[Federal Register Volume 68, Number 38 (Wednesday, February 26, 2003)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 8869-8871]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 03-4514]


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

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

40 CFR Part 52

[CA 264-0388; FRL-7455-1]


Revisions to the California State Implementation Plan, Ventura 
County Air Pollution Control District

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Proposed rule.

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

SUMMARY: EPA is proposing to approve revisions to the Ventura County 
Air Pollution Control District (VCAPCD) portion of the California State 
Implementation Plan (SIP). These revisions concern oxides of nitrogen 
(NOX) emissions from stationary gas turbines. We are 
proposing to approve a local rule to regulate these emission sources 
under the Clean Air Act as amended in 1990 (CAA or the Act). We are 
taking comments on this proposal and plan to follow with a final 
action.

DATES: Any comments must arrive by March 28, 2003.

ADDRESSES: Mail comments to Andy Steckel, Rulemaking Office Chief (AIR-
4), U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Region IX, 75 Hawthorne 
Street, San Francisco, CA 94105-3901.
    You can inspect copies of the submitted SIP revisions and EPA's 
technical support document (TSD) at our Region IX office during normal 
business hours. You may also see copies of the submitted SIP revisions 
at the following locations: California Air Resources Board, Stationary 
Source Division, Rule Evaluation Section, 1001 ``I'' Street, 
Sacramento, CA 95814. Ventura County Air Pollution Control District, 
669 County Square Drive, Ventura, California 93003.
    A copy of the rule may also be available via the Internet at http://www.arb.ca.gov/drdb/drdbltxt.htm. Please be advised that this is not 
an EPA Web site and may not contain the same version of the rule that 
was submitted to EPA.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Charnjit Bhullar, EPA Region IX, 
(415)972-3960.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Throughout this document, ``we,'' ``us'' and 
``our'' refer to EPA.

Table of Contents

I. The State's Submittal
    A. What rule did the State submit?
    B. Are there other versions of this rule?
    C. What is the purpose of the submitted rule revisions?
II. EPA's Evaluation and Action
    A. How is EPA evaluating this rule?
    B. Does this rule meet the evaluation criteria?
    C. Public comment and final action.
III. Background Information
    Why was this rule submitted?
IV. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews

I. The State's Submittal

A. What Rule Did the State Submit?

    Table 1 lists the rule addressed by this proposal with the date 
that it was adopted by local air agency and submitted by the California 
Air Resources Board (CARB).

                                            Table 1.--Submitted Rules
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                          Rule                  Rule Title              Adopted     Submitted
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
VCAPCD..................................        74.23  Stationary Gas Turbines........     01/08/02     03/15/02
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    On May 7, 2002, this rule submittal was found to meet the 
completeness criteria in 40 CFR part 51, appendix V, which must be met 
before formal EPA review.

B. Are There Other Versions of This Rule?

    VCAPCD adopted an earlier version of this rule on October 10, 1995, 
and CARB submitted it to us on March 26, 1996. We published approval of 
this previous version of rule 74.23 into the SIP on January 22, 1997 
(14 FR 3220). VCAPCD adopted revisions to the SIP-approved version on 
June 12, 2001 and CARB submitted to us on October 30, 2001. While we 
can only act on the most recently submitted version, we have reviewed 
material associated with previous submittals.

C. What Is the Purpose of the Submitted Rule Revisions?

    Rule 74.23 applies to all stationary gas turbines with a rating 
equal to or greater than 0.3 megawatts (MW) output and operated on 
gaseous and/or liquid fuel. Stationary gas turbines in Ventura County 
are used as cogeneration units to generate electricity and supply heat 
for industrial processes, or as electric generators, and/or as 
primemovers of equipment used in the oil production industry. The 
primary purpose of the rule revisions is to slightly modify two 
emission limits.
    The TSD has more information about this rule.

[[Page 8870]]

II. EPA's Evaluation and Action

A. How Is EPA Evaluating This Rule?

    Generally, SIP rules must be enforceable (see section 110(a) of the 
Act), must require Reasonably Available Control Technology (RACT) for 
major sources in nonattainment areas (see section 182(a)(2)(A), 182(f) 
and 189(a)), and must not relax existing requirements (see sections 
110(l) and 193). The VCAPCD regulates an ozone nonattainment area (see 
40 CFR part 81), so Rule 74.23 must fulfill RACT.
    Guidance and policy documents that we used to help evaluate 
enforceability and RACT requirements consistently include the 
following:
    1. Issue Relating to VOC Regulation, Cut points, Deficiencies, and 
Deviations (the Blue Book), U.S. EPA, May 25, 1988.
    2. ``Guidance Document for Correcting VOC Rule Deficiencies'', U.S. 
EPA Region 9, August 21, 2001 (the little bluebook).
    3. State Implementation Plans: Nitrogen Oxides Supplement to the 
General Preamble for the Implementation of Title I of the Clean Air Act 
Amendment of 1990 (the ``NOX Supplement to the General 
Preamble''), U.S. EPA, 57 FR 55620, November 25, 1992.
    4. Requirements for Preparation, Adoption, and Submittal of 
Implementation Plans, U.S. EPA, 40 CFR part 51.
    5. State Implementation Plans for National Primary and Secondary 
Ambient Air Quality Standards, Section 110 of the Clean Air Act, and 
Plan Requirements for Nonattainment Areas, Title I Part D of the Clean 
Air Act.
    6. Determination of Reasonably Available Control Technology and 
Best Available Retrofit Control Technology for the Control of Oxides of 
Nitrogen From Stationary Gas Turbines, State of California Air 
Resources Board, May 18, 1992.
    7. Alternative Control Techniques (ACT) Document, NOX 
Emissions from Stationary Gas Turbines, U.S. EPA, January 1993, EPA-
453/R-93-007.
    8. Cost Effective Nitrogen Oxides (NOX) Reasonably 
Available Control Technology (RACT), U.S. EPA Office of Air Quality 
Planning and Standards, March 16, 1994.

B. Does This Rule Meet the Evaluation Criteria?

    The substantive revisions to the rule were relaxation of the 
NOX emission limit in section B.5 from 20 ppmv to 24 ppmv 
for LM-2500 turbines, and the strengthening of the limit in section B.6 
from 9 ppmv to 6.8 ppmv for LM-5000 turbines. We believe these changes 
result in a net decrease and that this rule is consistent with the 
relevant policy and guidance regarding enforceability, RACT, and SIP 
relaxations. The TSD has more information on our evaluation.

C. Public Comment and Final Action

    Because EPA believes the submitted rule fulfill all relevant 
requirements, we are proposing to fully approve it as described in 
section 110(k)(3) of the Act. We will accept comments from the public 
on this proposal for the next 30 days. Unless we receive convincing new 
information during the comment period, we intend to publish a final 
approval action that will incorporate this rule into the federally 
enforceable SIP.

III. Background Information

Why Was This Rule Submitted?

    NOX helps produce ground-level ozone, smog and 
particulate matter, which harm human health and the environment. 
Section 110(a) of the CAA requires states to submit regulations that 
control NOX emissions. Table 2 lists some of the national 
milestones leading to the submittal of this local agency NOX 
rule.

                Table 2.--Ozone Nonattainment Milestones
------------------------------------------------------------------------
                   Date                                Event
------------------------------------------------------------------------
March 3, 1978............................  EPA promulgated a list of
                                            ozone nonattainment areas
                                            under the Clean Air Act as
                                            amended in 1977. 43 FR 8964;
                                            40 CFR 81.305.
May 26, 1988.............................  EPA notified Governors that
                                            parts of their SIPs were
                                            inadequate to attain and
                                            maintain the ozone standard
                                            and requested that they
                                            correct the deficiencies
                                            (EPA's SIP-Call). See
                                            section 110(a)(2)(H) of the
                                            pre-amended Act.
November 15, 1990........................  Clean Air Act Amendments of
                                            1990 were enacted. Pub. L.
                                            101-549, 104 Stat. 2399,
                                            codified at 42 U.S.C. 7401-
                                            7671q.
May 15, 1991.............................  Section 182(a)(2)(A) requires
                                            that ozone nonattainment
                                            areas correct deficient RACT
                                            rules by this date.
------------------------------------------------------------------------

IV. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews

    Under Executive Order 12866 (58 FR 51735, October 4, 1993), this 
proposed action is not a ``significant regulatory action'' and 
therefore is not subject to review by the Office of Management and 
Budget. For this reason, this action is also not subject to Executive 
Order 13211, ``Actions Concerning Regulations That Significantly Affect 
Energy Supply, Distribution, or Use'' (66 FR 28355, May 22, 2001). This 
proposed action merely proposes to approve state law as meeting Federal 
requirements and imposes no additional requirements beyond those 
imposed by state law. Accordingly, the Administrator certifies that 
this proposed rule will not have a significant economic impact on a 
substantial number of small entities under the Regulatory Flexibility 
Act (5 U.S.C. 601 et seq.). Because this rule proposes to approve pre-
existing requirements under state law and does not impose any 
additional enforceable duty beyond that required by state law, it does 
not contain any unfunded mandate or significantly or uniquely affect 
small governments, as described in the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 
1995 (Public Law 104-4).
    This proposed rule also does not have tribal implications because 
it will not have a substantial direct effect on one or more Indian 
tribes, on the relationship between the Federal Government and Indian 
tribes, or on the distribution of power and responsibilities between 
the Federal Government and Indian tribes, as specified by Executive 
Order 13175 (65 FR 67249, November 9, 2000). This action also does not 
have Federalism implications because it does not have substantial 
direct effects on the States, on the relationship between the national 
government and the States, or on the distribution of power and 
responsibilities among the various levels of government, as specified 
in Executive Order 13132 (64 FR 43255, August 10, 1999). This action 
merely proposes to approve a state rule implementing a Federal 
standard, and does not alter the relationship or the distribution of 
power and responsibilities established in the Clean Air Act. This 
proposed rule also is not subject to Executive Order 13045 ``Protection 
of Children from Environmental Health Risks and Safety Risks'' (62 FR 
19885, April 23, 1997), because it is not economically significant.
    In reviewing SIP submissions, EPA's role is to approve state 
choices, provided that they meet the criteria of the Clean Air Act. In 
this context, in the

[[Page 8871]]

absence of a prior existing requirement for the State to use voluntary 
consensus standards (VCS), EPA has no authority to disapprove a SIP 
submission for failure to use VCS. It would thus be inconsistent with 
applicable law for EPA, when it reviews a SIP submission, to use VCS in 
place of a SIP submission that otherwise satisfies the provisions of 
the Clean Air Act. Thus, the requirements of section 12(d) of the 
National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act of 1995 (15 U.S.C. 272 
note) do not apply. This proposed rule does not impose an information 
collection burden under the provisions of the Paperwork Reduction Act 
of 1995 (44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.).

List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52

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

    Authority: 42 U.S.C. 7401 et seq.

    Dated: February 7, 2003.
Alexis Strauss,
Acting Regional Administrator, Region IX.
[FR Doc. 03-4514 Filed 2-25-03; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P