[Federal Register Volume 60, Number 6 (Tuesday, January 10, 1995)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 2563-2565]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 95-521]
=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
40 CFR Part 52
[OAQPS No. CA-102-3-6756a; FRL-5135-5]
Approval and Promulgation of Implementation Plans; California
State Implementation Plan Revision, Placer County Air Pollution Control
District (PCAPCD) and San Diego County Air Pollution Control District
(SDCAPCD)
AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).
ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM).
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: EPA is proposing to approve revisions to the California State
Implementation Plan (SIP) which concern recordkeeping requirements for
sources emitting volatile organic compounds (VOCs) and which concern
the control of VOC emissions from metal can and coil coating
operations.
The intended effect of proposing approval of these rules is to
regulate emissions of VOCs 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 (NPRM) will incorporate these
rules into the federally approved SIP. EPA has evaluated each of these
rules and is proposing to approve them 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: Comments must be received on or before February 9, 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 rules and EPA's evaluation report of each rule are
available for public inspection at EPA's Region 9 office during normal
business hours. Copies of the submitted rules are also available for
inspection at the following locations:
California Air Resources Board, Stationary Source Division, Rule
Evaluation Section, 2020 ``L'' Street, Sacramento, CA 95814.
Placer County Air Pollution Control District, 11464 B Avenue,
Auburn, CA 95603.
San Diego County Air Pollution Control District, 9150 Chesapeake
Drive, San Diego, CA 92123.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Nikole Reaksecker, Rulemaking Section
(A-5-3), Air and Toxics Division, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency,
Region IX, 75 Hawthorne Street, San Francisco, CA 94105-3901, (415)
744-1187.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Applicability
The rules being proposed for approval into the California SIP
include: PCAPCD Rule 223, Metal Container Coating; PCAPCD Rule 410,
Recordkeeping for Volatile Organic Compound Emissions; and SDCAPCD Rule
67.4, Metal Container, Metal Closure, and Metal Coil Coating
Operations. These rules were submitted by the California Air Resources
Board to EPA on November 30, 1994, December 21, 1994, and October 19,
1994, respectively.
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 CAA or pre-amended Act), that included Placer
[[Page 2564]] County and San Diego County. 43 FR 8964; 40 CFR 81.305.
Because these areas were unable to meet the statutory attainment date
of December 31, 1982, California requested under section 172(a)(2), and
EPA approved, an extension of the attainment date to December 31, 1987.
40 CFR 52.222. On May 26, 1988, EPA notified the Governor of
California, pursuant to section 110(a)(2)(H) of the pre-amended Act,
that the above districts' portions of the California SIP were
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(a)(2)(A) of the CAA, Congress statutorily adopted
the requirement that nonattainment areas fix their deficient reasonably
available control technology (RACT) rules for ozone and established a
deadline of May 15, 1991 for states to submit corrections of those
deficiencies. Section 182(a)(2)(A) applies to areas designated as
nonattainment prior to enactment of the amendments and classified as
marginal or above as of the date of enactment. It requires such areas
to adopt and correct RACT rules pursuant to pre-amended section 172(b)
as interpreted in pre-amendment guidance.\1\ EPA's SIP-Call used that
guidance to indicate the necessary corrections for specific
nonattainment areas. Both Placer County and San Diego County are
classified as serious;\2\ therefore, these areas were subject to the
RACT fix-up requirement and the May 15, 1991 deadline.
\1\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
technique guidelines (CTGs).
\2\Placer County and San Diego County retained their
designations of nonattainment and were 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).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The State of California submitted many revised RACT rules for
incorporation into its SIP on October 19, 1994, November 30, 1994, and
December 21, 1994, including the rules being acted on in this document.
This document addresses EPA's proposed action for PCAPCD Rule 223,
Metal Container Coating; PCAPCD Rule 410, Recordkeeping for Volatile
Organic Compound Emissions; and SDCAPCD Rule 67.4, Metal Container,
Metal Closure, and Metal Coil Coating Operations. PCAPCD adopted Rules
223 and 410 on October 6, 1994 and November 3, 1994, respectively.
SDCAPCD adopted Rule 67.4 on September 27, 1994. These submitted rules
were found to be complete on December 7, 1994, December 23, 1994, and
December 1, 1994, pursuant to EPA's completeness criteria that are set
forth in 40 CFR Part 51 Appendix V\3\ and are being proposed 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).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
PCAPCD Rule 223 controls VOC emissions from metal container coating
operations. PCAPCD Rule 410 establishes recordkeeping requirements for
sources emitting VOCs. SDCAPCD Rule 67.4 controls VOC emissions from
metal container, metal closure, and metal coil coating operations. VOCs
contribute to the production of ground level ozone and smog. These
rules were adopted as part of the districts' effort to achieve the
National Ambient Air Quality Standard (NAAQS) for ozone and in response
to EPA's SIP-Call and the section 182(a)(2)(A) CAA requirement. The
following is EPA's evaluation and proposed action for these rules.
EPA Evaluation and Proposed 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 listed in footnote 1. 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.
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
``fix-up'' their RACT rules. See section 182(a)(2)(A). The CTG
applicable to PCAPCD Rule 223 and SDCAPCD Rule 67.4 is entitled,
``Control of Volatile Organic Emissions from Existing Stationary
Sources--Volume II: Surface Coating of Cans, Coils, Paper, Fabrics,
Automobiles, and Light-Duty Trucks'', EPA-450/2-77-008. The guidance
document used to evaluate PCAPCD Rule 410 is entitled, ``Recordkeeping
Guidance Document for Surface Coating Operations and the Graphics Arts
Industry'', EPA-340/1-88-003. Further interpretations of EPA policy are
found in the Blue Book, referred to in footnote 1. In general, these
guidance documents have been set forth to ensure that VOC rules are
fully enforceable and strengthen or maintain the SIP.
PCAPCD Rule 223 includes the following significant changes from the
current SIP:
Adds definitions which improve rule clarity and
enforceability,
Regulates emissions from coil coating, the interior body
spray of three piece cans, tab press lubricant, and necker lubricants,
Lowers emission limits for the interior body spray of two
piece cans and new drums, pails and lids coatings,
Allows emission control systems to be used by sources
using noncomplying coatings,
Specifies coating application methods,
Prohibits use of coatings which could violate the
provisions of the rule,
Regulates the use of surface preparation and clean-up
solvents,
Adds a compliance schedule to the administrative
requirements,
Requires sources using an emission control device to
submit an Operation and Maintenance Plan and to maintain daily records,
States that compliance with the standards of Section 302
shall be demonstrated by conducting annual source testing of the
emission control equipment and by analyzing coating VOC content,
Includes test methods for determining vapor pressure of an
organic solvent used in a gun washing system and for determining
capture and control efficiency.
PCAPCD Rule 410 includes the following significant changes from the
current SIP:
Removes reference to unspecified test methods. SDCAPCD's
submitted Rule 67.4 includes the following significant changes from the
current SIP:
Redefines ``closure'', ``exempt compound'', and ``volatile
organic compound (VOC)'', and defines [[Page 2565]] ``exterior body
spray'' and ``letterpress coating'',
Specifies VOC limits for letterpress coatings, other coil
coatings, and end sealing compounds applied to pet food and non-food
containers,
Removes portions containing Air Pollution Control Officer
Discretion,
Requires air pollution control systems installed to
include emissions collection systems with an overall capture and
control device efficiency of at least 85 percent by weight,
Adds recordkeeping requirements for solvent usage and
sources using noncomplying coatings,
Allows the measurement of VOC content in letterpress
coatings to be determined using SDCAPCD's Method 24D,
Requires the measurement of VOC content in noncomplying
coatings to be conducted in accordance with EPA Methods 18 and 25 or
25A,
Includes requirements when perfluorocarbon (PFC) compounds
and other exempt compounds are present in the coating, cleaning, or
surface preparation material.
EPA has evaluated the submitted rules and has determined that they
are consistent with the CAA, EPA regulations, and EPA policy.
Therefore, PCAPCD Rule 223, Metal Container Coating; PCAPCD Rule 410,
Recordkeeping for Volatile Organic Compound Emissions; and SDCAPCD Rule
67.4, Metal Container, Metal Closure, and Metal Coil Coating
Operations, are being proposed for approval under section 110(k)(3) of
the CAA as meeting the requirements of section 110(a) and Part D.
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. Section 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 populations of less than
50,000.
SIP approvals under sections 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 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).
The 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,
Intergovernmental relations, Ozone, Reporting and recordkeeping
requirements, Volatile organic compound.
Authority: 42 U.S.C. 7401-7671q.
Dated: December 27, 1994.
Felicia Marcus,
Regional Administrator.
[FR Doc. 95-521 Filed 1-9-95; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P
