Approval and Promulgation of Implementation Plans; California State Implementation Plan Revision, South Coast Air Quality Management District, El Dorado County Air Pollution Control District, Yolo-Solano Air Quality Management District, and Ventura County Air Pollution Control District

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

40 CFR Part 52

[CA 031-0202; FRL-6508-5]

Approval and Promulgation of Implementation Plans; California

State Implementation Plan Revision, South Coast Air Quality Management

District, El Dorado County Air Pollution Control District, Yolo-Solano

Air Quality Management District, and Ventura County Air Pollution

Control District

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Final rule.

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

SUMMARY: EPA is finalizing limited approvals and limited disapprovals

of revisions to the California State Implementation Plan (SIP) proposed

in the Federal Register on February 28, 1997, August 18, 1998 and

September 14, 1998. This final action will incorporate these rules into

the federally approved SIP. The intended effect of finalizing this

action is to regulate emissions of oxides of nitrogen (NOX)

in accordance with the requirements of the Clean Air Act, as amended in

1990 (CAA or the Act). The revised rules control NOX

emissions from boilers and process heaters in petroleum refineries,

stationary internal combustion engines, and Boilers, Steam Generators,

and Process Heaters. 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 these

revisions, while strengthening the SIP, also do not fully meet the CAA

provisions regarding plan submissions and requirements for

nonattainment areas. As a result of this limited disapproval EPA will

be required to impose highway funding or emission offset sanctions

under the CAA 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 February 14, 2000.

ADDRESSES: Copies of the rule revisions and EPA's evaluation report for

each rule are available for public inspection at EPA's Region IX office

during normal business hours. Copies of the submitted rule revisions

are available for inspection at the following locations:

Rulemaking Office, (AIR-4), Air 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.

South Coast Air Quality Management District 21865 E. Copley Drive,

Diamond Bar, CA 91765-4182.

El Dorado County Air Pollution Control District, 2850 Fairlane

Court, Building C, Placerville, CA 95667.

Yolo-Solano Air Quality Management District, 1947 Galileo

Court,Suite 103, Davis, CA 95616.

Ventura County Air Pollution Control District, 669 County Square

Drive, Ventura, CA 93003.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: For SCAQMD 1109, Mae Wang, For other

rules, Thomas C. Canaday, Rulemaking Office, AIR-4, Air Division, US

Environmental Protection Agency, Region IX, 75 Hawthorne Street, San

Francisco, CA 94105, Telephone: (415) 744-1200 or (415) 744-1202.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

I. Applicability

The rules being approved into the California SIP include: South

Coast Air Quality Management District (SCAQMD) Rule 1109, Emissions of

Oxides of Nitrogen from Process Heaters and Boilers in Petroleum

Refineries, El Dorado County Air Pollution Control District (EDCAPCD)

Rule 233, Stationary Internal Combustion Engines, Yolo-Solano Air

Quality Management District (YSAQMD) Rule 2.32, Stationary Internal

Combustion Engines, and Ventura County Air Pollution Control District

(VCAPCD) Rule 74.15.1, Boilers, Steam Generators, and Process Heaters.

SCAQMD Rule 1109 was submitted by the California Air Resources Board

(CARB) to EPA on March 26, 1990, EDCAPCD Rule 233 on October 20, 1994,

YSAQMD Rule 2.32 on September 28, 1994, and VCAPCD Rule 74.15.1 on

October 13, 1995.

II. Background

EPA proposed granting limited approval and limited disapproval of

the following rules into the California SIP: SCAQMD Rule 1109,

Emissions of Oxides of Nitrogen from Process Heaters and Boilers in

Petroleum Refineries, on February 28, 1997 in 62 FR 9138; EDCAPCD Rule

233, Stationary Internal Combustion Engines and YSAQMD Rule 2.32,

Stationary Internal Combustion Engines, on August 18, 1998 in 63 FR

44211; VCAPCD Rule 74.15.1, Boilers, Steam Generators, and Process

Heaters, on September 14, 1998 in 63 FR 49056. Rule 1109 was adopted by

SCAQMD on August 5, 1988, EDCAPCD adopted Rule 233 on October 18, 1994,

YSAQMD adopted Rule 2.32 on August 10, 1994 and VCAPCD adopted Rule

74.15.1 on June 13, 1995. Rule 1109 was submitted by the CARB to EPA on

March 26, 1990, EDCAPCD Rule 233 on October 20, 1994, YSAQMD Rule 2.32

on September 28, 1994, and VCAPCD Rule 74.15.1 on October 13, 1995.

These rules were 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 each of

the above rules and nonattainment areas is provided in the proposed

rules (PR) cited above.

EPA has evaluated all of the above rules for consistency with the

[[Page 2053]]

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 PRs. EPA is finalizing the limited approval

of these rules in order to strengthen the SIP and finalizing the

limited disapproval requiring the correction of the remaining

deficiencies. Because none of the rules are currently in the SIP, the

incorporation of these rules into the SIP would decrease the

NOX emissions allowed by the SIP. The submitted rules SCAQMD

Rule 1109-Emissions of Oxides of Nitrogen from Process Heaters and

Boilers in Petroleum Refineries, EDCAPCD Rule 233-Stationary Internal

Combustion Engines, YSAQMD Rule 2.32-Stationary Internal Combustion

Engines, and VCAPCD Rule 74.15.1-Boilers, Steam Generators, and Process

Heaters, include the following provisions:

General provisions including applicability, exemptions,

and definitions.

Exhaust emissions standards for oxides of nitrogen

(NOX) and carbon monoxide (CO)

Administrative and monitoring requirements including

compliance schedule, reporting requirements, monitoring and

recordkeeping, and test methods.

Rules submitted to EPA for approval as revisions to the SIP must be

fully enforceable, must maintain or strengthen the SIP, and must

conform with EPA policy in order to be approved by EPA. When reviewing

rules for SIP approvability, EPA evaluates enforceability elements such

as test methods, record keeping, and compliance testing in addition to

RACT guidance regarding emission limits. Incorporation of the Rules

strengthens the SIP through the addition of enforceable measures such

as record keeping, test methods, definitions, and more stringent

compliance testing.

SCAQMD Rule 1109 controls emissions of nitrogen oxides from boilers

and process heaters located in petroleum refineries with rated

capacities greater than 40 MBtu per hour heat input. The rule requires

units to meet a 0.03 pound per million Btu heat input limit in

accordance with a phased time schedule.

The emission limits will strengthen the SIP, but this rule

contains deficiencies which must be corrected. Those deficiencies

include Executive Officer discretion in approving continuous emission

monitoring equipment and test methods, insufficient records to

determine compliance, and an unapprovable provision for an alternative

emission control plan.

EDCAPCD Rule 233 and YSAQMD Rule 2.32: In both of the Rules, the

first option, which applies to existing IC engines that meet the limits

by May 31, 1995, sets emission limits of 640 ppmv, 740 ppmv and 700

ppmv for rich-burn spark-ignited engines, lean-burn spark-ignited

engines, and diesel engines respectively. In a Proposed Determination

of Reasonably Available Control Technology and Best Available Retrofit

Control Technology for Stationary Internal Combustion Engines dated

December 1997, the State of California Air Resources Board (CARB)

determined RACT limits for IC engines rated at 50 brake horsepower or

more to be 50 parts per million volume (ppmv) for rich-burn spark-

ignited engines, 125 ppmv for lean-burn spark-ignited engines, and 350

ppmv for diesel engines. These limits were determined based on

previously implemented regulatory control in Ventura County and San

Diego County.

EPA agrees that these limits are consistent with the

Agency's guidance and policy for making RACT determinations in terms of

general cost-effectiveness, emission reductions, and environmental

impacts. Both EDCAPCD Rule 233 and YSAQMD Rule 2.32 provide three

options for demonstrating compliance. The EPA has determined that these

limits do not meet RACT for IC engines. Although the monitoring and

recordkeeping provisions of EDCAPCD Rule 233 and YSAQMD Rule 2.32 will

strengthen the SIP, these rules contain deficiencies related to the

emissions limits for oxides of nitrogen (NOX), as well as

other deficiencies. VCAPCD Rule 74.15.1 controls emissions of oxides of

nitrogen from boilers, steam generators, and process heaters.

The Rule provides an automatic exemption from compliance

for emissions that occur during start-up, shutdown, or under breakdown

conditions. These conditions are not defined in the rule. Such

automatic exemptions are not allowed under EPA policy as contained in

the EPA policy memorandum signed by Kathleen M. Bennett, ``Policy on

Excess Emissions During Startup, Shutdown, Maintenance and

Malfunctions,'' dated February 15, 1983, and ``State Implementation

Plans: Policy Regarding Excess Emissions During Malfunctions, Startup,

and Shutdown,'' US EPA, Office of Air Quality Planning and Standards

letter dated September 20, 1999. In order to be consistent with EPA

policy, Rule 74.15.1 must be modified to either eliminate this

exemption, or to define the conditions of its applicability to conform

with the excess emissions memoranda.

A detailed discussion of the rules provisions and evaluations has

been provided in the PRs and in technical support documents (TSDs)

available at EPA's Region IX office. TSDs prepared by EPA are dated

January 22, 1997 for SCAQMD Rule 1109, July 21, 1998 for EDCAPCD Rule

233 and YSAQMD Rule 2.32, and August 18, 1998 for VCAPCD Rule 74.15.1.

III. Response to Public Comments

A 30-day public comment period was provided in 62 FR 9138. EPA

received no comments on the proposed NPRs.

IV. EPA Action

EPA is finalizing a limited approval and a limited disapproval of

the above-referenced rules. The limited approval of these rules 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 rules strengthen the SIP. However, the rules do not meet

the section 182(a)(2)(A) CAA requirement because of the rules

deficiencies which were discussed in the PR. Thus, in order to

strengthen the SIP, EPA is granting limited approval of these rules

under sections 110(k)(3) and 301(a) of the CAA. This action approves

the rules into the SIP as federally enforceable rules.

At the same time, EPA is finalizing the 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. As

stated in the proposed rules, upon the effective date of the final

rules, 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 approve the submittal within 18

months of the effective date of the final rules, either the highway

sanction or the offset sanction will be imposed at the 18 month mark.

It should be noted that the rules covered by this FR have been adopted

by the Districts and are currently in effect in the Districts. EPA's

limited disapproval action will not prevent the Districts or EPA from

enforcing the rules.

V. Administrative Requirements

A. Executive Order 12866

The Office of Management and Budget (OMB) has exempted this

regulatory

[[Page 2054]]

action from Executive Order 12866, entitled ``Regulatory Planning and

Review.''

B. Executive Order 13132

Federalism (64 FR 43255, August 10, 1999) revokes and replaces

Executive Orders 12612, Federalism and 12875, Enhancing the

Intergovernmental Partnership. Executive Order 13132 requires EPA to

develop an accountable process to ensure ``meaningful and timely input

by State and local officials in the development of regulatory policies

that have federalism implications.'' ``Policies that have federalism

implications'' is defined in the Executive Order to include regulations

that 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.'' Under Executive Order 13132, EPA may not issue a

regulation that has federalism implications, that imposes substantial

direct compliance costs, and that is not required by statute, unless

the Federal government provides the funds necessary to pay the direct

compliance costs incurred by State and local governments, or EPA

consults with State and local officials early in the process of

developing the proposed regulation. EPA also may not issue a regulation

that has federalism implications and that preempts State law unless the

Agency consults with State and local officials early in the process of

developing the proposed regulation.

The final rules will 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.

Thus, the requirements of section 6 of the Executive Order do not apply

to the rules.

C. Executive Order 13045

Protection of Children from Environmental Health Risks and Safety

Risks (62 FR 19885, April 23, 1997), applies to any rule that: (1) Is

determined to be ``economically significant'' as defined under

Executive Order 12866, and (2) Concerns an environmental health or

safety risk that EPA has reason to believe may have a disproportionate

effect on children. If the regulatory action meets both criteria, the

Agency must evaluate the environmental health or safety effects of the

planned rule on children, and explain why the planned regulation is

preferable to other potentially effective and reasonably feasible

alternatives considered by the Agency.

The rules are not subject to Executive Order 13045 because it does

not involve decisions intended to mitigate environmental health or

safety risks.

D. Executive Order 13084

Under Executive Order 13084, Consultation and Coordination with

Indian Tribal Governments, EPA may not issue a regulation that is not

required by statute, that significantly affects or uniquely affects the

communities of Indian tribal governments, and that imposes substantial

direct compliance costs on those communities, unless the Federal

government provides the funds necessary to pay the direct compliance

costs incurred by the tribal governments. If the mandate is unfunded,

EPA must provide to the Office of Management and Budget, in a

separately identified section of the preamble to the rule, a

description of the extent of EPA's prior consultation with

representatives of affected tribal governments, a summary of the nature

of their concerns, and a statement supporting the need to issue the

regulation.

In addition, Executive Order 13084 requires EPA to develop an

effective process permitting elected and other representatives of

Indian tribal governments ``to provide meaningful and timely input in

the development of regulatory policies on matters that significantly or

uniquely affect their communities.'' Today's rules do not significantly

or uniquely affect the communities of Indian tribal governments.

Accordingly, the requirements of section 3(b) of Executive Order 13084

do not apply to the rules.

E. Regulatory Flexibility Act

The Regulatory Flexibility Act (RFA) generally requires an agency

to conduct a regulatory flexibility analysis of any rule subject to

notice and comment rulemaking requirements unless the agency certifies

that the rule will not have a significant economic impact on a

substantial number of small entities. Small entities include small

businesses, small not-for-profit enterprises, and small governmental

jurisdictions.

The final rules will not have a significant impact on a substantial

number of small entities because SIP approvals under section 110 and

subchapter I, part D of the Clean Air 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 create

any new requirements, I certify that this action will not have a

significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities.

Moreover, due to the nature of the Federal-State relationship under

the Clean Air Act, preparation of flexibility analysis would constitute

Federal inquiry into the economic reasonableness of state action. The

Clean Air Act forbids EPA to base its actions concerning SIPs on such

grounds. Union Electric Co., v. US EPA, 427 U.S. 246, 255-66 (1976); 42

U.S.C. 7410(a)(2).

F. 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

annual 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 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 promulgated does not

include a Federal mandate that may result in estimated annual 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

requirements. Accordingly, no additional costs to State, local, or

tribal governments, or to the private sector, result from this action.

G. Submission to Congress and the Comptroller General

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

[[Page 2055]]

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. The rules are not ``major'' rules as defined by 5

U.S.C. 804(2).

H. National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act

Section 12 of the National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act

(NTTAA) of 1995 requires Federal agencies to evaluate existing

technical standards when developing a new regulation. To comply with

NTTAA, EPA must consider and use ``voluntary consensus standards''

(VCS) if available and applicable when developing programs and policies

unless doing so would be inconsistent with applicable law or otherwise

impractical.

The EPA believes that VCS are inapplicable to this action. Today's

action does not require the public to perform activities conducive to

the use of VCS.

I. Petitions for Judicial Review

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 March 13, 2000. Filing a

petition for reconsideration by the Administrator of the final rules

does not affect the finality of the rules 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

rules 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, Hydrocarbons,

Incorporation by reference, Intergovernmental relations, Ozone,

Reporting and recordkeeping requirements, Volatile organic compound.

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

Dated: November 18, 1999.

Laura Yoshii,

Deputy Regional Administrator, Region IX.

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 et seq.

Subpart F--California

2. Section 52.220 is amended by adding paragraphs (c)(179)(i)(H),

(c) (199)(i)(E)(2), (c)(203), (c)(225)(i)(C) introductory text, and

(c)(225)(i)(G) to read as follows:

(c) * * *

(179) * * *

(i) * * *

(H) South Coast Air Quality Management District.

(1) Rule 1109 adopted on March 12, 1984 and amended on August 5,

1988.

* * * * *

(199) * * *

(i) * * *

(E) * * *

(2) Rule 2.32 adopted on August 10, 1994.

* * * * *

(203) New and amended regulations for the following APCDs were

submitted on October 20, 1994, by the Governor's designee.

(i) Incorporation by reference.

(A) El Dorado County Air Pollution Control District.

(1) Rule 233 adopted on October 18, 1994.

* * * * *

(225) * * *

(i) * * *

(C) El Dorado County Air Pollution Control District.

* * * * *

(G) Ventura County Air Pollution Control District.

(1) Rule 74.15.1 revised on June 13, 1995.

* * * * *

[FR Doc. 00-623 Filed 1-12-00; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6560-50-P