[Federal Register Volume 61, Number 168 (Wednesday, August 28, 1996)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 44161-44163]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 96-21907]


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

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

40 CFR Part 52

[CA 13-13-6749; FRL-5557-2]


Approval and Promulgation of Implementation Plans, California 
State Implementation Plan Revision, San Joaquin Valley Unified Air 
Pollution District

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Final rule.

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

SUMMARY: EPA is finalizing limited approval and limited disapproval of 
a revision to the California State Implementation Plan (SIP) proposed 
in the Federal Register on March 21, 1994. The revision concerns Rule 
465.01 from the San Joaquin Valley Unified Air Pollution Control 
District (SJVUAPCD). This final action will incorporate this rule into 
the federally approved SIP. The intended effect of finalizing this 
action is to regulate emissions of

[[Page 44162]]

volatile organic compounds (VOCs) in accordance with the requirements 
of the Clean Air Act, as amended in 1990 (CAA or the Act). The rule 
controls VOC emissions from steam-enhanced crude oil production well 
vents. Thus, EPA is finalizing a simultaneous limited approval and 
limited disapproval under CAA provisions regarding EPA action on SIP 
submittals and general rulemaking authority because this revision, 
while strengthening the SIP, also does not fully meet the CAA 
provisions regarding plan submissions and requirements for 
nonattainment areas. As a result of this limited disapproval, sanctions 
will be automatically imposed in accordance with EPA's Order of 
Sanctions rule unless the State submits and EPA approves corrections to 
the identified deficiencies within 18 months of the effective date of 
this disapproval. Moreover, EPA will be required to promulgate a 
Federal implementation plan (FIP) unless the deficiencies are corrected 
within 24 months of the effective date of this disapproval.

EFFECTIVE DATE: This action is effective on September 27, 1996.

ADDRESSES: Copies of the rule and EPA's evaluation report are available 
for public inspection at EPA's Region 9 office during normal business 
hours. Copies of the submitted rule are available for inspection at the 
following locations:

Rulemaking Section (A-5-3), Air and Toxics Division, U.S. Environmental 
Protection Agency, Region IX, 75 Hawthorne Street, San Francisco, CA 
94105
Environmental Protection Agency, Air Docket (6102), 401 ``M'' Street, 
S.W., Washington, D.C. 20460
California Air Resources Board, Stationary Source Division, Rule 
Evaluation Section, 2020 ``L'' Street, Sacramento, CA 95814
San Joaquin Valley Unified Air Pollution Control District, 1999 
Tuolumne Street, Suite #200, Fresno, CA 95814.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 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, Telephone: 
(415) 744-1185.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Background

    On March 21, 1994 in 59 FR 13289, EPA proposed granting limited 
approval and limited disapproval of SJVUAPCD's Rule 465.1, Steam-
enhanced Crude Oil Production Well Vents, into the California SIP. Rule 
465.1 was adopted by SJVUAPCD on September 19, 1991. This rule was 
submitted by the California Air Resources Board (CARB) to EPA on 
January 28, 1992. This rule was submitted in response to EPA's 1988 SIP 
Call and the CAA section 182(a)(2)(A) requirement that nonattainment 
areas fix their reasonably available control technology (RACT) rules 
for ozone in accordance with EPA guidance that interpreted the 
requirements of the pre-amendment Act. A detailed discussion of the 
background for the above rule and nonattainment area is provided in the 
notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM) cited above.
    EPA has evaluated the above rule for consistency with the 
requirements of the CAA and EPA regulations and EPA's interpretation of 
these requirements as expressed in the various EPA policy guidance 
documents referenced in the NPRM. EPA is finalizing the limited 
approval of this rule in order to strengthen the SIP and finalizing the 
limited disapproval requiring the correction of the remaining 
deficiencies. The rule contains deficiencies which were required to be 
corrected pursuant to the section 182(a)(2)(A) requirement of part D of 
the CAA. Rule 465.1 lacks clarity in specifying rule applicability, 
lacks sufficient recordkeeping requirements, and includes an 
unapprovable provision which exempts certain equipment from New Source 
Review (NSR) requirements. Section III.G. of Rule 465.1 states that if 
a new incineration device is required solely to comply with the 
requirements of Rule 465.1 for existing cyclic wells, then the device 
will not be subject to New and Modified Source Review requirements, 
provided the device includes best available control technology for all 
air contaminants and is under a District permit. This provision is 
unapprovable and in order to correct the deficiency, section III.G. 
must be amended to be consistent with the memorandum entitled, 
``Pollution Control Projects and New Source Review Applicability'' 
issued by John Seitz, Office of Air Quality Planning and Standards, on 
July 1, 1994. In addition, any emissions previously allowed under this 
NSR exemption must be offset. A detailed discussion of the rule 
provisions and evaluation have been provided in the NPRM and in the 
technical support document (TSD) available at EPA's Region IX office.

Response to Public Comments

    A 30-day public comment period was provided in NPRM at 59 FR 13289. 
EPA received one comment letter on the NPRM from the Independent Oil 
Producers' Agency (IOPA). The comment letter has been evaluated by EPA 
and a summary of the comment and EPA's response are set forth below.
    Comment: In the TSD for SJVUAPCD Rule 465.1, EPA stated that no 
data were submitted to justify the exemption in Section III.F. The IOPA 
asked why EPA is questioning the small producer exemption for exempting 
10 wells responding to another operator's steam injection when the 
emissions from the 100 cyclic wells in III.B exemption were not 
considered significant.
    Response: Data submitted by SJVUAPCD demonstrate that emissions 
from the cyclic wells (exempted by section III.B) were not significant. 
However, emissions from non-cyclic wells tend to be much higher than 
from cyclic wells. SJVUAPCD did not submit sufficient data to show that 
the emissions from non-cyclic wells (exempted by section III.F) were 
also insignificant.
    Comment: There is no need to require small producers to keep 
production records because oil producers always keep production records 
in order to monitor production levels.
    Response: The EPA believes that recordkeeping, as outlined in the 
``Blue Book'' is necessary to ensure that the sources are complying 
with the rule. If the producers are already keeping production records, 
there should be no difficulties in complying with the recordkeeping 
requirement.
    Comment: According to the commenter, the word ``county'' was 
purposely left in the small production definition to delineate between 
the Kern County and Fresno County oilfields.
    Response: EPA recognizes the point raised by the commenter. 
However, since the SJVUAPCD is comprised of eight counties, the word 
district is more appropriate to use, particularly for the applicability 
of promulgating rules and regulations.

EPA Action

    EPA is finalizing a limited approval and a limited disapproval of 
the above-referenced rule. The limited approval of this rule is being 
finalized 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 in the sense that the 
rule strengthens the SIP. However, the rule does not meet the section 
182(a)(2)(A) CAA requirement because of the rule deficiencies which 
were discussed in the NPRM. Thus, in order to strengthen the SIP, EPA 
is granting limited approval of this rule under

[[Page 44163]]

sections 110(k)(3) and 301(a) of the CAA. This action approves the rule 
into the SIP as federally enforceable.
    At the same time, EPA is finalizing the limited disapproval of this 
rule because it contains deficiencies that have not been corrected as 
required by section 182(a)(2)(A) of the CAA, and, as such, the rule 
does not fully meet the requirements of Part D of the Act. As stated in 
the NPRM, upon the effective date of this NFRM, the 18 month clock for 
sanctions and the 24 month FIP clock will begin. Sections 179(a) and 
110(c). If the State does not submit the required corrections and EPA 
does not determine within 18 months of the effective date of the NFRM 
that the State has corrected the deficiency, sanctions will be imposed 
in accordance with EPA's Order of Sanctions rule. See 59 FR 39832 (Aug. 
4, 1994), to be codified at 40 CFR 52.31. It should be noted that the 
rule covered by this NFRM has been adopted by SJVUAPCD and is currently 
in effect in the SJVUAPCD. EPA's limited disapproval action will not 
prevent the SJVUAPCD, or the EPA from enforcing this rule.
    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 section 307(b)(1) of the Act, petitions for judicial review 
of this action must be filed in the United States Court of Appeals for 
the appropriate circuit by October 28, 1996. 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)).

Unfunded Mandates

    Under Sections 202, 203, and 205 of the Unfunded Mandates Reform 
Act of 1995 (``Unfunded Mandates Act''), signed into law on March 22, 
1995, EPA must undertake various actions in association with proposed 
or final rules that include a Federal mandate that may result in 
estimated costs of $100 million or more to the private sector or to 
State, local, or tribal governments in the aggregate.
    Through submission of this state implementation plan or plan 
revision, the State and any affected local or tribal governments have 
elected to adopt the program provided for under Part D of the Clean Air 
Act. These rules may bind State, local, and tribal governments to 
perform certain actions and also require the private sector to perform 
certain duties. The rule being approved by this action will impose no 
new requirements because affected sources are already subject to these 
regulations under State law. Therefore, no additional costs to State, 
local, or tribal governments or to the private sector result from this 
action. EPA has also determined that this final action does not include 
a mandate that may result in estimated costs of $100 million or more to 
State, local, or tribal governments in the aggregate or to the private 
sector.
    Under 5 U.S.C. 801(a)(1)(A) as added by the Small Business 
Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act of 1996, EPA submitted 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 
General Accounting Office prior to publication of the rule in today's 
Federal Register. This rule is not a major rule as defined by 5 U.S.C. 
804(2).
    This action has been classified as a Table 3 action for signature 
by the Regional Administrator under the procedures published in the 
Federal Register on January 19, 1989 (54 FR 2214-2225), as revised by a 
July 10, 1995 memorandum from Mary Nichols, Assistant Administrator for 
Air and Radiation. The Office of Management and Budget (OMB) has 
exempted this regulatory action from Executive Order 12866 review.

List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52

    Environmental protection, Air pollution control, Hydrocarbons, 
Incorporation by reference, Intergovernmental relations, Oxides of 
nitrogen, Ozone, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements, Volatile 
organic compound.

    Note: Incorporation by reference of the State Implementation 
Plan for the State of California was approved by the Director of the 
Federal Register on July 1, 1982.

    Dated: August 9, 1996.
Felicia Marcus,
Regional Administrator.
    Subpart F of 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. 7401-7671q.

Subpart F--California

    2. Section 52.220 is amended by adding paragraph (c)(187)(i)(A)(6) 
to read as follows:


Sec. 52.220  Identification of plan.

* * * * *
    (c) * * *
    (187) * * *
    (i) * * *
    (A) * * *
    (6) Rule 465.1, adopted on September 19, 1991.
* * * * *

[FR Doc. 96-21907 Filed 8-27-96; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-W