Approval and Promulgation of Implementation Plans; California State Implementation Plan Revision, El Dorado County Air Pollution Control District

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

40 CFR Part 52

[CA 153-1-7165a; FRL-5278-7]

Approval and Promulgation of Implementation Plans; California

State Implementation Plan Revision, El Dorado County Air Pollution

Control District

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Direct final rule.

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

SUMMARY: EPA is taking direct final action on revisions to the

California State Implementation Plan. The revisions concern a rule from

the El Dorado County Air Pollution Control District (EDCAPCD). This

rule controls volatile organic compound (VOC) emissions from lumber

processing and timber manufacturing operations. This approval action

will incorporate the rule into the federally approved SIP.

The intended effect of approving this rule is to regulate emissions

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

amended in 1990 (CAA or the Act). In addition, the final action on this

rule serves as a final determination that the finding of

[[Page 47274]]

nonsubmittal for this rule has been corrected and that on the effective

date of this action, any Federal Implementation Plan (FIP) clock is

stopped. Thus, EPA is finalizing the approval of this revision into the

California SIP under provisions of the CAA regarding EPA action on SIP

submittals, SIPs for national primary and secondary ambient air quality

standards, and plan requirements for nonattainment areas.

DATES: This final rule is effective on November 13, 1995 unless adverse

or critical comments are received by October 12, 1995. If the effective

date is delayed, a timely notice will be published in the Federal

Register.

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

are available for public inspection at EPA's Region IX 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

94105-3901.

Environmental Protection Agency, Air Docket (6102), 401 ``M'' Street,

SW., Washington, DC 20460.

California Air Resources Board, Stationary Source Division, Rule

Evaluation Section, 2020 ``L'' Street, Sacramento, CA 95814.

El Dorado County Air Pollution Control District, 330 Fair Lane,

Placerville, CA 95667.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Duane F. James, 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) 744-1191.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Applicability

The rule being approved into the California SIP is EDCAPCD's Rule

234, ``VOC RACT Rule--Sierra Pacific Industries.'' This rule was

submitted by the California Air Resources Board to EPA on June 16,

1995.

Background

On March 3, 1978, EPA promulgated a list of ozone nonattainment

areas under the provisions of the Clean Air Act, as amended in 1977

(1977 Act or pre-amended Act), that included a portion of El Dorado

County in the Sacramento Metro Area. 43 FR 8964, 40 CFR 81.305. On May

26, 1988, EPA notified the Governor of California, pursuant to section

110(a)(2)(H) of the 1977 Act, that the above district's portion of the

California SIP was 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, the Clean Air Act Amendments of 1990

were enacted. Pub. L. 101-549, 104 Stat. 2399, codified at 42 U.S.C.

7401-7671q. In amended section 182(b)(2)(C) of the CAA, Congress

statutorily required nonattainment areas to submit reasonably available

control technology (RACT) rules for all major stationary sources of

VOCs by November 15, 1992 (the RACT ``catch-up'' requirement).

At the time of enactment of the CAA amendments, the Sacramento

Metro Area was classified as serious; 1 therefore, this area was

subject to the RACT catch-up requirement and the November 15, 1992

deadline.2

\1\ The Sacramento Metro Area was reclassified from serious to

severe on June 1, 1995. See 60 FR 20237 (April 25, 1995).

\2\ California did not make the required SIP submittal by

November 15, 1992. On March 29, 1994, the EPA made a finding of

failure to make a submittal pursuant to section 179(a)(1), which

started an 18-month sanction clock. The rule being acted on in this

direct final rule was submitted in response to the EPA finding of

failure to submit.

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

The State of California submitted many revised RACT rules for

incorporation into its SIP on June 16, 1995, including the rule being

acted on in this notice. This notice addresses EPA's direct-final

action for EDCAPCD's Rule 234, ``VOC RACT Rule--Sierra Pacific

Industries.'' EDCAPCD adopted Rule 234 on April 25, 1995. This

submitted rule was found to be complete on July 31, 1995, pursuant to

EPA's completeness criteria that are set forth in 40 CFR part 51

Appendix V 3 and is being finalized for approval into the SIP.

\3\ EPA adopted the 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).

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

Rule 234 controls VOC emissions from a waste-fired boiler (Boiler

#3) at Sierra Pacific Industries in Camino, California. VOCs contribute

to the production of ground level ozone and smog. This rule was adopted

as part of EDCAPCD's effort to achieve the National Ambient Air Quality

Standard (NAAQS) for ozone and in response to section 182(b)(2)(C). A

similar rule was promulgated by EPA on February 14, 1995, as part of an

ozone attainment Federal Implementation Plan (FIP).4 The following

is EPA's evaluation and final action for Rule 234.

\4\ The ozone attainment FIP was a court ordered requirement,

which applied to the Sacramento, Ventura, and South Coast ozone

nonattainment areas in California, and was not a result of the March

29, 1994, findings letter. The final FIP rule was signed on February

14, 1995, but was not published in the Federal Register. The FIP was

rescinded by Congressional action on April 10, 1995. Pub. L. 104-6,

Defense Supplemental Appropriation, H.R. 889.

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

EPA Evaluation and 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.5 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.

\5\ 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

techniques guideline (CTGs).

For the purpose of assisting state and local agencies in developing

RACT rules, EPA prepared a series of Control Technique Guideline (CTG)

documents. 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

``catch-up'' their RACT rules. See section 182(b)(2). For some

categories, such as lumber processing and timber manufacturing, EPA did

not publish a CTG. In such cases, the state and local agencies may

determine what controls are required by reviewing the operation of

facilities subject to the regulation and evaluating regulations for

similar sources in other areas. Therefore, the EDCAPCD must determine

the VOC control measures that are reasonable and available for Sierra

Pacific based on its operations. Further interpretations of EPA policy

are found in the Blue Book, referred to in footnote 5. In general,

these guidance documents have been set forth to ensure that VOC rules

are fully enforceable and strengthen or maintain the SIP.

EDCAPCD's Rule 234, ``VOC RACT Rule--Sierra Pacific Industries,''

limits the emissions of volatile organic

[[Page 47275]]

compounds (VOCs) to 150 parts per million volume (ppmv) from a waste-

fired boiler (Boiler #3) at Sierra Pacific. This standard is maintained

through any one or more of the following: (1) use of fuel with a

maximum moisture content of 50%, (2) operation of the boiler at optimal

combustion conditions, (3) proper operation and maintenance of

pollution control equipment, and/or (4) periodic inspection,

maintenance, and repairs on the boiler and other equipment. Records

must be maintained of system operating parameters, including

temperatures, pressures, fuel flow rate, steam production rate, repair,

fuel moisture, and all VOC control measures. All records must be

maintained for five years. Compliance with the emission standard is

demonstrated using EPA Methods 25 or 25A. The APCO has to be notified

within 48 hours if the emission standard is exceeded. Final compliance

with Rule 234 is required by February 1, 1996. A more detailed

discussion of the source controlled, the controls required, and the

justification for why these controls represent RACT can be found in the

Technical Support Document (TSD) for Rule 234, dated May 25, 1995.

EPA has evaluated the submitted rule and has determined that it is

consistent with the CAA, EPA regulations, and EPA policy. Therefore,

EDCAPCD's Rule 234, ``VOC RACT Rule--Sierra Pacific Industries,'' is

being approved under section 110(k)(3) of the CAA as meeting the

requirements of section 110(a) and Part D. Therefore, if this direct

final action is not withdrawn, on November 13, 1995, any FIP clock

associated with the finding of failure to submit is stopped.

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.

EPA is publishing this notice without prior proposal because the

Agency views this as a noncontroversial amendment and anticipates no

adverse comments. However, in a separate document in this Federal

Register publication, the EPA is proposing to approve the SIP revision

should adverse or critical comments be filed. This action will be

effective November 13, 1995, unless, October 12, 1995, adverse or

critical comments are received.

If the EPA receives such comments, this action will be withdrawn

before the effective date by publishing a subsequent document that will

withdraw the final action. All public comments received will then be

addressed in a subsequent final rule based on this action serving as a

proposed rule. The EPA will not institute a second comment period on

this action. Any parties interested in commenting on this action should

do so at this time. If no such comments are received, the public is

advised that this action will be effective November 13, 1995.

Regulatory Process

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 population of less than

50,000.

SIP approvals under sections 110 and 301(a) 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 regulatory flexibility analysis would

constitute Federal inquiry into the economic reasonableness of state

action. The CAA forbids EPA to base its actions concerning SIPs on such

grounds. Union Electric Co. v. U.S. E.P.A., 427 U.S. 246, 256-66 (S.

Ct. 1976); 42 U.S.C. 7410 (a)(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 the affected source is already subject to this

regulation 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.

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 action from review under Executive Order 12866.

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.

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 10, 1995.

Felicia Marcus,

Regional Administrator.

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)(222)(i)(B) to

read as follows:

Sec. 52.220 Identification of plan.

* * * * *

(c) * * *

(222) * * *

(i) * * *

(B) El Dorado County Air Pollution Control District.

[[Page 47276]]

(1) Rule 234, adopted on April 25, 1995.

* * * * *

[FR Doc. 95-22154 Filed 9-11-95; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6560-50-W