[Federal Register Volume 59, Number 21 (Tuesday, February 1, 1994)]
[Unknown Section]
[Page 0]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 94-615]


[[Page Unknown]]

[Federal Register: February 1, 1994]


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

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

40 CFR Part 52

[OAQPS CA 57-1-6003; FRL-4824-3]

 

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: Notice of proposed rulemaking.

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

SUMMARY: EPA is proposing a limited approval and limited disapproval of 
revisions to the California State Implementation Plan (SIP) which 
concern the control of volatile organic compound (VOC) emissions from 
light and medium duty motor vehicle assembly plants, and pumps and 
compressor seals at petroleum refineries, chemical plants, bulk plants, 
and bulk terminals; and reactive organic compound (ROC) emissions from 
facilities that apply coatings to metal parts and products and 
polyester resin material operations.
    The intended effect of proposing limited approval and limited 
disapproval of these rules is to regulate emissions of VOCs in 
accordance with the requirements of the Clean Air Act, as amended in 
1990 (CAA or the Act). EPA's final action on this notice of proposed 
rulemaking (NPR) will incorporate these rules into the federally 
approved SIP. EPA has evaluated these rules and is proposing a limited 
approval under provisions of the CAA regarding EPA action on SIP 
submittals and general rulemaking authority because these revisions 
strengthen the SIP. At the same time, EPA is proposing a limited 
disapproval under the CAA provisions cited above because the rules do 
not meet the CAA provisions regarding plan submissions and requirements 
for nonattainment areas.
DATES: Comments must be received on or before March 3, 1994.

ADDRESSES: Comments may be mailed to: Daniel Meer, Rulemaking Section 
(A-5-3), Air and Toxics Division, Environmental Protection Agency, 
Region IX, 75 Hawthorne Street, San Francisco, CA 94105.
    Copies of the rule revisions and EPA's evaluation report of each 
rule are available for public inspection at EPA's Region 9 office 
during normal business hours. Copies of the submitted rule revisions 
are also available for inspection at the following locations:

    California Air Resources Board, Stationary Source Division, Rule 
evaluation Section, 2020 ``L'' Street, Sacramento, CA 95814.
    Bay Area Air Quality Management District, 939 Ellis Street, San 
Francisco, CA 94109.
    Ventura County Air Pollution Control District, Rule Development 
Section, 702 County Square Drive, Ventura, CA 93003.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Christine Vineyard, Rulemaking Section 
(A-5-3), Air and Toxics Division, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, 
Region IX, 75 Hawthorne Street, San Francisco, CA 94105, Telephone: 
(415) 744-1195.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Background

    On March 3, 1978 EPA promulgated a list of ozonenonattainment areas 
under the provisions of the 1977 Clean Air Act (1977 CAA or pre-amended 
Act), that included the San Francisco Bay Area (SF-Bay Area) and the 
Ventura County Area.43 FR 8964; 40 CFR 81.305. Because the SF-Bay Area 
and the Ventura County Area were unable to reach attainment by the 
statutory attainment date of December 31, 1982, California requested 
under pre-amended section 172(a)(2), and EPA approved, an extension of 
the attainment date to December 31, 1987. 40 CFR 52.238, 52.222. The 
SF-Bay Area and the Ventura County Area did not attain the ozone 
standard by the approved attainment date. On May 26, 1988, EPA notified 
the Governor of California, pursuant to section 110(a)(2)(H) of the 
pre-amended Act, that BAAQMD and VCAPCD's portion of the SIP were 
inadequate to attain and maintain the ozone standard and requested that 
deficiencies in the existing SIP be corrected (EPA's SIP-Call). On 
November 15, 1990, amendments to the 1977 CAA were enacted. Public Law 
101-549, 104 Stat. 2399, codified at 42 U.S.C. 7401-7671q. In amended 
section 182(a)(2)(A) of the CAA, Congress statutorily adopted the 
requirement that nonattainment areas fix their deficient reasonably 
available control technology (RACT) rules for ozone and established a 
deadline of May 15, 1991 for states to submit corrections of those 
deficiencies.
    Section 182(a)(2)(A) applies to areas designated as nonattainment 
prior to enactment of the amendments and classified as marginal or 
above as of the date of enactment. It requires such areas to adopt and 
correct RACT rules pursuant to pre-amended section 172(b) as 
interpreted in pre-amendment guidance.1 EPA's SIP-Call used that 
guidance to indicate the necessary corrections for specific 
nonattainment areas. The SF-Bay Area is classified as moderate and the 
Ventura County Area is classified as severe2; therefore, these two 
areas are subject to the RACT fix-up requirement and the May 15, 1991 
deadline.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ Among other things, the pre-amendment guidance consists of 
those portions of the proposed Post-1987 ozone and carbon monoxide 
policy that concern RACT, 52 FR 45044 (November 24, 1987); ``Issues 
Relating to VOC Regulation Cutpoints, Deficiencies, and Deviations, 
Clarification to Appendix D of November 24, 1987 Federal Register 
Notice'' (Blue Book) (notice of availability was published in the 
Federal Register on May 25, 1988); and the existing control 
technique guidelines (CTGs).
    \2\ BAAQMD and VCAPCD retained their designation and were 
classified by operation of law pursuant to sections 107(d) and 
181(a) upon the date of enactment of the CAA. See 56 FR 56694 
(November 6, 1991).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The State of California submitted many revised RACT rules to EPA 
for incorporation into its SIP on December 31, 1990, September 14, 
1992, November 12, 1992, and May 13, 1993, including the rules being 
acted on in this document. This document addresses EPA's proposed 
action for BAAQMD Rule 8-13, Light and Medium Duty Motor Vehicle 
Assembly Plants; BAAQMD Rule 8-25, Pump and Compressor Seals at 
Petroleum Refineries, Chemical Plants, Bulk Plants, and Bulk Terminals 
(adopted on March 4, 1992); VCAPCD Rule 74.12, Surface Coating of Metal 
Parts and Products (adopted November 17, 1992); and VCAPCD Rule 74.14, 
Polyester Resin Material Operations (adopted September 14, 1992). These 
submitted rules were found to be complete on February 28, 1991 (BAAQMD 
Rule 8-13), November20, 1992 (VCAPCD Rule 74.14), April 28, 1993 
(BAAQMD Rule 8-25), and July 19, 1993 (VCAPCD Rule 74.12) pursuant to 
EPA's completeness criteria that are set forth in 40 CFR part 51, 
appendix V3 and are being proposed for limited approval and 
limited disapproval.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \3\ EPA adopted completeness criteria on February 16, 1990 (55 
FR 5830) and, pursuant to section 110(k)(1)(A) of the CAA, revised 
the criteria on August 26, 1991 (56 FR 42216).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Rule 8-13 controls volatile organic compound (VOC) emissions from 
operations at light and medium duty motor vehicle assembly plants; Rule 
8-25 controls VOC emissions from pumps andcompressors; Rule 74.12 
controls reactive organic compound (ROC) emissions from facilities that 
apply coatings to metal parts or products; and Rule 74.14 controls VOC 
emissions from polyester resin material operations. VOCs contribute to 
the production of ground level ozone and smog. BAAQMD Rule 8-13 and 
BAAQMD Rule 8-25 were originally adopted as part of the District's 
effort to achieve the National Ambient Air Quality Standard (NAAQS) for 
ozone and have been revised in response to EPA's SIP-Call and the 
section 182(a)(2)(A) CAA requirement. Rules 74.12 and 74.14 are new 
rules which have been adopted to meet EPA's SIP-Call and the section 
182(a)(2)(A) CAA requirement. The following is EPA's evaluation and 
proposed action for BAAQMD Rule 8-13, BAAQMD Rule 8-25, VCAPCD Rule 
74.12, and VCAPCD 74.14.

EPA Evaluation and Proposed Action

    In determining the approvability of a VOC rule, EPA must evaluate 
the rule for consistency with the requirements of the CAA and EPA 
regulations, as found in section 110 and part D of the CAA and 40 CFR 
part 51 (Requirements for Preparation, Adoption, and Submittal of 
Implementation Plans). The EPA's interpretation of these requirements, 
which forms the basis for today's action, appears in the various EPA 
policy guidance documents listed in footnote 1. Among those provisions 
is the requirement that a VOC rule must, at a minimum, provide for the 
implementation of RACT for stationary sources of VOC emissions. This 
requirement was carried forth from the pre-amended Act.
    For the purpose of assisting state and local agencies in developing 
RACT rules, EPA prepared a series of Control Technique Guideline (CTG) 
documents which specify the minimum requirements that a rule must 
contain in order to be approved into the SIP. The CTGs are based on the 
underlying requirements of the Act and specify the presumptive norms 
for what is RACT for specific source categories. Under the CAA, 
Congress ratified EPA's use of these documents, as well as other Agency 
policy, for requiring States to ``fix-up'' their RACT rules. See 
section 182(a)(2)(A). The CTG applicable to BAAQMD Rule 8-13 is 
entitled, ``Control of Volatile Organic Emissions from Existing 
Stationary Sources (Vol II; Surface Coating of Cans, Coils, Paper, 
Fabrics, Automobiles, and Light-Duty Trucks)'', (EPA-450/2-77-008), May 
1977; the CTG applicable to BAAQMD Rule 8-25 is entitled, ``Control of 
Volatile Organic Compound Leaks from Synthetic Organic Chemical and 
Polymer Manufacturing'' (EPA-450/3-83-006), U.S. EPA, March 1984; and 
the CTG applicable to VCAPCD Rule 74.12 is entitled, ``Control of 
Volatile Organic Emissions from Existing Stationary Sources Coating of 
Miscellaneous Metal Parts and Products'', EPA-450/2-78-0-015, June 
1978. For some source categories, such as polyester resin material 
operations (VCAPCD Rule 74.14), EPA did not publish a CTG. In this 
case, the VCAPCD made a determination of what controls were required to 
satisfy the RACT requirement by reviewing the operations of facilities 
with the affected source category. In that review, the technological 
and economic feasibility of the proposed controls were considered. 
Additionally, for both CTG and non-CTG rules, the District may rely on 
EPA policy documents, such as the Blue Book, to ensure that the adopted 
VOC rules are fully enforceable and strengthen or maintain the SIP.
    BAAQMD submitted Rule 8-13, Light and Medium Duty Motor Vehicle 
Assembly Plants, includes the following revisions from the current SIP 
rule:

     Exemptions for miscellaneous coatings and constrained 
coating lines were deleted and the applicable coating limits from Rules 
8-19 (Surface Coating of Miscellaneous Metal Parts and Products) and 8-
31 (Surface Coating of Plastic Parts and Products) were incorporated 
into the rule.
     VOC limits were established on a ``solids-applied basis''.
     Several new definitions were added to clarify references 
made within the rule.
     A new compliance schedule was developed.
     The recordkeeping section was revised to require 
monthlyrecords instead of annual records.
    BAAQMD submitted Rule 8-25, Pump and Compressor Seals at Petroleum 
Refineries, Chemical Plants, Bulk Plants, and Bulk Terminals, includes 
the following revisions from the current SIP rule:

     Pump and compressor leak standards are reduced to 1000 ppm 
effective January 1993.
     Several exemptions were eliminated to broaden the scope of 
the rule.
     New definitions were added to clarify the rule.
     Test method requirements were added.
     Visual inspection requirements were revised.
    VCAPCD's Rule 74.12, Surface Coating of Metal Parts and Products, 
is a new rule and includes:

     Limits for the ROC content of metal surface coatings and 
solvents used to clean coating application equipment and metal surfaces 
prior to coating.
     The use of add-on equipment to control emissions of ROCs 
if noncompliant coatings are used.
     Requirements for monthly records of complying coatings and 
daily records of noncompliant coating applied.
     Test methods are included to determine compliance.
    VCAPCD's Rule 74.14 is a new rule which controls emissions from 
polyester resin materials operations and includes the following 
provisions:

     Emission requirements based on the monomer content of the 
resin material.
     Requirement that resin material be applied by specified 
transfer efficient methods.
     ROC content limits, usage limits and disposal 
specifications for cleaning materials.
     Add-on equipment may be used to reduce the emissions of 
noncompliant resin materials.
     Recordkeeping and test method requirements have been 
added.
    EPA has evaluated BAAQMD's submitted Rules 8-13 and 8-25 and 
VCAPCD's submitted Rules 74.12 and 74.14 for consistency with the CAA, 
EPA regulations, and EPA policy and has found that the revisions 
address and correct many deficiencies previously identified by EPA. 
These corrected deficiencies have resulted in clearer, more enforceable 
rules. Furthermore, the addition of more stringent requirements in 
submitted BAAQMD Rule 8-25 should lead to more emission reductions.
    Although BAAQMD Rule 8-13, BAAQMD Rule 8-25, VCAPCD Rule 74.12, and 
VCAPCD Rule 74.14 will strengthen the SIP, these rules still contain 
deficiencies which were required to be corrected pursuant to the 
section 182(a)(2)(A) requirement of Part D of the CAA. BAAQMD Rules 8-
13 and 8-25 contain two deficiencies, referencing of test method ST-7 
for determination of control efficiency and the lack of recordkeeping 
for add-on equipment. (A detailed discussion of the rules can be found 
in the Technical Support Document (TSD) dated July 2, 1993 (Rule 8-13) 
and May 14, 1993 (Rule 8-25).) VCAPCD Rule 74.12 contains specialty 
coatings that exceed the CTG limit of 420 grams per liter and VCAPCD 
Rule 74.14 references a test method that has not been approved by EPA. 
(A detailed discussion of these rules can be found in TSDs dated June 
10, 1993). Because of the deficiencies cited above, the rules are not 
approvable pursuant to the section 182(a)(2)(A) of the CAA because they 
are not consistent with the interpretation of section 172 of the 1977 
CAA as found in the Blue Book and may lead to rule enforceability 
problems.
    Because of the above deficiencies, EPA cannot grant full approval 
of these rules under section 110(k)(3) and part D. Also, because the 
submitted rules are not composed of separable parts which meet all the 
applicable requirements of the CAA, EPA cannot grant partial approval 
of the rules under section 110(k)(3). However, EPA may grant a limited 
approval of the submitted rules under section 110(k)(3) in light of 
EPA's authority pursuant to section 301(a) to adopt regulations 
necessary to further air quality by strengthening the SIP. The approval 
is limited because EPA's action also contains a simultaneous limited 
disapproval. In order to strengthen the SIP, EPA is proposing a limited 
approval of BAAQMD submitted Rules 8-13 and 8-25 and VCAPCD submitted 
Rules 74.12 and 74.14 under sections 110(k)(3) and 301(a) of the CAA.
    At the same time, EPA is also proposing a limited disapproval of 
these rules because they contain deficiencies that have not been 
corrected as required by section 182(a)(2)(A) of the CAA, and, as such, 
the rules do not fully meet the requirements of part D of the Act. 
Under section 179(a)(2), if the Administrator disapproves a submission 
under section 110(k) for an area designated nonattainment, based on the 
submission's failure to meet one or more of the elements required by 
the Act, the Administrator must apply one of the sanctions set forth in 
section 179(b) unless the deficiency has been corrected within 18 
months of such disapproval. Section 179(b) provides two sanctions 
available to the Administrator: highway funding and offsets. The 18 
month period referred to in section 179(a) will begin on the effective 
date of EPA's final limited disapproval. Moreover, the final 
disapproval triggers the Federal implementation plan (FIP) requirement 
under section 110(c). It should be noted that the rules covered by this 
NPR have been adopted by the BAAQMD and VCAPCD and are currently in 
effect in those local areas. EPA's limited disapproval action in this 
NPR does not prevent a local agency or EPA from enforcing these rules.
    Nothing in this action should be construed as permitting or 
allowing or establishing a precedent for any future request for 
revision to any state implementation plan. Each request for revision to 
the state implementation plan shall be considered separately in light 
of specific technical, economic, and environmental factors and in 
relation to relevant statutory and regulatory requirements.

Regulatory Process

    Under the Regulatory Flexibility Act, 5 U.S.C. 600 et seq., EPA 
must prepare a regulatory flexibility analysis assessing the impact of 
any proposed or final rule on small entities. 5 U.S.C. 603 and 604. 
Alternatively, EPA may certify that the rule will not have a 
significant impact on a substantial number of small entities. Small 
entities include small businesses, small not-for-profit enterprises and 
government entities with jurisdiction over populations of less than 
50,000.
    Limited approvals under sections 110 and 301 and subchapter I, part 
D of the CAA do not create any new requirements, but simply approve 
requirements that the State is already imposing. Therefore, because the 
Federal SIP-approval does not impose any new requirements, I certify 
that it does not have a significant impact on any small entities 
affected. Moreover, due to the nature of the Federal-state relationship 
under the CAA, preparation of a regulatory flexibility analysis would 
constitute Federal inquiry into the economic reasonableness of state 
action. The CAA forbids EPA to base its actions concerning SIPs on such 
grounds. Union Electric Co. v. U.S. E.P.A., 427 U.S. 246, 256-66 (S.Ct. 
1976); 42 U.S.C. 7410 (a) (2).
    EPA's limited disapproval of the State request under sections 110 
and 301 and subchapter I, part D of the CAA does not affect any 
existing requirements applicable to small entities. Federal disapproval 
of the state submittal does not affect its state enforceability. 
Moreover, EPA's limited disapproval of the submittal does not impose 
any new Federal requirements. Therefore, EPA certifies that this 
limited disapproval action does not have a significant impact on a 
substantial number of small entities because it does not remove 
existing requirements nor does it impose any new Federal requirements.
    This action has been classified as a Table 2 action by the Regional 
Administrator under the procedures published in the Federal Register on 
January 19, 1989 (54 FR 2214-2225). On January 6, 1989, the Office of 
Management and Budget (OMB) waived Table 2 and Table 3 SIP revisions 
(54 FR 2222) from the requirements of section 3 of Executive Order 
12291 for a period of two years. EPA has submitted a request for a 
permanent waiver for Table 2 and Table 3 SIP revisions. OMB has agreed 
to continue the waiver until such time as it rules on EPA's 
request.This request continues in effect under Executive Order 12866 
which superseded Executive Order 12291 on September 30, 1993.

List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52

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

    Authority: 42 U.S.C. 7401-7671q.

    Dated: December 22, 1993.
Felicia Marcus,
Regional Administrator.
[FR Doc. 94-615 Filed 1-31-94; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-F