[Federal Register Volume 69, Number 100 (Monday, May 24, 2004)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 29451-29454]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 04-11553]


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

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

40 CFR Part 52

[CA 169-0440a; FRL-7665-2]


Revision to the California State Implementation Plan, Bay Area 
Air Quality Management District, Monterey Bay Unified Air Pollution 
Control District, and Ventura County Air Pollution Control District

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Direct final rule.

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

SUMMARY: EPA is taking direct final action to approve revisions to the 
Bay Area Air Quality Management District (BAAQMD) Monterey Bay Unified 
Air Pollution Control District (MBUAPCD), and Ventura County Air 
Pollution Control District (VCAPCD) portions of the California State 
Implementation Plan (SIP). The revisions concern the emission of 
volatile organic compounds (VOCs) from episodic releases from relief 
devices, the emission of VOCs from the transfer of gasoline into 
storage containers at bulk terminals, and the storage and transfer of 
gasoline at dispensing facilities. We are approving local rules that 
regulate these emission sources under the Clean Air Act as amended in 
1990 (CAA or the Act).

DATES: This rule is effective on July 23, 2004 without further notice, 
unless EPA receives adverse comments by June 23, 2004. If we receive 
such comments, we will publish a timely withdrawal in the Federal 
Register to notify the public that this rule will not take effect.

ADDRESSES: Send comments to Andy Steckel, Rulemaking Office Chief (AIR-
4), U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Region IX, 75 Hawthorne 
Street, San Francisco, CA 94105, or e-mail to [email protected], 
or submit comments at http://www.regulations.gov.
    You can inspect a copy of the submitted rule revisions and EPA's 
technical support documents (TSDs) at our Region IX office during 
normal business hours. You may also see a copy of the submitted rule 
revisions and TSDs at the following locations:
    Environmental Protection Agency, Air Docket (6102), Ariel Rios 
Building, 1200 Pennsylvania Avenue, NW., Washington DC 20460.
    California Air Resources Board, Stationary Source Division, Rule 
Evaluation Section, 1001 ``I'' Street, Sacramento, CA 95814.
    Bay Area Air Quality Management District, 939 Ellis Street, San 
Francisco, CA 94109.
    Monterey Bay Unified Air Pollution Control District, 24580 Silver 
Cloud Court, Monterey, CA 93940.
    Ventura County Air Pollution Control District, 669 County Square 
Drive, Ventura, CA 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: Al Petersen, Rulemaking Office (AIR-
4), U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Region IX, (415) 947-4118, 
[email protected].

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

Table of Contents

I. The State's Submittal
    A. What Rules Did the State Submit?
    B. Are There Other Versions of These Rules?
    C. What Is the Purpose of the Submitted Rule Revisions?
II. EPA's Evaluation and Action
    A. How Is EPA Evaluating the Rules?
    B. Do the Rules Meet the Evaluation Criteria?
    C. EPA Recommendation To Further Improve a Rule
    D. Public Comment and Final Action
III. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews

I. The State's Submittal

A. What Rules Did the State Submit?

    Table 1 lists the rule we are approving with the date that it was 
amended or revised by the local air agency and submitted by the 
California Air Resources Board (CARB).

                                            Table 1.--Submitted Rules
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                 Rule                   Rule title             Amended or revised   Submitted
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
BAAQMD.........................         8-28  Episodic Releases from Pressure    03/18/98 Amended..     03/28/00
                                               Relief Devices at Petroleum
                                               Refineries and Chemical Plants.
MBUAPCD........................          418  Transfer of Gasoline into          04/16/03 Revised..     08/11/03
                                               Stationary Storage Containers.
VCAPCD.........................           70  Storage and Transfer of Gasoline.  11/11/03 Revised..     01/15/04
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------


[[Page 29452]]

    On May 19, 2000, the submittal of BAAQMD Rule 8-28 was found to 
meet the completeness criteria in 40 CFR part 51, appendix V, which 
must be met before formal EPA review. On October 10, 2003, the 
submittal of MBUAPCD Rule 418 was found to meet the completeness 
criteria. On March 1, 2004, the submittal of VCAPCD Rule 70 was found 
to meet the completeness criteria.

B. Are There Other Versions of These Rules?

    We approved a version of BAAQMD Rule 8-28 into the SIP on December 
9, 1994 (59 FR 63721). We approved a version of MBUAPCD Rule 418 into 
the SIP on April 23, 2002 (67 FR 19682). We approved a version of 
VCAPCD Rule 70 into the SIP on October 29, 2002 (67 FR 65873).

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

    VOCs help produce ground-level ozone and smog, which harm human 
health and the environment. Section 110(a) of the CAA requires states 
to submit regulations that control VOC emissions.
    The purpose of revising BAAQMD Rule 8-28 relative to the SIP rule 
is to make the following changes:
     8-28-114: To add a limited exemption from venting to a 
vapor recovery system for small refineries processing less than 20,000 
barrels per day of crude.
     8-28-200: To add nine new definitions to improve clarity.
     8-28-302: To add a requirement that new sources meet BACT 
and to add a requirement to meet the Prevention Measures Procedures of 
8-28-405.
     8-28-303: To revise the five choices for compliance of 
existing sources down to two choices, which are to either vent to a 
vapor recovery system or to meet the Prevention Measures Procedures of 
8-28-405.
     8-28-304: To add the requirement to vent all devices, 
having a second Release Event, to a vapor recovery system.
     8-28-401: To add additional reporting requirements for 
information regarding a Release Event.
     8-28-401: To delete the requirement to maintain records of 
measurements for a period of two years.
     8-28-405: To add requirements for Prevention Measures 
Procedures and a Process Hazards Analysis.
     8-28-600: To revise test methods for the determination of 
Control Efficiency.
    The purpose of revising MBUAPCD Rule 418 relative to the SIP rule 
is to make the following changes:
     418.1.3.2: To require exemption from vapor recovery for 
delivery vessels for small facilities in operation before January 1, 
1976, be requested annually by the owner instead of the owner or 
operator.
     418.2.2: To add the definition of [California Air 
Resources Board] ARB-certified vapor recovery system.
     418.3.1: To require that the vapor recovery system for 
transfer from a delivery vessel to a storage tank be ARB-certified 
instead of having a recovery of at least 95% of the gasoline vapors 
displaced.
     418.5: To change the test method for the vapor recovery 
efficiency to ARB TP-202.1; the certification procedure for cargo tanks 
to ARB TP-204; and the static pressure and leak test procedures to ARB 
TP-204.1, 204.2, and 204.3.
    The purpose of revising Rule 70 relative to the SIP is to remedy a 
deficiency in the limited approval/limited disapproval on October 29, 
2002 (67 FR 65873). Offset sanctions would start on May 30, 2004, if 
the deficiency were not corrected. The deficiency cited and the remedy 
is as follows:
     [Sections H.1.c, H.2.b, H.3, and H.7.a: Reverification of 
the performance tests of the vapor recovery system originally required 
by the Executive Order should be performed more frequently. EPA 
recommends reverification of performance tests once every 6-12 months 
in order to fulfill RACT.] The reverification of performance tests 
frequencies have been increased. The static pressure test, dynamic 
pressure test, and liquid removal rate test for vapor recovery systems 
at all dispensing facilities exceeding 100,000 gallons per year of 
gasoline throughput are now required every 12 months. The air-to-
liquid-volume-ratio test for vapor recovery systems at all dispensing 
facilities using vacuum assist are now required every 12 months. Test 
frequencies are less at smaller facilities.
    Other revisions to improve Rule 70 are as follows:
     An obsolete compliance date was removed.
     The list of Phase II (storage tank to vehicle) vapor 
recovery system defects was removed from the rule and instead 
referenced in California Code of Regulations, title 17, section 94006, 
adopted November 12, 2002.
     The references to specific CARB test methods were updated.
     Any test required by the CARB Executive Order, but not by 
this rule, shall be performed at the frequency required by the CARB 
Executive Order.

II. EPA's Evaluation and Action

A. How Is EPA Evaluating the Rules?

    Generally, SIP rules must be enforceable (see section 110(a) of the 
CAA), must require Reasonably Available Control Technology (RACT) for 
major sources in nonattainment areas (see section 182(a)(2)(A)), must 
fulfill the special requirements for gasoline vapor recovery in ozone 
nonattainment areas (see section 182(b)(3)(A)), and must not relax 
existing requirements (see sections 110(l) and 193).
    The BAAQMD regulates an area designated ozone nonattainment in 
accordance with subpart 1, section 172(c)(1) of the CAA. This section 
requires that the BAAQMD in general adopt RACM that, at a minimum, 
includes RACT. There are no specific mandatory RACM/RACT measures for 
VOC that must be adopted in subpart 1. Therefore, we are evaluating 
that the control measures and/or control technology employed are 
reasonably available.
    The MBUAPCD regulates an ozone maintenance attainment area (see 40 
CFR part 81). The maintenance attainment plan relies on MBUAPCD Rule 
418 for attainment. See Redesignation Request and Request for Exemption 
from NOX RACT Rule Requirements for the Monterey Bay Region 
(March, 1994). Therefore, MBUAPCD Rule 418 must fulfill the 
requirements of RACT and the special requirements for gasoline 
recovery.
    The VCAPCD regulates an area designated ozone nonattainment. 
Therefore, VCAPCD Rule 70 must fulfill the requirements of RACT and the 
special requirements for gasoline recovery.
    The following guidance documents were used for reference:
     Requirements for Preparation, Adoption, and Submittal of 
Implementation Plans, EPA, 40 CFR part 51.
     Issues Relating to VOC Regulation Cutpoints, Deficiencies, 
and Deviations, EPA (May 25, 1988). (The Bluebook)
     Guidance Document for Correcting Common VOC & Other Rule 
Deficiencies, EPA Region IX (August 21, 2001). (The Little Bluebook)
     Gasoline Vapor Recovery Guidelines, EPA Region IX (April 
24, 2000).
     Control of Hydrocarbons from Tank Truck Gasoline Loading 
Terminals, EPA-450-2-77-026 (October 1977).
     Control of VOC Leaks From Gasoline Tank Trucks and Vapor 
Collection Systems, EPA-50-2-78-051 (December 1978).

[[Page 29453]]

B. Do the Rules Meet the Evaluation Criteria?

    We believe the rules are consistent with the relevant policy and 
guidance regarding enforceability, SIP relaxations, special gasoline 
requirements, and fulfilling RACM/RACT in general. The TSD has more 
information on our evaluation.

C. EPA Recommendation to Further Improve a Rule

    The TSD describes an additional revision to BAAQMD Rule 8-28 that 
does not affect EPA's current action but is recommended for the next 
time the local agency modifies the rule.

D. Public Comment and Final Action

    As authorized in section 110(k)(3) of the CAA, EPA is fully 
approving submitted rules because we believe they fulfill all relevant 
requirements. We do not think anyone will object to this, so we are 
finalizing the approval without proposing it in advance. However, in 
the Proposed Rules section of this Federal Register, we are 
simultaneously proposing approval of the same submitted rules. If we 
receive adverse comments by June 23, 2004, we will publish a timely 
withdrawal in the Federal Register to notify the public that the direct 
final approval will not take effect and we will address the comments in 
a subsequent final action based on the proposal. If we do not receive 
timely adverse comments, the direct final approval will be effective 
without further notice on July 23, 2004. This will incorporate Rule 
BAAQMD 8-28, MBUAPCD Rule 418, and VCAPCD Rule 70 into the federally-
enforceable SIP. There are no sanction or FIP clocks associated with 
our previous action on BAAQMD 8-28 or MBUAPCD Rule 418. However, offset 
sanctions for VCAPCD Rule 70 would start on May 31, 2004, to be 
followed six months later by highway sanctions, if the deficiency were 
not remedied.
    Please note that if EPA receives adverse comment on an amendment, 
paragraph, or section of this rule and if that provision may be severed 
from the remainder of the rule, EPA may adopt as final those provisions 
of the rule that are not the subject of an adverse comment.

III. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews

    Under Executive Order 12866 (58 FR 51735, October 4, 1993), this 
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 action 
merely approves state law as meeting Federal requirements and imposes 
no additional requirements beyond those imposed by state law. 
Accordingly, the Administrator certifies that this 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 approves 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 (Pub. L. 104-4).
    This 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 approves 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 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 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 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.).
    The Congressional Review Act, 5 U.S.C. 801 et seq., as added by the 
Small Business Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act of 1996, generally 
provides that before a rule may take effect, the agency promulgating 
the rule must submit a rule report, which includes a copy of the rule, 
to each House of the Congress and to the Comptroller General of the 
United States. EPA will submit 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 United States prior 
to publication of the rule in the Federal Register. A major rule cannot 
take effect until 60 days after it is published in the Federal 
Register. This action is not a ``major rule'' as defined by 5 U.S.C. 
804(2).
    Under section 307(b)(1) of the Clean Air Act, petitions for 
judicial review of this action must be filed in the United States Court 
of Appeals for the appropriate circuit by July 23, 2004. 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).)

List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52

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

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

    Dated: May 7, 2004.
Laura Yoshii,
Deputy Regional Administrator, Region IX.

0
Part 52, chapter I, title 40 of the Code of Federal Regulations is 
amended as follows:

PART 52--[AMENDED]

0
1. The authority citation for part 52 continues to read as follows:

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

Subpart F--California

0
2. Section 52.220 is amended by adding paragraphs (c)(277)(i)(C)(8),

[[Page 29454]]

(320)(i)(A)(3), and (328) to read as follows:


Sec.  52.220  Identification of plan.

* * * * *
    (c) * * *
    (277) * * *
    (i) * * *
    (C) * * *
    (8) Rule 8-28, adopted on July 16, 1980 and amended on March 18, 
1998.
* * * * *
    (320) * * *
    (i) * * *
    (A) * * *
    (3) Rule 418, adopted on September 1, 1974 and revised on April 16, 
2003.
* * * * *
    (328) Amended regulations for the following APCDs were submitted on 
January 15, 2004, by the Governor's Designee.
    (i) Incorporation by reference.
    (A) Ventura County Air Pollution Control District
    (1) Rule 70, adopted on June 25, 1974 and revised on November 11, 
2003.
* * * * *

[FR Doc. 04-11553 Filed 5-21-04; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P