[Federal Register Volume 61, Number 168 (Wednesday, August 28, 1996)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 44161-44163]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 96-21907]
=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
40 CFR Part 52
[CA 13-13-6749; FRL-5557-2]
Approval and Promulgation of Implementation Plans, California
State Implementation Plan Revision, San Joaquin Valley Unified Air
Pollution District
AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).
ACTION: Final rule.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: EPA is finalizing limited approval and limited disapproval of
a revision to the California State Implementation Plan (SIP) proposed
in the Federal Register on March 21, 1994. The revision concerns Rule
465.01 from the San Joaquin Valley Unified Air Pollution Control
District (SJVUAPCD). This final action will incorporate this rule into
the federally approved SIP. The intended effect of finalizing this
action is to regulate emissions of
[[Page 44162]]
volatile organic compounds (VOCs) in accordance with the requirements
of the Clean Air Act, as amended in 1990 (CAA or the Act). The rule
controls VOC emissions from steam-enhanced crude oil production well
vents. Thus, EPA is finalizing a simultaneous limited approval and
limited disapproval under CAA provisions regarding EPA action on SIP
submittals and general rulemaking authority because this revision,
while strengthening the SIP, also does not fully meet the CAA
provisions regarding plan submissions and requirements for
nonattainment areas. As a result of this limited disapproval, sanctions
will be automatically imposed in accordance with EPA's Order of
Sanctions rule unless the State submits and EPA approves corrections to
the identified deficiencies within 18 months of the effective date of
this disapproval. Moreover, EPA will be required to promulgate a
Federal implementation plan (FIP) unless the deficiencies are corrected
within 24 months of the effective date of this disapproval.
EFFECTIVE DATE: This action is effective on September 27, 1996.
ADDRESSES: Copies of the rule and EPA's evaluation report are available
for public inspection at EPA's Region 9 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
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
San Joaquin Valley Unified Air Pollution Control District, 1999
Tuolumne Street, Suite #200, Fresno, CA 95814.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 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, Telephone:
(415) 744-1185.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Background
On March 21, 1994 in 59 FR 13289, EPA proposed granting limited
approval and limited disapproval of SJVUAPCD's Rule 465.1, Steam-
enhanced Crude Oil Production Well Vents, into the California SIP. Rule
465.1 was adopted by SJVUAPCD on September 19, 1991. This rule was
submitted by the California Air Resources Board (CARB) to EPA on
January 28, 1992. This rule was submitted in response to EPA's 1988 SIP
Call and the CAA section 182(a)(2)(A) requirement that nonattainment
areas fix their reasonably available control technology (RACT) rules
for ozone in accordance with EPA guidance that interpreted the
requirements of the pre-amendment Act. A detailed discussion of the
background for the above rule and nonattainment area is provided in the
notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM) cited above.
EPA has evaluated the above rule for consistency with the
requirements of the CAA and EPA regulations and EPA's interpretation of
these requirements as expressed in the various EPA policy guidance
documents referenced in the NPRM. EPA is finalizing the limited
approval of this rule in order to strengthen the SIP and finalizing the
limited disapproval requiring the correction of the remaining
deficiencies. The rule contains deficiencies which were required to be
corrected pursuant to the section 182(a)(2)(A) requirement of part D of
the CAA. Rule 465.1 lacks clarity in specifying rule applicability,
lacks sufficient recordkeeping requirements, and includes an
unapprovable provision which exempts certain equipment from New Source
Review (NSR) requirements. Section III.G. of Rule 465.1 states that if
a new incineration device is required solely to comply with the
requirements of Rule 465.1 for existing cyclic wells, then the device
will not be subject to New and Modified Source Review requirements,
provided the device includes best available control technology for all
air contaminants and is under a District permit. This provision is
unapprovable and in order to correct the deficiency, section III.G.
must be amended to be consistent with the memorandum entitled,
``Pollution Control Projects and New Source Review Applicability''
issued by John Seitz, Office of Air Quality Planning and Standards, on
July 1, 1994. In addition, any emissions previously allowed under this
NSR exemption must be offset. A detailed discussion of the rule
provisions and evaluation have been provided in the NPRM and in the
technical support document (TSD) available at EPA's Region IX office.
Response to Public Comments
A 30-day public comment period was provided in NPRM at 59 FR 13289.
EPA received one comment letter on the NPRM from the Independent Oil
Producers' Agency (IOPA). The comment letter has been evaluated by EPA
and a summary of the comment and EPA's response are set forth below.
Comment: In the TSD for SJVUAPCD Rule 465.1, EPA stated that no
data were submitted to justify the exemption in Section III.F. The IOPA
asked why EPA is questioning the small producer exemption for exempting
10 wells responding to another operator's steam injection when the
emissions from the 100 cyclic wells in III.B exemption were not
considered significant.
Response: Data submitted by SJVUAPCD demonstrate that emissions
from the cyclic wells (exempted by section III.B) were not significant.
However, emissions from non-cyclic wells tend to be much higher than
from cyclic wells. SJVUAPCD did not submit sufficient data to show that
the emissions from non-cyclic wells (exempted by section III.F) were
also insignificant.
Comment: There is no need to require small producers to keep
production records because oil producers always keep production records
in order to monitor production levels.
Response: The EPA believes that recordkeeping, as outlined in the
``Blue Book'' is necessary to ensure that the sources are complying
with the rule. If the producers are already keeping production records,
there should be no difficulties in complying with the recordkeeping
requirement.
Comment: According to the commenter, the word ``county'' was
purposely left in the small production definition to delineate between
the Kern County and Fresno County oilfields.
Response: EPA recognizes the point raised by the commenter.
However, since the SJVUAPCD is comprised of eight counties, the word
district is more appropriate to use, particularly for the applicability
of promulgating rules and regulations.
EPA Action
EPA is finalizing a limited approval and a limited disapproval of
the above-referenced rule. The limited approval of this rule is being
finalized 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 in the sense that the
rule strengthens the SIP. However, the rule does not meet the section
182(a)(2)(A) CAA requirement because of the rule deficiencies which
were discussed in the NPRM. Thus, in order to strengthen the SIP, EPA
is granting limited approval of this rule under
[[Page 44163]]
sections 110(k)(3) and 301(a) of the CAA. This action approves the rule
into the SIP as federally enforceable.
At the same time, EPA is finalizing the limited disapproval of this
rule because it contains deficiencies that have not been corrected as
required by section 182(a)(2)(A) of the CAA, and, as such, the rule
does not fully meet the requirements of Part D of the Act. As stated in
the NPRM, upon the effective date of this NFRM, the 18 month clock for
sanctions and the 24 month FIP clock will begin. Sections 179(a) and
110(c). If the State does not submit the required corrections and EPA
does not determine within 18 months of the effective date of the NFRM
that the State has corrected the deficiency, sanctions will be imposed
in accordance with EPA's Order of Sanctions rule. See 59 FR 39832 (Aug.
4, 1994), to be codified at 40 CFR 52.31. It should be noted that the
rule covered by this NFRM has been adopted by SJVUAPCD and is currently
in effect in the SJVUAPCD. EPA's limited disapproval action will not
prevent the SJVUAPCD, or the 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 section 307(b)(1) of the Act, petitions for judicial review
of this action must be filed in the United States Court of Appeals for
the appropriate circuit by October 28, 1996. Filing a petition for
reconsideration by the Administrator of this final rule does not affect
the finality of this rule for the purposes of judicial review nor does
it extend the time within which a petition for judicial review may be
filed and shall not postpone the effectiveness of such rule or action.
This action may not be challenged later in proceedings to enforce its
requirements (see section 307(b)(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 affected sources are already subject to these
regulations 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.
Under 5 U.S.C. 801(a)(1)(A) as added by the Small Business
Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act of 1996, EPA submitted a report
containing this rule and other required information to the U.S. Senate,
the U.S. House of Representatives and the Comptroller General of the
General Accounting Office prior to publication of the rule in today's
Federal Register. This rule is not a major rule as defined by 5 U.S.C.
804(2).
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 regulatory action from Executive Order 12866 review.
List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52
Environmental protection, Air pollution control, Hydrocarbons,
Incorporation by reference, Intergovernmental relations, Oxides of
nitrogen, Ozone, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements, Volatile
organic compound.
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 9, 1996.
Felicia Marcus,
Regional Administrator.
Subpart F of 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)(187)(i)(A)(6)
to read as follows:
Sec. 52.220 Identification of plan.
* * * * *
(c) * * *
(187) * * *
(i) * * *
(A) * * *
(6) Rule 465.1, adopted on September 19, 1991.
* * * * *
[FR Doc. 96-21907 Filed 8-27-96; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-W
