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

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

[Federal Register: January 2, 2008 (Volume 73, Number 1)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Page 48-51]
From the Federal Register Online via GPO Access [wais.access.gpo.gov]
[DOCID:fr02ja08-11]

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

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
40 CFR Part 52
[EPA-R09-OAR-2007-1074, FRL-8504-8]

Revisions to the California State Implementation Plan, Monterey
Bay Unified Air Pollution Control District and San Joaquin Valley 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 Unified Air Pollution Control District (MBUAPCD) and San
Joaquin Valley Air Pollution Control District (SJVAPCD) portions of the
California State Implementation Plan (SIP). Under authority of the
Clean Air Act as amended in 1990 (CAA or the Act), we are approving
local rules that address circumvention, reduction of animal matter, and
volatile organic compound (VOC) emissions from gasoline bulk storage
tanks, gasoline filling stations, petroleum refinery equipment, and
petroleum solvent dry cleaning.

DATES: This rule is effective on March 3, 2008 without further notice,
unless EPA receives adverse comments by February 1, 2008. If we receive
such comment, we will publish a timely withdrawal in the Federal
Register to notify the public that this rule will not take effect.

ADDRESSES: Submit comments, identified by docket number EPA-R09-OAR-
2007-1074, by one of the following methods:
1. Federal eRulemaking Portal: http://www.regulations.gov. Follow
the on-line instructions.
2. E-mail: steckel.andrew@epa.gov.
3. 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
http://www.regulations.gov, 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
http://www.regulations.gov or e-mail. http://www.regulations.gov
is an ``anonymous access'' system, 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 http://www.regulations.gov 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: Al Petersen, EPA Region IX, (415) 947-
4118, petersen.alfred@epa.gov.

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 is the purpose of the submitted rules and rule revisions?
II. EPA's Evaluation and Action
A. How is EPA evaluating the rules?
B. Do the rules meet the evaluation criteria?
C. EPA recommendation to further improve a rule
D. Public comment and final action
III. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews

I. The State's Submittal

A. What rules did the State submit?

Table 1 lists the rules we are approving with the dates that they
were adopted, amended, or revised by the local air agencies and
submitted by the California Air Resources Board (CARB).

Table 1.--Submitted Rules for Full Approval
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
District Rule No. Rule title Adopted, amended, or revised Submitted
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
MBUAPCD................... 415 Circumventions........... 03/21/07 Revised................. 08/24/07
MBUAPCD................... 418 Transfer of Gasoline into 03/21/07 Revised................. 08/24/07
Stationary Storage
Containers.
MBUAPCD................... 1002 Transfer of Gasoline into 03/21/07 Revised................. 08/24/07
Vehicle Fuel Tanks.
SJVUAPCD.................. 4104 Reduction of Animal 12/17/92 Amended................. 08/24/07
Matter.
SJVUAPCD.................. 4402 Crude Oil Production 12/17/92 Amended................. 08/24/07
Sumps.
SJVUAPCD.................. 4404 Heavy Oil Test Station-- 12/17/92 Adopted................. 08/24/07
Kern County.
SJVUAPCD.................. 4453 Refinery Vacuum Producing 12/17/92 Amended................. 08/24/07
Devices or Systems.
SJVUAPCD.................. 4454 Refinery Process Unit 12/17/92 Amended................. 08/24/07
Turnaround.
SJVUAPCD.................. 4625 Wastewater Separators.... 12/17/92 Amended................. 08/24/07
SJVUAPCD.................. 4641 Cutback, Slow Cure, and 12/17/92 Amended................. 08/24/07
Emulsified Asphalt,
Paving and Maintenance
Operations.
SJVUAPCD.................. 4672 Petroleum Solvent Dry 12/17/92 Amended................. 08/24/07
Cleaning Operations.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

[[Page 49]]

On September 17, 2007, the submittal of August 24, 2007 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 these rules?

We approved a version of MBUAPCD Rules 415, 418, and 1002 into the
SIP on March 7, 2003 (68 FR 10966), May 24, 2004 (69 FR 29451), and
January 15, 2004 (69 FR 2300), respectively.
Some SIP versions of submitted SJVAPCD rules are old rules from the
eight counties that now comprise SJVAPCD; other SIP versions are
SJVAPCD rules that have been renumbered. These SIP-approved rules are
described below.
Precursor SIP rules for submitted SJVAPCD Rule 4104:
• Fresno County Rule 414, Reduction of Animal Matter
(approved on September 22, 1972, 37 FR 19812).
• Kern County Rule 415, Reduction of Animal Matter (approved
on September 22, 1972, 37 FR 19812).
• Kings County Rule 415, Reduction of Animal Matter
(approved on September 22, 1972, 37 FR 19812).
• Madera County Rule 421, Reduction of Animal Matter
(approved on November 18, 1983, 48 FR 52450).
• Merced County Rule 414, Reduction of Animal Matter
(approved on September 22, 1972, 37 FR 19812).
• San Joaquin County Rule 414, Reduction of Animal Matter
(approved on August 22, 1977, 42 FR 42219).
• Stanislaus County Rule 414, Reduction of Animal Matter
(approved on September 22, 1972, 37 FR 19812).
• Tulare County Rule 415, Reduction of Animal Matter
(approved on September 22, 1972, 37 FR 19812).
Precursor SIP rule for submitted SJVAPCD Rule 4402:
• SJVAPCD Rule 465.2, Crude Oil Production Sumps (amended on
September 19, 1991, approved on December 18, 1994, 59 FR 64132).
Precursor SIP rules for submitted SJVAPCD Rule 4453:
• Kern County Rule 414.2, Refinery Process Vacuum Producing
Devices or Systems (approved on August 21, 1981, 46 FR 42459).
• Kings County Rule 414.2, Refinery Vacuum Producing Devices
or Systems (approved on May 7, 1982, 47 FR 19696).
• San Joaquin County Rule 413.2, Refinery Vacuum Producing
Devices (approved on May 7, 1982, 47 FR 19696).
Precursor SIP rules for submitted SJVAPCD Rule 4454:
• Kern County Rule 414.3, Refinery Process Unit Turnaround
(approved on August 21, 1981, 46 FR 42459).
• Kings County Rule 414.3, Refinery Process Unit Turnaround
(approved on May 7, 1982, 47 FR 19696).
• San Joaquin County Rule 413.3, Refinery Process Unit
Turnaround (approved on May 7, 1982, 47 FR 19696).
Precursor SIP rule for submitted SJVAPCD Rule 4625:
• SJVAPCD Rule 463.4, Wastewater Separators (adopted on
April 11, 1991, approved on May 13, 1993, 58 FR 28354).
Precursor SIP rule for submitted SJVAPCD Rule 4641:
• SJVAPCD Rule 463.1, Cutback, Slow Cure, and Emulsified
Asphalt, Paving and Maintenance Operations (amended on September 19,
1991, approved on June 24, 1992, 57 FR 28089).
Precursor SIP rule for submitted SJVAPCD Rule 4672:
• SJVAPCD Rule 467.2, Petroleum Solvent Dry Cleaning
Operations (adopted on April 11, 1991, approved on April 24, 1992, 57
FR 15026).
There is no SIP rule for submitted SJVAPCD Rule 4404.

C. What is the purpose of the submitted rules and rule revisions?

Section 110(a) of the CAA requires states to submit regulations
that control volatile organic compounds, oxides of nitrogen,
particulate matter, and other air pollutants which harm human health
and the environment. These rules were developed as part of the local
agency's program to control these pollutants.
The purposes of revisions to MBUAPCD Rules 415, 418, and 1002
relative to the SIP are as follows:
• 415.3.2: Two provisions are added to ensure that source
tests are performed as scheduled and not discontinued to avoid
documentation of periods of noncompliance.
• 418.3.6: A requirement is added for International Code
Council (ICC) certification of vapor recovery installation personnel
and vapor recovery test personnel for Phase I equipment.
• 1002.1.3.4: An exemption from Phase II vapor recovery is
added for facilities that have 90% of their vehicle fleet equipped with
onboard refueling vapor recovery (ORVR).
• 1002.3.8: A requirement is added for ICC certification of
vapor recovery installation personnel and vapor recovery test personnel
for Phase II equipment.
The purposes of new SJVAPCD Rule 4404 and amended Rules 4104, 4402,
4453, 4454, 4625, 4641, and 4672 and their amendments are as follows:
• 4104: The rule requires reducing air contaminants during
the reduction of animal matter by setting a minimum exposure time of
0.3 seconds at 1200 degrees Fahrenheit. The format of the rule is improved.
• 4402: The rule requires limiting VOC emissions from sumps
by the use of emission control devices. The format of the rule is
improved, and the definition of VOC is deleted.
• 4404: The rule requires reducing uncontrolled VOC
emissions from a heavy oil test station by 99%.
• 4453: The rule requires reducing VOC emissions from
refinery vacuum producing devices by covering hotwells and collecting
vapors for recycle to refinery gas or incineration. The format of the
rule is improved.
• 4454: The rule requires reducing VOC emissions from a
refinery process unit turnaround by collecting vapors for recycle to
refinery gas, incineration, or flaring. The format of the rule is improved.
• 4625: The rule requires reducing VOC emissions from
wastewater separators by installing covers or by the use of a vapor
recovery system with a control efficiency of at least 90%. The format
of the rule is improved, and the definition of VOC is deleted.
• 4641: The rule requires reducing VOC emissions by
prohibiting the application and manufacturing of certain types of
asphalt used for paving and maintenance operations. The format of the
rule is improved, and the definition of VOC is deleted.
• 4672: The rule requires reducing VOC emissions from
petroleum solvent dry cleaning operations through implementation of
various good operating practices and with the use of emission control
equipment. The format of the rule is improved.
The TSD has more information about these rules.

II. EPA's Evaluation and Action

A. How is EPA evaluating the rules?

Generally, SIP rules must be enforceable (see section 110(a) of the
CAA), must require Reasonably Available Control Technology (RACT) for
each category of sources covered by a Control Techniques Guidelines
(CTG) document as well as each major source in nonattainment areas (see
section 182(a)(2)), and must not relax existing requirements (see
sections 110(l) and 193). Gasoline dispensing sources in ozone
nonattainment areas must have gasoline vapor recovery equipment (see
section 182(a)(3)(A)). The MBUAPCD

[[Page 50]]

regulates an ozone maintenance attainment area (see 40 CFR part 81) and
must require the use vapor recovery equipment at gasoline dispensing
facilities in order to retain its maintenance attainment status. The
SJVAPCD regulates an ozone nonattainment area (see 40 CFR part 81) and
must fulfill the requirements of RACT.
Guidance and policy documents that we used to help evaluate specific
enforceability and RACT requirements consistently include the following:
1. Portions of the proposed post-1987 ozone and carbon monoxide
policy that concern RACT, 52 FR 45044 (November 24, 1987).
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].
4. Suggested Control Measure for the Control of Organic Compound
Emissions from Sumps Used in Oil Production Operation, California Air
Resources Board (August 1988).
5. Control of Refinery Vacuum Producing systems, Wastewater
Separators, and Process Unit Turnarounds, U.S. EPA (October 1977).
6. Control of VOC from the Use of Cutback Asphalt, U.S. EPA
(December 1977).
7. Control of VOC Emissions from Large Petroleum Dry Cleaners, U.S.
EPA (September 1982).

B. Do the rules meet the evaluation criteria?

There are no specific requirements for MBUAPCD Rule 415, but the
revisions improve enforcement of other rules. The rule should be given
full approval. We believe that MBUAPCD Rules 418 and 1002 comply with
the vapor recovery requirements for gasoline dispensing facilities and
should be given full approval.
We believe that SJVAPCD Rules 4104, 4402, 4404, 4453, 4454, 4625,
4641, and 4672 are consistent with the relevant policy and guidance
regarding enforceability and SIP relaxations, fulfill the requirements
of RACT, and should be given full approval.
The TSD has more information on our evaluation.

C. EPA recommendation to further improve a rule

The TSD describes a recommended revision to SJVAPCD Rule 4404 that
does not affect EPA's current action but is recommended for the next
time the local agency modifies the rule.

D. Public comment and final action

As authorized in section 110(k)(3) of the CAA, EPA is fully
approving the submitted rules because we believe they fulfill 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 rules. If we
receive adverse comments by February 1, 2008, 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 March 3, 2008. This will incorporate these
rules into the federally enforceable SIP.
Please note that if EPA receives adverse comment on an amendment,
paragraph, or section of this rule and if that provision may be severed
from the remainder of the rule, EPA may adopt as final those provisions
of the rule that are not the subject of an adverse comment.

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
(59 FR 22951, 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. section 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.

[[Page 51]]

This action is not a ``major rule'' as defined by 5 U.S.C. section 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 March 3, 2008. 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).)

List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52

Environmental protection, Air pollution control, Incorporation by
reference, Intergovernmental relations, Ozone, Reporting and
recordkeeping requirements, Volatile organic compounds.

Dated: November 16, 2007.
Laura Yoshii,
Acting Regional Administrator, Region IX.

• 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 et seq.

Subpart F--California

• 2. Section 52.220 is amended by adding paragraphs (c)(351)(i)(B)(2),
(B)(3), and (C) to read as follows:

Sec. 52.220 Identification of plan.

* * * * *
(c) * * *
(351) * * *
(i) * * *
(B) * * *
(2) Rules 415 and 418, adopted on September 1, 1974 and revised on
February 21, 2007 and March 21, 2007, respectively.
(3) Rule 1002, adopted on February 22, 1989 and revised on March
21, 2007.
(C) San Joaquin Valley Air Pollution Control District.
(1) Rules 4104, 4404, 4453, and 4454, adopted on May 21, 1992 and
amended on December 17, 1992.
(2) Rules 4402, 4625, 4641, and 4672, adopted on April 11, 1991 and
amended on December 17, 1992.

[FR Doc. E7-25103 Filed 12-31-07; 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, Monterey Bay Unified Air Pollution Control District and San Joaquin Valley Air Pollution Control District

Local Navigation