[Federal Register Volume 61, Number 78 (Monday, April 22, 1996)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 17675-17677]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 96-9848]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
40 CFR Part 52
[CA 157-0007; FRL-5460-7]
Clean Air Act Approval and Promulgation of New Source Review and
Prevention of Significant Deterioration Implementation Plan for
Monterey Bay Unified Air Pollution Control District
AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).
ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: The EPA proposes to approve with a contingency, and disapprove
in the alternative Monterey Bay Unified Air Pollution Control District
(District) Rules 207 and 215 for the purpose of meeting requirements of
the Clean Air Act, as amended in 1990 (CAA or Act) with regard to new
source review (NSR) in areas that have not attained the national
ambient air quality standards (NAAQS). Rules 207 (Review of New and
Modified Sources) and 215 (Banking of Emission Reductions) were
submitted by the State of California on behalf of the District as a
requested State Implementation Plan (SIP) revision to satisfy certain
Federal requirements for an approvable nonattainment new source review
SIP. This submittal also satisfies the requirements for a Prevention of
Significant Deterioration (PSD) program. This proposed approval is
contingent upon the District correcting existing deficiencies in its
NSR and PSD submittal before EPA promulgates a final rulemaking on this
submittal. Should the District fail to correct all deficiencies in this
submittal, then this notice will serve as a proposed disapproval of the
submittal.
DATES: Comments on this proposed action must be received in writing by
May 22, 1996.
ADDRESSES: To submit comments or receive further information, please
contact Steve Ringer, Environmental Engineer, New Source Section, Air &
Toxics Division (A-5-1), EPA Region 9, 75 Hawthorne Street, San
Francisco, CA 94105. Copies of the State's submittal and other
information are available for inspection during normal business hours
at the following locations: (1) EPA Region 9, 75 Hawthorne Street, San
Francisco, CA 94105; (2) Air Resources Board, 2020 L Street,
Sacramento, CA 95814; (3) Monterey Bay Unified Air Pollution Control
District, 24580 Silver Cloud Court, Monterey CA 93940.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Steve Ringer (415) 744-1260.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The air quality planning requirements for
nonattainment NSR are set out in part D of title I of the Clean Air
Act. EPA has issued a ``General Preamble'' describing EPA's preliminary
views on how EPA intends to review SIPs and SIP revisions submitted
under part D, including those State submittals containing nonattainment
NSR SIP requirements [see 57 FR 13498 (April 16, 1992) and 57 FR 18070
(April 28, 1992)]. Because EPA is describing its interpretations here
only in broad terms, the reader should refer to the General Preamble
for a more detailed discussion.
Procedural Background
The Act requires States to observe certain procedural requirements
in developing implementation plans and plan revisions for submission to
EPA. Section 110(a)(2) and section 110(l) of the Act provide that each
implementation plan or revision to an implementation plan submitted by
a State must be adopted after reasonable notice and public hearing.
Section 172(c)(7) of the Act provides that plan provisions for
nonattainment areas shall meet the applicable provisions of Section
110(a)(2).
The District held a public hearing on May 17, 1995 to entertain
public comment on rules 207 and 215. On May 17, 1995, the rules were
adopted by the District Board of Directors and submitted to the State.
On August 10, 1995 the rules were submitted to EPA as a proposed
revision to the California SIP.
EPA deemed the submittal complete on October 4, 1995. The submittal
has since been reviewed and found to be complete but lacking certain
requirements that would make it fully approvable. The District has,
however, committed to correct the deficiencies described below and
submit a rule with these changes for inclusion into the SIP. Therefore,
contingent on the submittal of a fully approvable SIP revision, as
described below, EPA proposes to approve the District's nonattainment
NSR and attainment PSD SIP submittal. If the District fails to correct
the deficiencies in this submittal, then EPA's final action will be a
disapproval.
Summary of Rule Contents
The Monterey Bay Unified Air Pollution Control District submitted
to EPA for adoption into the applicable NSR SIP Rules 207 (Review of
New or Modified Sources) and 215 (Banking of Emissions Reductions).
Rule 207 is intended to replace existing NSR SIP Rule 207 (Review of
New or Modified Source); and Rule 215 is a new addition to the existing
SIP.
These submitted rules constitute the District's new source
permitting
[[Page 17676]]
regulations. Rule 207 consists of definitions, requirements, including
applicability, major source definitions, offsets, increment analysis,
and Lowest Achievable Emission Rate/Best Available Control Technology.
Rule 215 establishes procedures for the creation, banking, and use of
emission reduction credits. This last rule has indirect bearing on new
source review, as these credits can be obtained by new sources and used
as offsets.
Within the District, Monterey County, San Benito County, and Santa
Cruz County are currently designated as Moderate nonattainment for
Ozone. All other areas within the District are designated as attainment
or unclassifiable with respect to the NAAQS. District nonattainment
rules must therefore apply to all major new or modified stationary
sources proposing to emit VOC or NOx in the nonattainment areas noted
above. The nonattainment provisions must also apply to any source which
would contribute to a violation of the NAAQS. The PSD provisions
submitted by the District apply to major new or modified stationary
sources proposing to emit attainment pollutants.
The Clean Air Act requirements are found at sections 172 and 173
for nonattainment NSR permitting and at section 165 for PSD permitting.
With certain exceptions, described below, the District's submittal
satisfies these requirements. For a detailed description of how the
submitted rule meets the applicable requirements, please refer to EPA's
technical support document.
Rule Deficiencies That Must Be Corrected
Rule 207
Section 4.2.9: Currently this section states that ``all emission
reductions must be in effect and enforceable by the time the new or
modified source commences operation''. However, section 173(a) of the
Clean Air Act requires that any emission reduction required as a
precondition of the issuance of a permit shall be made federally
enforceable prior to permit issuance. Therefore, the District must
change this language to meet the above Clean Air Act requirement.
Section 4.3.3.2: This section allows a source to obtain offsets
from a different air basin if the applicant provides them at the stated
ratios or at a ratio and distance approved by the District as long as
the source demonstrates a net air quality benefit. However, Section
173(c) of the Clean Air Act requires that emission reductions obtained
from another nonattainment area may be used only if (A) the other area
has an equal or higher nonattainment classification than the area in
which the source is located, and (B) emissions from such other area
contribute to a violation of the national ambient air quality standard
in the nonattainment area in which the source is located. Thus, the
rule should have language which explicitly requires the two conditions
above.
Proposed Action
EPA is proposing to approve, with disapproval in the alternative,
the plan revisions submitted by the California Resources Board on
behalf of Monterey Bay Unified Air Pollution Control District on August
10, 1995. Full approval as a final action on these rules is contingent
upon the District making the required changes listed above.
If the specified changes are not made before EPA's final action on
this submittal, then EPA's final action will be a disapproval. If
finalized, this disapproval would constitute a disapproval under
section 179(a)(2) of the Act (see 57 FR 13566-67). As provided under
section 179(a) of the Act, the District would have up to 18 months
after a final SIP disapproval to correct the deficiencies that are the
subject of the disapproval before EPA is required to impose sanctions.
If the District does not correct its SIP deficiencies within 18 months,
then section 179(a)(4) requires the immediate application of sanctions.
According to section 179(b), sanctions can take the form of a loss of
highway funds or a two to one emissions offset ratio. Once the
Administrator applies one of the section 179(b) sanctions, the State
will then have an additional six months to correct any deficiencies.
Section 179(a)(4) requires that both highway and offsets sanctions must
be applied if any deficiencies are still not corrected after the
additional six month period.
EPA is requesting comments on all aspects of the requested SIP
revision and EPA's proposed rulemaking action. Comments received by the
date indicated above will be considered in the development of EPA's
final rule.
Administrative Review
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.
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.
SIP approvals under section 110 and subchapter I, part D of the Act
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 Act,
preparation of a regulatory flexibility analysis would constitute
Federal inquiry into the economic reasonableness of State action. The
Act 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 Office of Management and Budget has exempted
this rule from the requirements of section 6 of Executive Order 12866.
Unfunded Mandates
Under Section 202 of the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 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
the private sector, of $100 million or more. EPA has determined that
the approval proposed in this document does not include such a federal
mandate, as this proposed federal action would approve pre-existing
requirements under state or local law, and would impose no new federal
requirements. Accordingly, no additional costs to state, local, or
tribal governments, or to the private sector, will result from this
action.
List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52
Environmental protection, Air pollution control, hydrocarbons,
intergovernmental relations, new source review, nitrogen dioxide,
particulate matter, reporting and record-keeping requirements, sulfur
dioxide, and volatile organic compounds.
Authority: 42 U.S.C. 7401-7671q.
[[Page 17677]]
Dated: April 10, 1996.
Felicia Marcus,
Regional Administrator.
[FR Doc. 96-9848 Filed 4-19-96; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P