99-6507. Approval and Promulgation of State Implementation Plans; California State Implementation Plan Revision, South Coast Air Quality Management District, San Joaquin Valley Unified Air Pollution Control District, Siskiyou County Air Pollution ...  

  • [Federal Register Volume 64, Number 52 (Thursday, March 18, 1999)]
    [Proposed Rules]
    [Pages 13379-13382]
    From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
    [FR Doc No: 99-6507]
    
    
    -----------------------------------------------------------------------
    
    ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
    
    40 CFR Part 52
    
    [CA 011-0134 FRL-6309-7]
    
    
    Approval and Promulgation of State Implementation Plans; 
    California State Implementation Plan Revision, South Coast Air Quality 
    Management District, San Joaquin Valley Unified Air Pollution Control 
    District, Siskiyou County Air Pollution Control District, and Bay Area 
    Air Quality Management District
    
    AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).
    
    ACTION: Proposed rule.
    
    -----------------------------------------------------------------------
    
    SUMMARY: EPA is proposing a limited approval of revisions to the 
    California State Implementation Plan (SIP) which concerns the control 
    of the sulfur content of fuels within the South Coast Air Quality 
    Management District and the Siskiyou County Air Pollution Control 
    District, emissions of sulfuric acid mist within the San Joaquin Valley 
    Unified Air Pollution Control District and emissions of sulfur dioxide 
    within the Bay Area Air Quality Management District.
        The intended effect of proposing a limited approval of these rules 
    is to regulate emissions of sulfur dioxide (SO2) in 
    accordance with the requirements of the Clean Air Act, as amended in 
    1990 (CAA or ``Act''). EPA's final action on this proposed rulemaking 
    will incorporate these rules into the federally approved SIP. EPA has 
    evaluated the rules and is proposing a limited approval under 
    provisions of the CAA 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.
    
    DATES: Comments must be received on or before April 19, 1999.
    
    ADDRESSES: Comments may be mailed to: Andrew Steckel, Rulemaking Office 
    [AIR-4], Air Division, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Region IX, 
    75 Hawthorne Street, San Francisco, CA 94105-3901.
        Copies of the rules and EPA's evaluation reports of the rules are 
    available for public inspection at EPA's Region IX office during normal 
    business hours. Copies of the submitted rules are also available for 
    inspection at the following locations:
    
    Environmental Protection Agency, Air Docket, 401 ``M'' Street, SW., 
    Washington, DC 20460.
    California Air Resources Board, Stationary Source Division, Rule 
    Evaluation Section, 2020 ``L'' Street, Sacramento, CA 95812.
    Bay Area Air Quality Management District, 939 Ellis Street, San 
    Francisco, CA 94109-7714.
    San Joaquin Valley Unified Air Pollution Control District, 1990 E. 
    Gettysburg Ave., Fresno, CA 93726.
    Siskiyou County Air Pollution Control District, 525 South Foothill Dr., 
    Yreka, CA 96097
    South Coast Air Quality Management District, 21865 E. Copley Dr., 
    Diamond Bar, CA 91765-4182.
    
    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Stanley Tong, Rulemaking Office, [AIR-
    4], Air Division, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Region IX, 75 
    Hawthorne Street, San Francisco, CA 94105-3901 Telephone: (415) 744-
    1191.
    
    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
    
    I. Applicability
    
        The rules being proposed for approval into the California SIP 
    include South Coast Air Quality Management District (SCAQMD) Rule 
    431.2, Sulfur Content of Liquid Fuels, San Joaquin Valley Unified Air 
    Pollution Control District (SJVUAPCD) Rule 4802, Sulfuric Acid Mist, 
    Siskiyou County Air Pollution Control District (SCAPCD) Rule 4.14, 
    Sulfur Content of Fuels and Bay Area Air Quality Management District 
    (BAAQMD) Regulation 9 Rule 1, Sulfur Dioxide. SCAQMD Rule 431.2 and 
    SCAPCD Rule 4.14 were submitted by the California Air Resources Board 
    (CARB) to EPA on December 31, 1990, BAAQMD Regulation 9 Rule 1 was 
    submitted by CARB to EPA on September 14, 1992, and SJVUAPCD Rule 4802 
    was submitted by CARB to EPA on November 18, 1993.
    
    II. Background
    
        40 CFR 81.305 provides the attainment status designations for air 
    districts in California. South Coast Air Quality Management District 
    1, San Joaquin Valley Unified Air Pollution Control 
    District, Siskiyou County Air Pollution Control District and Bay Area 
    Air Quality Management District are listed as being in attainment for 
    the national ambient air quality standards (NAAQS) for sulfur dioxide 
    (SO2). Therefore, for purposes of controlling 
    SO2, these rules need only comply with the general 
    provisions of Section 110 of the Act.
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    
        \1\ This Federal Register action for the South Coast Air Quality 
    Management District excludes the Los Angeles County portion of the 
    Southeast Desert AQMA, otherwise known as the Antelope Valley Region 
    in Los Angeles County, which is now under the jurisdiction of the 
    Antelope Valley Air Pollution Control District as of July 1, 1997.
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    
        Sulfur dioxide is formed by the combustion of fuels containing 
    sulfur compounds. SCAQMD adopted Rule 431.2, Sulfur Content of Liquid 
    Fuels, on May 4, 1990. SCAPCD adopted Rule 4.14, Sulfur Content of 
    Fuels, on July 11, 1989. On December 31, 1990 the State of California 
    submitted many rules for incorporation into its SIP, including SCAQMD 
    Rule 431.2 and SCAPCD Rule 4.14. These rules were found to be complete 
    on February 28, 1991 pursuant to EPA's completeness criteria that are 
    set forth in 40 CFR Part 51, Appendix V 2 and are being 
    proposed for limited approval.
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    
        \2\ EPA adopted completeness criteria on February 16, 1990 (55 
    FR 5824) and, pursuant to section 110(k)(1)(A) of the CAA, revised 
    the criteria on August 26, 1991 (56 FR 42216).
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    
        SJVUAPCD adopted Rule 4802, Sulfuric Acid Mist, on December 17, 
    1992. On November 18, 1993 the State of California submitted many rules 
    for incorporation into its SIP, including SJVUAPCD Rule 4802. This rule 
    was found to be complete on December 27, 1993 pursuant to EPA's 
    completeness criteria and is being proposed for limited approval.
        BAAQMD adopted Regulation 9 Rule 1, Sulfur Dioxide, on May 20, 
    1992. On September 14, 1992 the State of California submitted many 
    rules for incorporation into its SIP, including BAAQMD Regulation 9 
    Rule 1. This rule was found to be complete on November
    
    [[Page 13380]]
    
    20, 1992 pursuant to EPA's completeness criteria and is being proposed 
    for limited approval.
        The following is EPA's evaluation and proposed action for these 
    rules.
    
    III. EPA Evaluation and Proposed Action
    
        In determining the approvability of an SO2 rule, EPA 
    must evaluate the rule for consistency with the requirements of the CAA 
    and EPA regulations, as found in section 110 and 40 CFR Part 51 
    (Requirements for Preparation, Adoption, and Submittal of 
    Implementation Plans).
        While the SCAQMD, SCAPCD, SJVUAPCD and BAAQMD are in attainment 
    with the SO2 NAAQS, many of the general SIP requirements 
    regarding enforceability, for example, are still appropriate for these 
    rules. In determining the approvability of these rules, EPA evaluated 
    them in light of the ``SO2 Guideline Document'', EPA-452/R-
    94-008.
        On September 28, 1981, EPA approved into the SIP a version of Rule 
    431.2 , Sulfur Content of Liquid Fuels, that had been adopted by the 
    SCAQMD on February 2, 1979. Revisions to this rule were subsequently 
    adopted, and then were superseded by the submitted version. In 
    evaluating the submitted version, EPA reviewed materials associated 
    with the SIP approved rule and the submitted version. SCAQMD submitted 
    an amendment to Rule 431.2 on December 31, 1990 which includes the 
    following significant changes from the current SIP rule:
         Sets a uniform limit of 0.05 percent by weight for the 
    sulfur content in liquid fuels that are burned, purchased, sold or 
    offered for sale to be burned.
         Requires stationary internal combustion engines operating 
    on diesel or distillate fuel to use CARB compliant diesel fuel on and 
    after October 1, 1993.
         Requires a person selling the fuel to provide the customer 
    or user with specifications for the sulfur content of the fuel.
         Requires a monthly report be submitted to the SCAQMD 
    documenting the liquid fuel consumption and applicable sulfur content 
    used in refineries and power plants.
         Requires an annual report be submitted documenting the 
    liquid fuel consumption and applicable sulfur content for all other 
    commercial and industrial facilities with permitted combustion 
    equipment.
         Adds sections for recordkeeping, definitions and test 
    methods.
        EPA has evaluated SCAQMD's submitted Rule 431.2 for consistency 
    with the CAA, EPA regulations, and EPA policy and has found that the 
    revisions result in a clearer, more enforceable rule. Although SCAQMD's 
    Rule 431.2 will strengthen the SIP, this rule contains the following 
    deficiency which should be corrected.
         The rule allows Executive Officer discretion in approving 
    alternate test methods to determine compliance with the sulfur limits 
    of the rule. EPA also recommends the following improvements to the 
    rule.
         A reference to a CARB specification for motor vehicle 
    diesel fuel (Title 13, Section 2256), should be updated to reflect 
    renumbering of the section which occurred in the year following the 
    amendment of Rule 431.2
         The period of record retention specified should be 
    consistent with the federal record retention requirement of 5 years.
        A detailed discussion of the rule deficiency and recommendations 
    for rule improvement can be found in the Technical Support Document for 
    Rule 431.2 (2/12/99), which is available from the U.S. EPA, Region IX 
    office.
        There is currently no version of SJVUAPCD Rule 4802, Sulfuric Acid 
    Mist, in the SIP. The submitted rule includes the following provisions:
         Limits the amount of effluent process gas that can be 
    discharged into the atmosphere from sulfuric acid production units 
    constructed or modified before August 17, 1971 to 0.30 pounds per short 
    ton of acid produced, the production being expressed as 100 percent 
    sulfuric acid.
         Prohibits any owner or operator of an existing sulfuric 
    acid production unit that emits less than the allowable limit from 
    allowing an increase of emissions beyond the level being emitted as of 
    December 17, 1992. Such owners or operators must also utilize all acid 
    mist emissions control equipment to reduce acid mist emissions to 
    lowest possible levels.
         Establishes Method 8 of 40 CFR 60 Appendix A as the test 
    procedure to be used to determine sulfuric acid mist emissions.
        EPA has evaluated SJVUAPCD's submitted Rule 4802 for consistency 
    with the CAA, EPA regulations, and EPA policy. Although SJVUAPCD's Rule 
    4802 will strengthen the SIP, this rule contains the following 
    deficiency which should be corrected.
         The rule lacks recordkeeping requirements to confirm 
    source compliance with sections 4.1 and 4.2 of the rule.
        EPA also recommends the following improvements to the rule.
         The period of record retention specified should be 
    consistent with the federal record retention requirement of 5 years.
         A typographical error in Section 4.2 should be corrected 
    so that the requirement reads: ``The owner or operator of an existing 
    sulfuric acid production unit which emits acid mist. * * *.''
        There is currently no version of SCAPCD Rule 4.14, Sulfur Content 
    of Fuels, in the SIP. The submitted rule supersedes an earlier 
    submittal of Rule 4.14, adopted on January 24, 1989 and submitted to 
    EPA on March 26, 1990. The submitted rule being acted on in this 
    document includes the following provisions:
         Prohibits the burning of any liquid fuel or solid fuel 
    having a sulfur content in excess of 0.5 percent by weight.
         Exempts sources from the above limit which obtain written 
    approval from the Control Officer and remove sulfur compounds from 
    combustion products or use a mixture of fuels to the extent that sulfur 
    compound emissions are no greater than that which would be emitted 
    using a liquid or solid fuel complying with the 0.5 percent by weight 
    limit.
        EPA has evaluated SCAPCD's submitted Rule 4.14 for consistency with 
    the CAA, EPA regulations, and EPA policy. Although SCAPCD's Rule 4.14 
    will strengthen the SIP, this rule contains the following deficiencies 
    which should be corrected.
         The rule lacks recordkeeping requirements to confirm 
    source compliance with sections A. and B. of the rule.
         The rule lacks test methods to determine source compliance 
    with sections A. and B. of the rule.
        EPA also recommends the following improvement to the rule.
         The period of record retention specified should be 
    consistent with the federal record retention requirement of 5 years.
        On May 3, 1984, EPA approved into the SIP a version of BAAQMD 
    Regulation 9 Rule 1, Sulfur Dioxide, that had been adopted by the 
    BAAQMD on February 16, 1983. Revisions to this rule were subsequently 
    adopted, and then were superseded by the submitted version. In 
    evaluating the submitted version, EPA reviewed materials associated 
    with the SIP approved rule and the submitted version. BAAQMD submitted 
    an amendment to Regulation 9 Rule 1 on September 14, 1992 which 
    includes the following significant changes from the current SIP rule:
         Deletes obsolete phased-in compliance dates for sulfur 
    recovery plants at local refineries.
    
    [[Page 13381]]
    
         Deletes duplicative standards and definitions for sulfur 
    recovery plants.
         Cuts in half the one hour SO2 limit to match 
    the State SO2 limits.
         Adds additional definitions.
         Adds standards for sulfur removal operations at petroleum 
    refineries.
         Adds additional test methods for hydrogen sulfide, 
    ammonia, and the sulfur content of crude oil.
        EPA has evaluated BAAQMD's submitted Regulation 9 Rule 1 for 
    consistency with the CAA, EPA regulations, and EPA policy and has found 
    that the revisions result in a clearer, more enforceable rule. Although 
    BAAQMD's Regulation 9 Rule 1 will strengthen the SIP, this rule 
    contains the following deficiency which should be corrected.
         The rule lacks recordkeeping for some of the source 
    categories with emissions limits covered by the rule. EPA also 
    recommends the following improvements to the rule.
         An apparent typographical error resulted in the sulfur 
    dioxide limits changing from 0.04 ppm to 0.05 ppm over 24 hours when 
    the ground level sulfur dioxide limit was moved from one section to 
    another section.
         Test method ST-19B is marked as deleted from the BAAQMD 
    Manual of Procedures. The rule should be updated to delete this test 
    method.
        A detailed discussion of the rule deficiencies and rule 
    improvements can be found in the Technical Support Document for 
    SJVUAPCD Rule 4802, SCAPCD Rule 4.14 and BAAQMD Regulation 9 Rule 1 (2/
    19/99), which is available from the U.S. EPA, Region IX office.
        Because of the deficiencies identified for the rules being acted on 
    in this document, they are not fully approvable and may lead to rule 
    enforceability problems. Because of the above deficiencies, EPA cannot 
    grant full approval of these rules under section 110(k)(3). Also, 
    because the submitted rules are not composed of separable parts which 
    meet all the applicable requirements of the CAA, EPA cannot grant 
    partial approval of the rules under section 110(k)(3). However, EPA may 
    grant a limited approval of the submitted rules under section 110(k)(3) 
    in light of EPA's authority pursuant to section 301(a) to adopt 
    regulations necessary to advance the Act's overarching air quality 
    protection goals by strengthening the SIP. In order to strengthen the 
    SIP by advancing the SO2 air quality protection goal of the 
    Act, EPA is proposing a limited approval of SCAQMD Rule 431.2, SJVUAPCD 
    Rule 4802, SCAPCD Rule 4.14 and BAAQMD Regulation 9 Rule 1 under 
    sections 110(k)(3) and 301(a) of the Act. However, this limited 
    approval would not approve those measures as satisfying any other 
    specific requirement of the Act, nor would it constitute full approval 
    of the SIP submittals pursuant to section 110(k)(3). Rather, a limited 
    approval of these rules by EPA would mean that the emission limitations 
    and other control measure requirements become part of the California 
    SIP and are federally enforceable by EPA. See, e.g. sections 302(q) and 
    113 of the Act.
        It is should be noted that the rules covered by this proposed 
    rulemaking have been adopted by and are currently in effect in the air 
    quality districts to which this action pertains. EPA's final limited 
    approval action will not prevent the SCAQMD, SJVUAPCD, SCAPCD, BAAQMD 
    or EPA from enforcing these rules.
        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.
    
    IV. Administrative Requirements
    
    A. Executive Order 12866
    
        The Office of Management and Budget (OMB) has exempted this 
    regulatory action from Executive Order (E.O.) 12866, Regulatory 
    Planning and Review.
    
    B. Executive Order 12875
    
        Under Executive Order 12875, Enhancing the Intergovernmental 
    Partnership, EPA may not issue a regulation that is not required by 
    statute and that creates a mandate upon a State, local or tribal 
    government, unless the Federal government provides the funds necessary 
    to pay the direct compliance costs incurred by those governments, or 
    EPA consults with those governments. If EPA complies by consulting, 
    Executive Order 12875 requires EPA to provide to the Office of 
    Management and Budget a description of the extent of EPA's prior 
    consultation with representatives of affected State, local and tribal 
    governments, the nature of their concerns, copies of any written 
    communications from the governments, and a statement supporting the 
    need to issue the regulation. In addition, Executive Order 12875 
    requires EPA to develop an effective process permitting elected 
    officials and other representatives of State, local and tribal 
    governments ``to provide meaningful and timely input in the development 
    of regulatory proposals containing significant unfunded mandates.'' 
    Today's rule does not create a mandate on State, local or tribal 
    governments. The rule does not impose any enforceable duties on these 
    entities. Accordingly, the requirements of section 1(a) of E.O. 12875 
    do not apply to this rule.
    
    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 E.O. 
    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. This rule is not subject to E.O. 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 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, or EPA consults with those 
    governments. If EPA complies by consulting, Executive Order 13084 
    requires EPA to 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 officials 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 rule 
    does not
    
    [[Page 13382]]
    
    significantly or uniquely affect the communities of Indian tribal 
    governments. Accordingly, the requirements of section 3(b) of E.O. 
    13084 do not apply to this rule.
    
    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. This final rule 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. U.S. 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.
    
    List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52
    
        Environmental protection, Air pollution control, Incorporation by 
    reference, Intergovernmental relations, Reporting and recordkeeping 
    requirements, sulfur oxides.
    
        Authority: 42 U.S.C. 7401-7671q.
    
        Dated: March 4, 1999.
    Laura Yoshii,
    Deputy Regional Administrator, Region IX.
    [FR Doc. 99-6507 Filed 3-17-99; 8:45 am]
    BILLING CODE 6560-50-P
    
    
    

Document Information

Published:
03/18/1999
Department:
Environmental Protection Agency
Entry Type:
Proposed Rule
Action:
Proposed rule.
Document Number:
99-6507
Dates:
Comments must be received on or before April 19, 1999.
Pages:
13379-13382 (4 pages)
Docket Numbers:
CA 011-0134 FRL-6309-7
PDF File:
99-6507.pdf
CFR: (1)
40 CFR 52