[Federal Register Volume 62, Number 170 (Wednesday, September 3, 1997)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 46451-46453]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 97-23362]
=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
40 CFR Parts 52 and 70
[CA-001-PP; FRL-5885-7]
Clean Air Act Proposed Approval of Title V Operating Permits
Program Revisions; Santa Barbara County Air Pollution Control District,
California
AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).
ACTION: Proposed rule.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: The EPA proposes to approve a revision to Rule 1301 of
Regulation XIII, both as a revision to the federally-approved State
Implementation Plan (SIP) and as a revision to the title V operating
permit program to be adopted by the Santa Barbara County Air Pollution
Control District (Santa Barbara, SBCAPCD, or District). The District
submitted this rule to EPA on August 11, 1997, and is scheduled to
adopt this rule on September 18, 1997, for the purpose of allowing
Department of Defense facilities to become exempt from title V of the
Clean Air Act permit requirements, if the source implements an emission
reduction plan that achieves a minimum reduction of 10 tons per year of
ozone precursors. Amended Rule 1301 also identifies 9 stationary source
designations for title V purposes that will apply to a DoD facility
that implements an approved emission reduction plan. It also allows the
exclusion of emissions from tactical support equipment and
infrastructure building maintenance equipment from the emissions used
to determine if an operating permit is required under District
Regulation XIII and title V of the Clean Air Act.
This proposed rule will create federally-enforceable requirements
for the emission reduction plan with specific project milestones for
DoD facilities to meet. The actual emission reduction plan will also be
submitted for incorporation into the SIP in a future rulemaking.
DATES: Comments on this proposed action must be received in writing by
October 3, 1997.
ADDRESSES: Comments must be submitted to John Walser at EPA, AIR-3, 75
Hawthorne Street, San Francisco, CA 94105. Copies of the rules and
EPA's Technical Support Document for the amended title V program and
prohibitory rule are available for public inspection during normal
business hours at the following locations:
Permits Office (AIR-3), Air Division, U.S. Environmental Protection
Agency, Region IX, 75 Hawthorne Street, San Francisco, CA 94105
Santa Barbara County Air Pollution Control District, 26 Castilian Drive
B-23, Goleta, CA 93117
California Air Resources Board, 2020 L Street, Sacramento, CA 95814
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: John Walser (telephone 415/744-1257),
Permits Office (AIR-3), Air Division, U.S. Environmental Protection
Agency, Region IX, 75 Hawthorne Street, San Francisco, CA 94105.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
I. Background
On November 1, 1995, EPA published in the Federal Register a final
action of interim approval for Santa Barbara's title V operating
permits program (60 FR 55460) in accordance with title V of the Act (as
amended in 1990) and 40 CFR
[[Page 46452]]
part 70 (the title V implementing regulations). The District rules for
title V are contained in Regulation XIII of the District Rules and
Regulations. On August 15, 1996, Santa Barbara adopted revisions to
Rule 1301, ``Part 70 Operating Permits--General Information'' portion
of Regulation XIII. Rule 1301 is part of Regulation XIII. These
revisions apply to any source that qualifies as a Part 70 source and
meets the requirements for exclusion of military tactical support and/
or infrastructure building maintenance equipment at a Department of
Defense facility. In Santa Barbara County, only Vandenberg Air Force
Base (VAFB) meets these requirements. The revision enables VAFB to
comply with Rule 370, the District's prohibitory rule, which limits the
Base's potential to emit to below the title V applicability thresholds
and requires VAFB to reduce its annual emissions rate of ozone
precursors by at least 10 tons through the ENVVEST initiative. The rule
revision also includes emission reduction plan requirements and
milestones to be approved by the District and made federally-
enforceable by the EPA by incorporating the rule revisions into the SIP
for California, if EPA finds that the planned emission reductions are
real, quantifiable, surplus and enforceable.
ENVVEST is a pilot project pursuant to the 1995 Memorandum of
Agreement between the DoD and EPA on Regulatory Reinvention Projects
testing innovative approaches to environmental protection. ENVVEST
allows EPA and the DoD to develop new ways to achieve better overall
environmental performance at lower costs than expected under existing
regulatory approaches.
The emission reductions will be achieved through retrofits of
equipment (mostly boilers rated between 2 and 5 MMBtu/hr) currently
exempt from the permitting process. In lieu of obtaining a Part 70
permit, VAFB will commit to use its title V permitting funds to
implement an emission reduction plan to reduce ozone precursors at the
base by at least 10 tons per year by November 15, 2002.
The District is enabling VAFB to reprogram funds currently targeted
toward title V compliance to this pollution prevention project by
modifying the definition of stationary source to enable Department of
Defense (DoD) facilities (i.e., VAFB) to comply with Rule 370. This
proposed rule change also includes the project milestones as outlined
in the Vandenberg ENVVEST Final Project Agreement (FPA). The proposed
changes are consistent with EPA's August 2, 1996 Guidance Memorandum
entitled ``Major Source Determinations for Military Installations under
the Air Toxics, New Source Review, and Title V Operating Permit
Programs of the Clean Air Act (Act)'', signed by John S. Seitz,
Director, Office of Air Quality Planning and Standards (``Military
Guidance'').
The proposed changes also enable the source to exclude emissions
from equipment meeting the EPA definition of nonroad engines (see 59 FR
31310 dated June 17, 1994) for Department of Defense (DoD) facilities
that are participating in the EPA/DoD Environmental Investment
(ENVVEST) pilot project.
Also, the District, the California Air Resources Board (CARB) and
EPA are working together to ``parallel process'' this rule revision
consistent with the procedures outlined in 46 FR 44477 on September 4,
1981. EPA Region IX will work closely with CARB and the District as
they develop this regulation and proceed through the rulemaking
process. CARB, the District, and EPA will process this rule revision at
the same time and jointly review the comments. EPA will commence its
official 30-day public review of the proposed SIP approval of Rule 1301
through this document, which is nearly concurrent with the District's
30-day public notice for adoption of the rule. This parallel processing
approach will involve much earlier involvement of the EPA in the SIP
revision process and thereby reduce the amount of time for processing
significantly.
II. Proposed Action
The EPA is proposing to approve the submitted revisions to the
District's operating permits program and incorporate the submitted
revisions into the SIP for California. The District amended the August
15, 1996 adopted version of Rule 1301 and resubmitted it on August 11,
1997. The most recent revisions, scheduled for adoption on September
18, 1997 by Santa Barbara, are being made in order to allow VAFB
participation in the EPA/DoD proposed ENVVEST pilot project and are not
adopted in response to the program deficiencies identified by EPA in
the final interim approval action (60 FR 55460).
A. Analysis of Submission
The EPA has evaluated the submitted rule revision and has
determined that it is consistent with 40 CFR part 70, and the August 2,
1996 Military Guidance Memorandum. The following is a brief analysis of
the key regulatory revisions being acted on in today's proposed action.
(Please refer to the Technical Support Document for a more detailed and
complete analysis of the submission.)
1. Definition of Major Stationary Source
As defined in 40 CFR part 70.2, major source means any stationary
source (or any group of stationary sources that are located on one or
more contiguous or adjacent properties, and are under common control of
the same person (or persons under common control)) belonging to a
single major industrial grouping. A stationary source or group of
stationary sources shall be considered part of a single industrial
grouping if all of the pollutant emitting activities at such source or
group of sources on contiguous or adjacent properties belong to the
same Major Group (i.e., all have the same two-digit code) as described
in the Standard Industrial Classification Manual, 1987.
VAFB is the only DoD facility in Santa Barbara County that is
subject to the revisions of the stationary source definition in
District Rule 1301. At present the installation is defined as one major
stationary source. In accordance with EPA's Military Guidance
Memorandum and as part of the ENVVEST pilot project, the proposed
changes allow VAFB to be considered nine stationary sources and to
demonstrate that actual emissions for each source (each under separate
common control, not determined to be support facilities and have
different two-digit SIC codes) are less than 50 percent of the existing
major source threshold. For the purposes of the ENVVEST pilot project,
EPA has assumed worst case analysis for threshold levels and that Santa
Barbara County would be bumped-up from moderate to serious ozone
nonattaniment status, and therefore the major source threshold level
would drop from 100 tons/year (moderate) to 50 tons/year (serious).
EPA is proposing approval of the title V operating permit program
revisions submitted to EPA on August 11, 1997, both as part of the
District's title V program and into the SIP. These revisions do not
correct the deficiencies identified in the November 1, 1995 final
interim approval, and hence, do not impact Santa Barbara's interim
approval status.
Nothing in this action should be construed as permitting or
allowing or establishing a precedent for any future 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
[[Page 46453]]
relation to relevant statutory and regulatory requirements.
III. Administrative Requirements
A. Docket
Copies of Santa Barbara's submittal and other information relied
upon for the direct final actions are contained in docket number CA-
001-PP OPS maintained at the EPA Regional Office. The docket is an
organized and complete file of all the information submitted to, or
otherwise considered by, EPA in the development of this direct final
rulemaking. The docket is available for public inspection at the
location listed under the ADDRESSES section of this document.
B. Regulatory Flexibility Act
The EPA's actions under section 502 of the Act do not create any
new requirements, but simply address revisions to Santa Barbara's
existing operating permits program that was submitted to satisfy the
requirements of 40 CFR part 70. Because this action does not impose any
new requirements, it does not have a significant impact on a
substantial number of small entities.
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
the 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 today 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.
D. Executive Order 12866
The Office of Management and Budget has exempted this action from
review under Executive Order 12866.
List of Subjects
40 CFR Part 52
Environmental protection, air pollution control, Carbon monoxide,
Hydrocarbons, Incorporation by reference, Intergovernmental relations,
Lead, Nitrogen dioxide, Ozone, Particulate matter, Sulfur oxides,
Volatile organic compounds.
40 CFR Part 70
Environmental protection, Administrative practice and procedure,
Air pollution control, Hazardous substances, Intergovernmental
relations, Operating permits, and Reporting and recordkeeping
requirements.
Dated: August 22, 1997.
John Wise,
Regional Administrator.
[FR Doc. 97-23362 Filed 9-2-97; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P
