[Federal Register Volume 62, Number 142 (Thursday, July 24, 1997)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 39795-39796]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 97-19549]
=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
40 CFR Part 52
[CA 179-0033; FRL-5863-3]
Approval and Promulgation of Implementation Plans; California
State Implementation Plan Revision; Bay Area Air Quality Management
District
AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).
ACTION: Proposed rulemaking.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: EPA is proposing a limited approval and limited disapproval of
revisions to the California State Implementation Plan (SIP) for ozone.
These revisions concern the control of oxides of nitrogen
(NOX) and carbon monoxide from boilers, steam generators,
and process heaters in petroleum refineries in the San Francisco Bay
Area. 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 SIP enforceability
guidelines. This rule is being incorporated into the SIP in accordance
with the requirements for contingency measures contained in the area's
ozone maintenance plan.
DATES: Comments on this proposed action must be received in writing on
or before August 25, 1997.
ADDRESSES: Comments may be mailed to: Andrew Steckel, Rulemaking
Section (AIR-4), Air Division, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency,
Region IX, 75 Hawthorne Street, San Francisco, CA 94105-3901.
Copies of the rule and EPA's evaluation report of this rule are
available for public inspection at EPA's Region IX office during normal
business hours. Copies of the submitted rule are also available for
inspection at the following locations:
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.
Bay Area Air Quality Management District, Rule Development Section, 939
Ellis Street, San Francisco, CA 94109.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Lily Wong, Rulemaking Office (AIR-4),
Air Division, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Region IX, 75
Hawthorne Street, San Francisco, CA 94105, Telephone: (415) 744-1190.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Background
This document addresses EPA's proposed action for Bay Area Air
Quality Management District (BAAQMD) Regulation 9, Rule 10, Nitrogen
Oxides and Carbon Monoxide from Boilers, Steam Generators, and Process
Heaters in Petroleum Refineries. BAAQMD adopted Regulation 9, Rule 10
on January 5, 1994. The State of California originally submitted the
rule being acted on in this document on May 24, 1994. Regulation 9,
Rule 10 was found to be complete on July 14, 1994 pursuant to EPA's
completeness criteria that are set forth in 40 CFR part 51, appendix
V1.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ 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. BAAQMD Regulation 9, Rule 10, controls emissions
of NOX from boilers, steam generators, and process heaters
in petroleum refineries. The rule was adopted as part of BAAQMD's
efforts to achieve the National Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS)
for ozone, as well as to satisfy the mandates of the California State
Clean Air Act requirements. The rule was originally submitted in
response to the CAA requirements for the reduction of NOX
emissions through reasonably available control technology (RACT)
contained in section 182.
However, prior to the complete submittal of the BAAQMD
NOX rules pursuant to the CAA, the district applied for an
exemption from the NOX RACT requirements pursuant to section
182(f)(3). The BAAQMD's exemption request was submitted along with
amendments to the BAAQMD's request for redesignation to attainment of
the ozone standard. The basis for the BAAQMD's exemption request was
that the area had achieved the ozone standard, as demonstrated by three
years of monitoring data, without having implemented the NOX
measures. While the BAAQMD had adopted the measures in response to both
the State and Federal requirements, the emission reductions obtained by
the rules would not occur until full implementation in the future. The
district was able to demonstrate with three years of monitoring data
that the Federal ozone standard was reached without having implemented
the NOX control measures. Subsequently, EPA evaluated the
exemption request and published an approval for the BAAQMD's petition
for a NOX RACT exemption on May 22, 1995 (60 FR 27028).
While the BAAQMD was no longer required to submit NOX
RACT rules pursuant to section 182(b)(2), the BAAQMD incorporated
several of the previously submitted NOX rules as contingency
measures in its ozone maintenance plan as a requirement for
redesignation to attainment. Since being redesignated to attainment of
the ozone standard, 2 the Bay Area has recorded violations
of the Federal ozone
[[Page 39796]]
standard, thereby triggering the contingency measures of the
maintenance plan. In accordance with the redesignation maintenance
plan, and at the request of the BAAQMD, EPA is incorporating the
NOX measures into the SIP. The BAAQMD resubmitted the
contingency measures being acted on in this document on July 23, 1996.
This action encompasses part of the measures identified in the plan as
contingency measures.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\2\ See 60 FR 27028 (May 22, 1995).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
EPA Evaluation and Proposed Action
Because BAAQMD Regulation 9, Rule 10 is being incorporated into the
SIP as part of the maintenance measures for the area's redesignation
plan, the rule is not being evaluated for meeting the RACT emission
limits pursuant to section 182(f) of the CAA. Rather, the rule is being
incorporated into the SIP as an attainment maintenance measure for
ozone. It is therefore being evaluated against the emissions reductions
committed to in the maintenance plan, and SIP enforceability
guidelines.
BAAQMD Regulation 9, Rule 10 controls emissions of nitrogen oxides
and carbon monoxide from boilers, steam generators, and process heaters
in petroleum refineries with rated capacities greater than or equal to
1 million Btu per hour heat input. The rule requires sources (excluding
carbon monoxide boilers) to meet a facility-wide emission rate of 0.20
pounds NOX per million Btu heat input limit, and carbon
monoxide boilers to meet 300 parts per million by volume (ppmv) of
NOX. The rule requires compliance by May 31, 1995.
Although Regulation 9, Rule 10 will strengthen the SIP, this rule
still contains deficiencies related primarily to the lack of
enforceability. This rule does not specify any test method for
determination of compliance with the NOX emission limit, and
it does not require recordkeeping to demonstrate compliance with the
emission rate. A more detailed discussion of the sources controlled,
the controls required, and rule deficiencies can be found in the
Technical Support Document (TSD), dated May 30, 1997.
Because of the above deficiencies, EPA cannot grant full approval
of this rule under section 110(k)(3). 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 BAAQMD's
submitted Regulation 9, Rule 10 under sections 110(k)(3) and 301(a) of
the CAA as meeting the requirements of section (110)(a). 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 meet the
requirement for enforceability under section 110(a). If the
Administrator disapproves a submission under section 110(k) for an area
designated attainment, based on the submission's failure to meet one or
more of the elements required by the Act, the Administrator may, at her
discretion, apply one of the sanctions set forth in section 179(b),
pursuant to section 110(m). 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 document has been
adopted by the BAAQMD and is currently in effect in the BAAQMD. EPA's
final limited disapproval action will not prevent BAAQMD 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.
Administrative Requirements
A. Executive Order 12866
The Office of Management and Budget (OMB) has exempted this
regulatory action from E.O. 12866 review.
B. Regulatory Flexibility Act
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 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, 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 flexibility analysis would constitute
Federal inquiry into the economic reasonableness of state action. The
Clean Air Act forbids EPA to base its action 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).
C. 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
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 proposed does not
include a Federal mandate that may result in estimated 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
Federal 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, Hydrocarbons,
Intergovernmental relations, Oxides of nitrogen, Ozone, Reporting and
recordkeeping requirements, Volatile organic compounds.
Authority: 42 U.S.C. 7401-7671q.
Dated: July 10, 1997.
Felicia Marcus,
Regional Administrator.
[FR Doc. 97-19549 Filed 7-23-97; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P
