[Federal Register Volume 62, Number 93 (Wednesday, May 14, 1997)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 26460-26463]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 97-12627]


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

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

40 CFR Part 52

[CA 12-2-0039; FRL-5825-8]


Approval and Promulgation of Implementation Plans; California 
State Implementation Plan Revision; San Joaquin Valley Unified Air 
Pollution District and South Coast Air Quality Management District 
State Implementation Plan Revisions

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Proposed rule.

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

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 
facilities that load organic liquids into tank trucks, trailers, or 
railroad tank cars and the control of emissions during the transfer of 
organic liquids between storage units and delivery vessels.
    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 proposed rulemaking 
document will incorporate these rules into the federally approved SIP. 
EPA has evaluated the rules and is proposing a simultaneous limited 
approval and limited disapproval under provisions of the CAA regarding 
EPA action on SIP submittals and general rulemaking authority because 
these revisions, while strengthening the SIP, also do not fully meet 
the CAA provisions regarding plan submissions and requirements for 
nonattainment areas.

DATES: Comments must be received on or before June 13, 1997.

ADDRESSES: Comments may be mailed to: Christine Vineyard, Rulemaking 
Office [AIR-4], Air Division, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, 
Region IX, 75 Hawthorne Street, San Francisco, CA 94105-3901.
    Copies of the rules and EPA's evaluation report of the rules are 
available for public inspection at EPA's Region 9 office during normal 
business hours. Copies of the submitted rules are also available for 
inspection at the following locations:
    California Air Resources Board, Stationary Source Division, Rule 
Evaluation Section, 2020 ``L'' Street, Sacramento, CA 95812.
    San Joaquin Valley Unified Air Pollution Control District, 1999 
Tuolumne Street, Fresno, CA 93721.
    South Coast Air Quality Management District, 21865 E. Copley Drive, 
Diamond Bar, CA 91765-4182.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Christine Vineyard, Rulemaking Office, 
[AIR-4], Air Division, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Region IX, 
75 Hawthorne Street, San Francisco, CA 94105-3901, Telephone: (415) 
744-1197.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

I. Applicability

    The rules being proposed for approval into the California SIP 
include: San Joaquin Valley Unified Air Pollution Control District 
(SJVUAPCD) Rule 463.3, Organic Liquid Loading, and South Coast Air 
Quality Management District (SCAQMD) Rule 462, Organic Liquid Loading. 
These rules were submitted by the California Air Resources Board (CARB) 
to EPA on January 28, 1992 and October 13, 1995, respectively.

II. Background

    On March 3, 1978, EPA promulgated a list of ozone nonattainment 
areas under the provisions of the 1977 Clean Air Act (1977 CAA or pre-
amended Act), that included the Los Angeles-South Coast Air Basin (LA 
Basin) and the San Joaquin Area that encompassed the following eight 
air pollution control districts (APCDs): Fresno County APCD, Kern 
County APCD,1 King County 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. The San Joaquin Valley 
Air Basin which includes all the above eight

[[Page 26461]]

counties except for the Southeast Desert Air Basin portion of Kern 
County. Because these areas were unable to meet this 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 On May 26, 1988, EPA notified 
the Governor of California, pursuant to section 110(a)(2)(H) of the 
pre-amended Act, that SJVUAPCD and SCAQMD portions 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. 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.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    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.3 EPA's SIP-Call used 
that guidance to indicate the necessary corrections for specific 
nonattainment areas. The San Joaquin Valley Air Basin is classified as 
serious and the LA Basin is classified as extreme; 4 
therefore, these two areas are subject to the RACT fix-up requirement 
and the May 15, 1991 deadline.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \3\ 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).
    \4\ SCAQMD and SJVUAPCD 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 January 28, 1992 and October 13, 
1995, including the rules being acted on in this document. This 
document addresses EPA's proposed action for SJVUAPCD Rule 463.3, 
Organic Liquid Loading, adopted on September 19, 1991 and SCAQMD Rule 
462, Organic Liquid Loading, adopted on June 9, 1995. These submitted 
rules were found to be complete on April 3, 1992 and November 28, 1995 
pursuant to EPA's completeness criteria that are set forth in 40 CFR 
Part 51, Appendix V 5 and are being proposed for limited 
approval and limited disapproval.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \5\ 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).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    SJVUAPCD Rule 463.3 controls VOC emissions from facilities that 
load liquids into tank trucks or railroad tank cars. SCAQMD Rule 462 
controls emissions of VOC during the transfer of organic liquids 
between storage units and delivery vessels. VOCs contribute to the 
production of ground level ozone and smog. SJVUAPCD Rule 463.3 and 
SCAQMD Rule 462 were originally adopted as part of the districts' 
effort to achieve the National Ambient Air Quality Standard (NAAQS) for 
ozone and has been revised 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 SJVUAPCD's Rule 463.3 and SCAQMD's Rule 462.

III. 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 3. 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 CTGs applicable to SCAQMD Rule 462 are 
entitled, ``Control of Hydrocarbons from Tank Truck Gasoline Loading 
Terminals,'' EPA-450/2-77-026; ``Control of Volatile Organic Compound 
Leaks from Gasoline Tank Trucks and vapor Collection Systems,'' EPA 
4450/2-78-0521; and Control of Volatile Organic Emissions from Bulk 
Gasoline Plants,'' EPA-450/2-77-035. The CTG applicable to SJVUAPCD 
Rule 463.3 is entitled, ``Control of Hydrocarbons from Tank Truck 
Gasoline Loading Terminals,'' EPA-450/2-77-026. Further interpretations 
of EPA policy are found in the Blue Book. In general, these guidance 
documents have been set forth to ensure that VOC rules are fully 
enforceable and strengthen or maintain the SIP.
    SCAQMD's submitted Rule 462, Organic Liquid Loading, includes the 
following revisions from the current SIP rule: 6
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \6\ A previous version of SCAQMD Rule 462 was submitted to EPA 
on May 13, 1991, and EPA proposed a limited approval/ limited 
disapproval on March 21, 1994 (59 FR 11958).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

     The definition of ``facility vapor leak'' was revised to 
require measurement at a distance of 2 centimeters from the source 
according to EPA Method 21. As explained below, EPA has identified this 
revision as a deficiency.
     New and revised definitions were added for rule clarity.
     The Executive Officer determination of an equivalent test 
method was removed.
     A test method was added to determine compliance with the 
vapor emission limit.
     The requirements section was updated and revised. The leak 
inspection requirements were added to include monthly sight, sound, and 
smell detection methods; and quarterly inspections if using an organic 
vapor analyzer (OVA).
     The compliance schedule, compliance determination/test 
methods, recordkeeping, distribution of responsibilities, and 
exemptions sections were updated and/or revised.
    SJVUAPCD's submitted Rule 463.3, Organic Liquid Loading, will 
replace rules from the eight individual counties making up the SJVUAPCD 
(Fresno, Kern, King, Madera, Merced, San Joaquin, Stanislaus, and 
Tulare). The major differences between Rule 463.3 and the existing SIP 
rules include:

[[Page 26462]]

     The applicability of the rule has been broadened to 
include organic liquid facilities which load 4,000 gallons or more in 
any one day.
     The stringency of the emission limit and vapor control 
efficiency have been increased.
     Definitions have been added to improve rule clarity.
     Recordkeeping and test method provisions have been added 
to determine compliance with the rule.
    EPA has evaluated SCAQMD submitted Rule 462 and SJVUAPCD submitted 
Rule 463.3 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 emission limits and a broader applicability 
in submitted SJVUAPCD Rule 463.3 should lead to more emission 
reductions.
    Although SCAQMD's Rule 462 and SJVUAPCD's Rule 463.3 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. SCAQMD Rule 462 contains the 
following deficiency: The definition of ``facility vapor leak'' 
includes a measurement distance of 2 centimeters from the source 
according to procedures listed in EPA Test Method 21. This 2 centimeter 
distance is inconsistent with EPA Test Method 21, which requires 
measurement at the surface of the source or 1 centimeter for moving 
parts. A detailed discussion of rule deficiencies can be found in the 
Technical Support Document for Rule 462 (March 12, 1997), which is 
available from the U.S. EPA, Region 9 office.
    SJVUAPCD Rule 463.3 contains the following test method 
deficiencies:
     Rule 463.3 references a test method for initial compliance 
determination that has not been reviewed and approved by EPA;
     The rule references a vapor pressure testing procedure 
when the storage temperature is above 100 degrees. This procedure is 
vague and should be submitted to EPA for review and approval; and
     The rule references a test method for the measurement of 
true vapor pressure of crude oil that has not been reviewed and 
approved.
    A detailed discussion of rule deficiencies can be found in the 
Technical Support Document for Rule 463.3 (April 16, 1997), which is 
available from the U.S. EPA, Region 9 office. Because of these 
deficiencies, the rules are not approvable pursuant to 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.
    Also, because of the above deficiencies, EPA cannot grant full 
approval of these rules under section 110(k)(3) and part D. 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 SCAQMD's submitted Rule 462 and SJVUAPCD's Rule 463.3 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 
document have been adopted by the SCAQMD and SJVUAPCD and are currently 
in effect in the districts. EPA's final limited disapproval action will 
not prevent SCAQMD, SJVUAPCD 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.

IV. Administrative Requirements

A. Executive Order 12866

    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 E.O. 12866 review.

B. Regulatory Flexibility Act

    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 sections 110 and 30l, 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 flexibility analysis would constitute 
Federal inquiry into the economic reasonableness of state action. The 
Clean Air Act forbids EPA to base its action concerning SIPS on such 
grounds. Union Electric Co. v. U.S. EPA, 427 U.S. 246, 255-66 (1976); 
42 U.S.C. 7410(a)(2).

C. Unfunded Mandates

    Under Section 202 of the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995 
(``Unfunded Mandates Act''), signed into law on March 22, 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 
private sector, of $100 million or more. Under Section 205, EPA must 
select the most cost-effective

[[Page 26463]]

and least burdensome alternative that achieves the objectives of the 
rule and is consistent with statutory requirements. Section 203 
requires EPA to establish a plan for informing and advising any small 
governments that may be significantly or uniquely impacted by the rule.
    EPA has determined that the approval action proposed does not 
include a Federal mandate that may result in estimated costs of $100 
million or more to either State, local, or tribal governments in the 
aggregate, or to the private sector. This Federal action approves pre-
existing requirements under State or local law, and imposes no new 
Federal requirements. Accordingly, no additional costs to State, local, 
or tribal governments, or to the private sector, result from this 
action.

List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52

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

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

    Dated: May 2, 1997.
Felicia Marcus,
Regional Administrator.
[FR Doc. 97-12627 Filed 5-13-97; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P