulation, Cut points, Deficiencies, and
Deviations (the ``Blue Book''), U.S. EPA, May 25, 1988.
2. Guidance Document for Correcting VOC Rule Deficiencies: U.S. EPA
Region IX and California Air Resources Board, April 1991.
3. State Implementation Plans; Nitrogen Oxides Supplement to the
General Preamble for the Implementation of Title I of the Clean Air Act
Amendment of 1990 (the ``NO_X Supplement to the General
Preamble''), U.S. EPA, 57 FR 55620, November 25, 1992.
4. Requirements for Preparation, Adoption, and Submittal of
Implementation Plans, U.S. EPA, 40 CFR part 51.
5. State Implementation Plans for National Primary and Secondary
Ambient Air Quality Standards, Section 110 of the Clean Air Act, and
Plan Requirements for Nonattainment Areas, Title I Part D of the Clean
Air Act.
6. State of California, Air Resources Board, Suggested Control
Measure for the Control of Oxides of Nitrogen from Glass Melting
Furnaces, September 5, 1980.
7. Cost Effective Nitrogen Oxides (NO_X) Reasonably
Available Control Technology (RACT), U.S. EPA Office of Air Quality
Planning and Standards, March 16, 1994.
8. State Implementation Plans (SIPS): Policy Regarding Excess
Emissions During Malfunctions, Startup, and Shutdown, dated September
20, 1999.

B. Does This Rule Meet the Evaluation Criteria?

We believe this rule is consistent with the relevant policy and
guidance regarding enforceability, RACT, and SIP relaxations. The TSD
has more information on our evaluation and how the previously
identified deficiencies have been corrected.

C. EPA Recommendations To Further Improve This Rule

None.

D. Public Comment and Final Action

Because EPA believes the submitted rule fulfills all relevant
requirements, we are proposing to fully approve it as described in
section 110(k)(3) of the Act. We will accept comments from the public
on this proposal for the next 30 days. Unless we receive convincing new
information during the comment period, we intend to publish a final
approval action that will incorporate this rule into the federally
enforceable SIP.

III. Background Information

Why Was This Rule Submitted?

NO_X 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 NO_X emissions. Table 2 lists some of the national
milestones leading to the submittal of this local agency NO_X
rule.

Table 2.--Ozone Nonattainment Milestones
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Date Event
------------------------------------------------------------------------
March 3, 1978............................. 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-
7671q.
May 15, 1991.............................. Section 182(a)(2)(A)
requires that ozone
nonattainment areas correct
deficient RACT rules by
this date.
------------------------------------------------------------------------

[[Page 20080]]

IV. Administrative Requirements

Under Executive Order 12866 (58 FR 51735, October 4, 1993), this
proposed 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 proposed 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 proposed 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 proposed 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 proposes to
approve 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 proposes to approve 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 proposed 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 proposed 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.).

List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52

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

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

Dated: April 10, 2002.
Nora L. McGee,
Acting Regional Administrator, Region IX.
[FR Doc. 02-9910 Filed 4-23-02; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P

Notices For
2009
2008
2007
2006
2005
2004
2003
2002
2001
2000
1999
1998
1997
1996
1995
1994

Revisions to the California State Implementation Plan, San Joaquin Valley Unified Air Pollution Control District

Related Material

Local Navigation