Approval and Promulgation of Implementation Plans; California State Implementation Plan Revision; Santa Barbara County Air Pollution Control District

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

40 CFR Part 52

[CA37-10-6602; FRL-5148-3]

Approval and Promulgation of Implementation Plans; California

State Implementation Plan Revision; Santa Barbara County Air Pollution

Control District

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM).

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

SUMMARY: EPA is proposing a limited approval and limited disapproval of

a revision to the California State Implementation Plan (SIP) for ozone.

The revision concerns the control of oxides of nitrogen (NOX) from

internal combustion (I/C) engines. The intended effect of proposing

limited approval and limited disapproval of this rule is to regulate

emissions of NOX in accordance with the requirements of the Clean

Air Act, as amended in 1990 (CAA or the Act). EPA's final action on

this notice of proposed rulemaking will incorporate this rule into the

federally approved SIP. EPA has evaluated this rule and is proposing a

simultaneous limited approval and limited disapproval under provisions

of the CAA regarding EPA actions 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 on this proposed action must be received in writing on

or before March 3, 1995.

ADDRESSES: Comments may be mailed to: Daniel A. Meer, Rulemaking

Section (A-5-3), Air and Toxics Division, U.S. Environmental Protection

Agency, Region IX, 75 Hawthorne Street, San Francisco, CA 94105-3901.

Copies of the rule revision and EPA's evaluation report of each

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

during normal business hours. Copies of the submitted rule revisions

are also available for inspection at the following locations:

Santa Barbara County Air Pollution Control District, Rule Development

Section, 26 Castilian Drive B-23, Goleta, CA 93117.

California Air Resources Board, Stationary Source Division, Rule

Evaluation Section, 2020 ``L'' Street, Sacramento, CA 95812.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Wendy Colombo, Rulemaking Section

[[Page 6050]] (A-5-3), Air and Toxics Division, U.S. Environmental

Protection Agency, Region IX, 75 Hawthorne Street, San Francisco, CA

94105, Telephone: (415) 744-1202.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Background

On November 15, 1990, the Clean Air Act Amendments of 1990 (CAA)

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

7401-7671q. The air quality planning requirements for the reduction of

NOX emissions through reasonably available control technology

(RACT) are set out in section 182(f) of the CAA. On November 25, 1992,

EPA published a NPRM entitled ``State Implementation Plans; Nitrogen

Oxides Supplement to the General Preamble; Clean Air Act Amendments of

1990 Implementation of Title I; Proposed Rule,'' (the NOX

Supplement) which describes and provides preliminary guidance on the

requirements of section 182(f). The November 25, 1992, notice should be

referred to for further information on the NOX requirements and is

incorporated into this document by reference.

Section 182(f) of the Clean Air Act requires States to apply the

same requirements to major stationary sources of NOX (``major'' as

defined in section 302 and sections 182 (c), (d), and (e)) as are

applied to major stationary sources of volatile organic compounds

(VOCs), in moderate or above ozone nonattainment areas. Santa Barbara

County is classified as moderate;1 therefore this area was subject

to the RACT requirements of section 182(b)(2) and the November 15, 1992

deadline, cited below.

\1\The Santa Barbara County Area retained its designation of

nonattainment and was classified by operation of law pursuant to

sections 107(d) and 181(a) upon the date of enactment of the CAA.

See 55 FR 56694 (November 6, 1991).

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

Section 182(b)(2) requires submittal of RACT rules for major

stationary sources of VOC (and NOX) emissions (not covered by a

pre-enactment control technologies guidelines (CTG) document or a post-

enactment CTG document) by November 15, 1992. There were no NOX

CTGs issued before enactment and EPA has not issued a CTG document for

any NOX sources since enactment of the CAA. The RACT rules

covering NOx sources and submitted as SIP revisions, are expected to

require final installation of the actual NOX controls as

expeditiously as practicable, but no later than May 31, 1995.

This document addresses EPA's proposed action for Santa Barbara

County Air Pollution Control District (SBCAPCD), Rule 333, Control of

Emissions from Reciprocating Internal Combustion Engines. SBCAPCD

adopted Rule 333 on December 10, 1991. The State of California

submitted the rule being acted on in this document on June 19, 1992.

Rule 333 was found to be complete on August 27, 1992 pursuant to EPA's

completeness criteria that are set forth in 40 CFR Part 51 Appendix

V2 and is being proposed for approval into the SIP.

\2\ 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).

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

NOX emissions contribute to the production of ground level

ozone and smog. Rule 333 controls emissions of NOX, carbon

monoxide (CO), and reactive organic compounds (ROC) from internal

combustion engines in Santa Barbara County used in a wide variety of

applications, but primarily at oil and gas production and processing

facilities. The engines are used to power various types of industrial

equipment such as oil well rod pumps, rock crushing equipment, conveyor

belts, gas compressors, waste water treatment pumps, etc. Rule 333 was

adopted as part of SBCAPCD's efforts to achieve the National Ambient

Air Quality Standards (NAAQS) for ozone and in response to the CAA

requirements cited above. The following is EPA's evaluation and

proposed action for these rules.

EPA Evaluation and Proposed Action

In determining the approvability of a NOX 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). EPA's interpretation of these requirements,

which forms the basis for this action, appears in the NOX

Supplement (57 FR 55620) and various other EPA policy guidance

documents.3 Among these provisions is the requirement that a

NOX rule must, at a minimum, provide for the implementation of

RACT for major stationary sources of NOX emissions.

\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).

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

For the purposes of assisting state and local agencies in

developing NOX RACT rules, EPA prepared the NOX Supplement to

the General Preamble. In the NOX Supplement, EPA provides

preliminary guidance on how RACT will be determined for stationary

sources of NOX emissions. While most of the guidance issued by EPA

on what constitutes RACT for stationary sources has been directed

towards application for VOC sources, much of the guidance is also

applicable to RACT for stationary sources of NOX (see section 4.5

of the NOX Supplement). In addition, pursuant to section 183(c),

EPA has issued alternative control technique documents (ACTs) that

identify alternative controls for all categories of stationary sources

of NOX. The ACT documents provide information on control

technology for stationary sources that emit or have the potential to

emit 25 tons per year or more of NOX. However, the ACTs will not

establish a presumptive norm for what is considered RACT for stationary

sources of NOX. In general, the guidance documents cited above, as

well as other relevant and applicable guidance documents, have been set

forth to ensure that submitted NOX RACT rules meet Federal RACT

requirements and are fully enforceable and strengthen or maintain the

SIP.

Rule 333 applies to existing and new I/C engines with rated brake

horsepower of greater than or equal to 50 which are fueled by natural

gas, field gas, liquified petroleum gas, diesel, gasoline, or any other

liquid fuel. The rule limits NOX emissions from noncyclic rich-

burn engines to 50 parts per million (ppm) and from noncyclic lean-burn

engines to 125 ppm. For cyclic engines, the NOX limit is also 50

ppm, while the limit for diesel engines is 8.4 grams per brake

horsepower-hour (g/bhp-hr). Final compliance with these limits is

required by the date of adoption for new engines and March 3, 1994 for

existing cyclic and noncyclic engines.

The NOX limits suggested by the California Air Resources Board

(CARB) as reasonably available control technology (RACT) for I/C

engines are 50 ppm (90% reduction) for rich-burn engines, 125 ppm (80%

reduction) for lean-burn engines, and 8.4 g/bhp-hr for diesel engines.

These limits were recommended using information regarding average,

actual, uncontrolled levels and previous regulatory control levels in

Ventura County, the South Coast Basin, and Santa Barbara County. EPA

agrees that these limits, which are incorporated in Rule 333, are

consistent with the Agency's guidance and policy for making RACT

determinations in terms of general cost-effectiveness, emission

reductions, and environmental impacts, and represent RACT for these

sources in Santa Barbara County. [[Page 6051]]

In evaluating the rule, EPA must also determine whether the section

182(b) requirement for RACT implementation by May 31, 1995 is met. The

rule is written such that final compliance is required 2.5 years after

the date of adoption. Since the rule was adopted in December 1991,

final compliance is required by March 1994, thereby meeting the section

182(b) requirement of the CAA.

Although Rule 333, Control of Emissions from Reciprocating Internal

Combustion Engines, will strengthen the SIP, the rule contains

deficiencies related primarily to the lack of Federal enforceability.

These deficiencies include inconsistent applicability cutoffs and

exemptions, unenforceable provisions in definitions, inconsistent

emission limit requirements, unenforceable alternative emission control

plan provisions, and alternative compliance schedule provisions. A more

detailed discussion of the sources controlled, the controls required,

justification for why these controls represent RACT, and rule

deficiencies can be found in the Technical Support Document (TSD) for

Rule 333, dated November 1994.

Because of the above deficiencies, EPA cannot grant full approval

of this rule under section 110(k)(3) and Part D. Also, because the

submitted rule is not composed of separable parts which meet all the

applicable requirements of the CAA, EPA cannot grant partial approval

of the rule under section 110(k)(3). However, EPA may grant a limited

approval of the submitted rule 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 SBCAPCD's submitted Rule 333 under sections 110(k)(3) and

301(a) of the CAA as meeting the requirements of section (110)(a) and

Part D.

At the same time, EPA is also proposing a limited disapproval of

this rule because it contains deficiencies which must be corrected in

order to fully meet the requirements of section 182(a)(2), section

182(b)(2), section 182(f), and 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 rule covered by this NPRM has been adopted by

the SBCAPCD and is currently in effect in Santa Barbara county. EPA's

final limited disapproval action will not prevent SBCAPCD or EPA from

enforcing this rule.

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.

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 economic 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.

Limited approvals under section 110 and 301 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, it does not

have a significant impact on affected small entities. 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. section

7410 (a)(2).

The OMB has exempted this regulatory action from review under

Executive Order 12866.

List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52

Environmental protection, Air pollution control, Hydrocarbons,

Intergovernmental relations, Nitrogen dioxide, Nitrogen oxides, Ozone,

Reporting and recordkeeping requirements, Volatile organic compounds.

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

Dated: January 23, 1995.

Felicia Marcus,

Regional Administrator.

[FR Doc. 95-2436 Filed 1-31-95; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6560-50-W