[Federal Register Volume 60, Number 22 (Thursday, February 2, 1995)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 6467-6470]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 95-2501]



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

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

40 CFR Part 52
[CA 95-8-6858a; FRL-5148-5]


Approval and Promulgation of Implementation Plans; California 
State Implementation Plan Revision, Bay Area Air Quality Management 
District, Placer County Air Pollution Control District, San Diego 
County Air Pollution Control District, and San Joaquin Valley Unified 
Air Pollution Control District

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM).

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

SUMMARY: EPA is proposing to approve revisions to the California State 
Implementation Plan (SIP) which concern the control of volatile organic 
compound (VOC) emissions from marine vessel coating; graphic arts 
operations; paper, fabric and film coating; and storage of organic 
liquids.
    The intended effect of proposing approval 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 (NPRM) will incorporate these 
rules into the federally approved SIP. EPA has evaluated each of these 
rules and is proposing to approve them under provisions of the CAA 
regarding EPA action on SIP submittals, SIPs for national primary and 
secondary ambient air quality standards and plan requirements for 
nonattainment areas.

DATES: Comments must be received on or before March 6, 1995.

ADDRESSES: Comments may be mailed to: Daniel A. Meer, Rulemaking 
Section [A-5-3], Air and Toxics Division, U.S. Environmental Protection 
Agency, Region IX, 75 Hawthorne Street, San Francisco, CA 94105-3901.
    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 92123-1095.
    Bay Area Air Quality Management District, 939 Ellis Street, San 
Francisco, CA 94109.
    Placer County Air Pollution Control District, 11464 B. Avenue, 
Auburn, CA 95603.
    San Diego County Air Pollution Control District, 9150 Chesapeake 
Drive, San Diego, CA 92123-1096.
    San Joaquin Valley Unified Air Pollution Control District, 1999 
Tuolumne Street, Suite 200, Fresno, CA 93721.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Erik H. Beck, Rulemaking Section [A-5-
3], Air and Toxics Division, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, 
Region IX, 75 Hawthorne Street, San Francisco, CA 94105-3901. Internet 
Email: [email protected]. Telephone: (415) 744-1190.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Applicability
    The rules being proposed for approval into the California SIP 
include: Bay Area Air Quality Management District (BAAQMD) Rule 8-43, 
``Surface Coating of Marine Vessels''; Placer County Air Pollution 
Control District (PCAPCD) Rule 212, ``Storage of Organic Liquids''; San 
Diego County Air Pollution Control District (SDCAPCD) Rule 67.16, 
``Graphic Arts Operations''; SDCAPCD Rule 67.18, ``Marine Coating 
Operations''; and San Joaquin Valley Unified Air Pollution Control 
District (SJVUAPCD) Rule 4607, ``Graphic Arts''. These rules were 
submitted by the California Air Resource Board to EPA on September 28, 
1994, December 19, 1994, October 19, 1994, December 22, 1994, and July 
13, 1994 respectively.

Background

    On March 3, 1978, EPA promulgated a list of ozone nonattainment 
areas under the provisions of the Clean Air Act, as amended in 1977 
(1977 CAA or pre-amended act), that included the San Francisco Bay 
Area, Sacramento Metro Area, San Diego Area, and the San Joaquin Valley 
Air Basin. The San Joaquin Valley Air Basin is comprised of the 
following eight air pollution control districts (APCD): Fresno County 
APCD, Kern County APCD,1 Kings County 

[[Page 6468]]
APCD, Madera County APCD, Merced County APCD, San Joaquin County APCD, 
Stanislaus County APCD, and Tulare County APCD. 43 FR 8964, 40 CFR 
81.305. Because some of these areas were unable to meet the statutory 
attainment date of December 31, 1982, California requested under 
section 172(a)(2), and EPA approved, an extension of the attainment 
date to December 31, 1987.2 40 CFR 52.222. On May 26, 1988, EPA 
notified the Governor of California, pursuant to section 110(a)(2)(H) 
of the pre-amended Act, that the above districts' portions of the 
California 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, the Clean Air Act 
Amendments of 1990 were enacted. Pub. L. 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.

    \1\At that time, Kern County included portions of two air 
basins: the San Joaquin Valley Air Basin and the Southeast Desert 
Air Basin. The San Joaquin Valley Air Basin portion of Kern County 
was designated as nonattainment, and the Southeast Desert Air Basin 
portion of Kern County was designated as unclassified. See 40 CFR 
81.305 (1991).
    \2\This extension was not requested for the following counties: 
Kern, Kings, Madera, Merced and Tulare. Thus, the attainment date 
for these counties remained December 31, 1982.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    On March 20, 1991, the San Joaquin Valley Unified Air Pollution 
Control District (SJVUAPCD) was formed. The SJVUAPCD has authority over 
the San Joaquin Valley Air Basin which includes the following counties, 
except for the Southeast Desert Air Basin portion of Kern County: 
Fresno County APCD, Kern County APCD,3 Kings County APCD, Madera 
County APCD, Merced County APCD, San Joaquin County APCD, Stanislaus 
County APCD, and Tulare County APCD. Thus, Kern County Air Pollution 
Control District (KCAPCD) still exists, but only has authority over the 
Southeast Desert Air Basin portion of Kern County.

    \3\At that time, Kern County included portions of two air 
basins: the San Joaquin Valley Air Basin and the Southeast Desert 
Air Basin. The San Joaquin Valley Air Basin portion of Kern County 
was designated as nonattainment, and the Southeast Desert Air Basin 
portion of Kern County was designated as unclassified. See 40 CFR 
81.305 (1991).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    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.4 EPA's SIP-Call used that 
guidance to indicate the necessary corrections for specific 
nonattainment areas. BAAQMD is moderate, PCAPCD is serious, SDCAPCD is 
severe, and the APCDs found in the San Joaquin Valley Air Basin (now 
collectively known as the SJVUAPCD) are serious5; therefore, these 
areas were subject to the RACT fix-up requirement and the May 15, 1991 
deadline. KCAPCD was subject to EPA's SIP-Call, but was not subject to 
the RACT fix-up requirement and the May 15, 1991 deadline.6

    \4\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).
    \5\The San Francisco Bay Area, Sacramento Metro Area, San Diego 
Area, and the San Joaquin Valley Air Basin retained their 
designations of nonattainment and were classified by operation of 
law pursuant to sections 107(d) and 181(a) upon the date of 
enactment of the CAA. See 55 FR 56694 (November 6, 1991).
    \6\KCAPCD was not subject to the RACT fix-up requirement and the 
May 15, 1991 deadline because the Southeast Desert Air Basin portion 
of Kern County was not a pre-enactment nonattainment area, and thus, 
was not automatically designated nonattainment on the date of 
enactment of the Clean Air Act Amendments of 1990. (See Sec. 107(d) 
and Sec. 182(a)(2)(A) of the Clean Air Act Amendments of 1990.) 
However, the KCAPCD is still subject to the requirements of EPA's 
SIP-Call because the SIP-Call included all of Kern County. The 
substantive requirements of the SIP-Call are the same as those of 
the statutory RACT fix-up requirement.
    Because EPA had previously given earlier submittals of these rules 
limited approval/limited disapproval, 18 month sanction clocks were 
started. These sanction clocks began on August 11, 1993, and September 
29, 1993. For more information on these sanction clocks, please refer 
to the Interim final rule being published elsewhere in today's Federal 
Register.
    The State of California submitted many revised RACT rules for 
incorporation into its SIP on July 13, 1994, September 28, 1994, 
October 19, 1994, December 19, 1994, and December 22, 1994, including 
the rules being acted on in this document. This document addresses 
EPA's proposed action for BAAQMD Rule 8-43, ``Surface Coating of Marine 
Vessels;'' PCAPCD Rule 212, ``Storage of Organic Liquids;'' SDCAPCD 
Rule 67.16, ``Graphic Arts Operations''; SDCAPCD Rule 67.18, ``Marine 
Coating Operations''; and SJVUAPCD Rule 4607, ``Graphic Arts''. BAAQMD 
adopted Rule 8-43 on June 1, 1994. PCAPCD adopted Rule 212 on November 
3, 1994. SDCAPCD adopted Rule 67.16 on September 20, 1994, and Rule 
67.18 on December 13, 1994. SJVUAPCD adopted Rule 4607 on May 19, 1994. 
These submitted rules were found to be complete on July 22, 1994 
(SJVUAPCD Rule 4607); November 22, 1994 (BAAQMD Rule 8-43); December 1, 
1994 (SDCAPCD Rule 67.16); December 23, 1994 (PCAPCD Rule 212); and 
January 3, 1995 (SDCAPCD Rule 67.18). These findings of completeness 
are pursuant to EPA's completeness criteria that are set forth in 40 
CFR part 51 appendix V.7 These revised SIP submittals are being 
proposed for approval into the SIP.

    \7\EPA adopted the 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).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    These rules control VOC emissions from graphic arts operations, the 
coating of paper, fabric and film products, the coating of marine 
vessels, and the storage of organic liquids. VOCs contribute to the 
production of ground-level ozone and smog. The rules were adopted as 
part of each district's efforts to achieve the National Ambient Air 
Quality Standard (NAAQS) for ozone and in response to EPA's SIP-Call 
and the section 182(a)(2)(A) CAA requirement. The following is EPA's 
evaluation and proposed action for these rules.

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 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. 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 

[[Page 6469]]
these documents, as well as other Agency policy, for requiring States 
to ``fix-up'' their RACT rules. See section 182(a)(2)(A). The CTGs 
applicable to these rules are entitled:

     Control of Volatile Organic Emissions from Petroleum 
Liquid Storage in External Floating Roof Tanks (EPA-450/2-78-047);
     Control of Volatile Organic Emissions from Existing 
Stationary Sources--Volume II: Surface Coating of Cans, Coils, 
Paper, Fabrics, Automobiles, and Light-Duty Trucks. (EPA-450/2-77-
008);
     Control of Volatile Organic Emissions from Existing 
Stationary Sources--Volume VIII: Graphic Arts--Rotogravure and 
Flexography. (EPA-450/2-78-033);

    Further interpretations of EPA policy are found in the Blue Book, 
referred to in footnote 1, and in EPA's Alternative Control Technique 
(ACT) documents for offset lithography and marine coating. These 
documents are entitled Alternative Control Techniques Document: Offset 
Lithographic Printing (EPA 453/R-94-054) and Alternative Control 
Techniques Document: Surface Coating Operations at Shipbuilding and 
Ship Repair Facilities (EPA 453/R-94-932). In general, these guidance 
documents have been set forth to ensure that VOC rules are fully 
enforceable and strengthen or maintain the SIP. Also, the ACTs 
referenced provide technical guidance on the control of VOCs from their 
respective industries, similar to the guidance provided by the CTGs.
    BAAQMD Rule 8-43, ``Surface Coating of Marine Vessels'' includes 
the following significant changes from the current SIP:

     Deleted ``Alternate Emission Control Plan'';
     Deleted ``Small Business Provision'';
     Added specific add-on control equipment efficiency 
standards;
     Revised references to test procedures;
     Simplified specialty coating limits table;
     Modified architectural coatings exemption;
     Added a definition of ``Key Operating System 
Parameter'';
     Revised coating records section;
     Created recordkeeping requirements for add-on controls;
     Modified the test method section. These modifications 
include:
     Removed ``Executive Officer's Discretion'';
     Added references to EPA test methods;
     Added a test method for acid content.

    PCAPCD Rule 212, ``Storage of Organic Liquids'' includes the 
following significant changes from the current SIP:

     Added an applicability section;
     Added a definition of ``vapor pressure'';
     Revised the definition of volatile organic compounds 
consistent with 40 CFR 51.100 (except that Rule 212 also regulates 
ethane);
     Revised recordkeeping section to require sources 
subject to the requirements of Title V of the CAA retain their 
records for at least 5 years, and that other sources retain their 
records for at least 2 years;
     Revised the test method section by adding standard 
American Society for Testing and Materials (ASTM) and California Air 
Resources Board test methods.

    SDCAPCD Rule 67.16, ``Graphic Arts Operations'' includes the 
following significant changes from the current SIP:

     Eliminated unapprovable test methods;
     Revised exemption language to clarify and to exempt 
some sources from some recordkeeping requirements;
     Revised compounds considered to be exempt from control 
by virtue of their lack of photochemical reactivity in forming 
ozone. These revisions match EPA requirements promulgated at 40 CFR 
51.100;
     Revised the definition of Stationary Source to 
reference SDCAPCD Rule 20.1;
     Removed 1991 future effective dates for regulations 
regarding cleanup, since they are now in effect;
     Modified control device requirements to permit 
increased flexibility with the same overall capture and control 
efficiency;
     Deleted recordkeeping requirements regarding ozone 
depleters;
     Revised recordkeeping requirements for noncompliant 
coatings and for add-on control equipment;
     Modified test methods to reflect EPA policy and rectify 
previous rule deficiencies. These modifications include:
     Removed reference to Bay Area Air Quality Management 
District Test Method 30 for evaluating the VOC content of non-
heatset inks.
     Removed reference to ASTM standard practice D-3960-87 
for calculating VOC content of coatings and inks.

    SDCAPCD Rule 67.18, ``Marine Coating Operations'' includes the 
following significant changes from the current SIP:

     Extended applicability to fresh water vessels;
     Exempted small coating users;
     Extended the limited antifoulant exemption;
     Established exemptions for materials regulated by Rules 
66, 67.6, and 67.12;
     Established exemption for individuals performing 
coating on private vessels at their residence;
     Added definitions for a number of coatings, exempt 
compounds, and VOC content;
     Revised definitions of coating operation, high gloss 
coating, pleasure craft topcoat, pretreatment wash primer, repair 
and maintenance coating operation, touch-up operation, and volatile 
organic compound;
     Deleted definition of marine coating;
     Changed several coating limits;
     Added a reference to alternate emission control plan 
(approved SDCAPCD Rule 67.1) to allow flexible compliance with the 
coating limits;
     Increased stringency of the equipment cleanup section. 
The language was revised to establish detailed equipment 
requirements, VOC content limits, and volatility constraints;
     Added VOC content and volatility restrictions on 
surface preparation;
     Clarified language relating to the add-on control 
device requirements;
     Clarified existing recordkeeping requirements and added 
additional recordkeeping requirements;
     Made numerous changes to the test method section.

    SJVUAPCD Rule 4607, ``Graphic Arts'' includes the following 
significant changes from the current SIP:

     Revised the applicability of the rule to include paper, 
fabric, and film coating;
     Removed ability of sources to comply by reducing VOC 
usage from an arbitrary baseline, effective Nov. 19, 1995;
     Added recordkeeping requirement for add-on VOC control 
equipment;
     Added language establishing test requirements for 
capture efficiency;
     Modified equipment clean-up requirements;
     Revised and added many definitions;
     Revised the rule to remove deficiencies previously 
identified by EPA. These revisions include:
     Modified the recordkeeping section to include 
requirements for fountain solutions and adhesives;
     Modified the test method section to require testing for 
adhesives and fountain solutions;
     Removed reference to Bay Area Air Quality Management 
District Test Method 30 for non-heatset inks;
     Removed reference to California Air Resources Board 
Test Method 100 to determine VOC control efficiency;

    EPA has evaluated the submitted rules and has determined that they 
are consistent with the CAA, EPA regulations, and EPA policy. 
Therefore, BAAQMD Rule 8-43, ``Surface Coating of Marine Vessels'', 
PCAPCD Rule 212 ``Storage of Organic Liquids'', SDCAPCD Rules 67.16 and 
67.18 (``Graphic Arts Operations'' and ``Marine Coating Operations''), 
and SJVUAPCD Rule 4607, ``Graphic Arts'', are being proposed for 
approval under section 110(k)(3) of the CAA as meeting the requirements 
of section 110(a) and Part D.
    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. Section 600 et seq., 
EPA must 

[[Page 6470]]
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.
    SIP 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, 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). The OMB has exempted this action from review 
under Executive Order 12866.

List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52

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

    Authority: 42 U.S.C. 7401-7671q.
    Date signed: January 26, 1995.
Felicia Marcus,
Regional Administrator.
[FR Doc. 95-2501 Filed 2-1-95; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P