2010-6804. Revisions to the California State Implementation Plan

AGENCY:

Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION:

Proposed rule.

SUMMARY:

EPA is proposing to approve revisions to the San Joaquin Valley Unified Air Pollution Control District (SJVUAPCD) portion of the California State Implementation Plan (SIP). These revisions concern volatile organic compound (VOC) emissions from refinery vacuum producing systems and process unit turnaround. We are approving local rules that regulate these emission sources under the Clean Air Act as amended in 1990 (CAA or the Act). We are taking comments on this proposal and plan to follow with a final action.

DATES:

Any comments must arrive by April 26, 2010.

ADDRESSES:

Submit comments, identified by docket number [EPA-R09-OAR-2009-0958], by one of the following methods:

1. Federal eRulemaking Portal: http://www.regulations.gov. Follow the on-line instructions.

2. E-mail: [e-mail].

3. Mail or deliver: Andrew Steckel (Air-4), U.S. Environmental Protection Agency Region IX, 75 Hawthorne Street, San Francisco, CA 94105-3901.

Instructions: All comments will be included in the public docket without change and may be made available online at http://www.regulations.gov,, including any personal information provided, unless the comment includes Confidential Business Information (CBI) or other information whose disclosure is restricted by statute. Information that you consider CBI or otherwise protected should be clearly identified as such and should not be submitted through http://www.regulations.gov or e-mail. Http://www.regulations.gov is an “anonymous access” system, and EPA will not know your identity or contact information unless you provide it in the body of your comment. If you send e-mail directly to EPA, your e-mail address will be automatically captured and included as part of the public comment. If EPA cannot read your comment due to technical difficulties and cannot contact you for clarification, EPA may not be able to consider your comment.

Docket: The index to the docket for this action is available electronically at http://www.regulations.gov and in hard copy at EPA Region IX, 75 Hawthorne Street, San Francisco, California. While all documents in the docket are listed in the index, some information may be publicly available only at the hard copy location (e.g., copyrighted material), and some may not be publicly available in either location (e.g., CBI). To inspect the hard copy materials, please schedule an appointment during normal business hours with the contact listed in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Joanne Wells, EPA Region IX, [phone], [e-mail].

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Throughout this document, “we,” “us” and “our” refer to EPA.

Table of Contents

I. The State's Submittal

A. What Rules did the State Submit?

B. Are There Other Versions of These Rules?

C. What Is the Purpose of the Submitted Rule Revisions?

II. EPA's Evaluation and Action

A. How is EPA Evaluating the Rules?

B. Do the Rules Meet the Evaluation Criteria?

C. EPA Recommendations to Further Improve the Rules

D. Public Comment and Final Action

III. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews

I. The State's Submittal

A. What rules did the State submit?

Table 1 lists the rules addressed by this proposal with the dates that they were amended by the local air agency and submitted by the California Air Resources Board (CARB).

Table 1—Submitted Rules

District	Rule No.	Rule title	Amended	Submitted
SJVUAPCD	4453	Refinery Vacuum Producing Devices or Systems	12/17/92	08/24/07
SJVUAPCD	4454	Refinery Process Unit Turnaround	12/17/92	08/24/07

On September 17, 2007, EPA determined that the submittal for San Joaquin Valley Unified Air Pollution Control District Rules 4453 and 4454 met the completeness criteria in 40 CFR part 51 Appendix V, which must be met before formal EPA review.

B. Are there other versions of these rules?

SIP versions of submitted SJVUAPCD rules are old rules from three of the eight counties that now comprise SJVUAPCD: These SIP-approved rules are described below:

Precursor SIP rules for submitted SJVUAPCD Rule 4453:

• Kern County Rule 414.2, Refinery Process Vacuum Producing Devices or Systems (approved on August 21, 1981, 46 FR 42459).
• Kings County Rule 414.2, Refinery Vacuum Producing Devices or Systems (approved on May 7, 1982, 47 FR 19696).
• San Joaquin County Rule 413.2, Refinery Vacuum Producing Devices (approved on May 7, 1982, 47 FR 19696).

Precursor SIP rules for submitted SJVUAPCD Rule 4454:

• Kern County Rule 414.3, Refinery Process Unit Turnaround (approved on August 21, 1981, 46 FR 42459).
• Kings County Rule 414.3, Refinery Process Unit Turnaround (approved on May 7, 1982, 47 FR 19696).
• San Joaquin County Rule 413.3, Refinery Process Unit Turnaround (approved on May 7, 1982, 47 FR 19696).

C. What is the purpose of the submitted rules and rule revisions?

VOCs help produce ground-level ozone and smog, which harm human health and the environment. Section 110(a) of the CAA requires states to submit regulations that control VOC emissions. These rules were developed as part of the local agency's program to control VOCs.

The purposes of amendments to Rules 4453 and 4454 are as follows:

• 4453: The rule requires reducing VOC emissions from refinery vacuum producing devices by covering hot wells and collecting vapors for recycle to refinery gas or incineration. The format is improved, the rule is renumbered, the rule purpose and applicability are added, and a 90% VOC control efficiency requirement is added.
• 4454: The rule requires reducing VOC emissions from a refinery process unit turnaround by collecting vapors for recycle to refinery gas, incineration, or flaring. The format is improved, the rule is renumbered, and the rule purpose and applicability are added.

EPA's technical support document (TSD) has more information about these rules.

II. EPA's Evaluation and Action

A. How is EPA evaluating the rules?

Generally, SIP rules must be enforceable (see section 110(a) of the Act), must require Reasonably Available Control Technology (RACT) for each category of sources covered by a Control Techniques Guidelines (CTG) document as well as each major source in nonattainment areas (see sections 182(a)(2) and (b)(2)), and must not relax existing requirements (see sections 110(l) and 193). The SJVUAPCD regulates an ozone nonattainment area (see 40 CFR part 81), so these rules must fulfill RACT.

Guidance and policy documents that we use to evaluate enforceability and RACT requirements consistently include the following:

1. Portions of the proposed post-1987 ozone and carbon monoxide policy that concern RACT, 52 FR 45044 (November 24, 1987).

2. Requirements for Preparation, Adoption, and Submittal of Implementation Plans, U.S. EPA, 40 CFR part 51.

3. Addendum to the General Preamble for the Implementation of Title I of the Clean Air Act Amendments of 1990, 59 FR 41998 (August 16, 1994).

4. Issues Relating to VOC Regulation Cutpoints, Deficiencies, and Deviations, EPA (May 25, 1988). [The Bluebook]

5. Guidance Document for Correcting Common VOC & Other Rule Deficiencies, EPA Region 9 (August 21, 2001). [The Little Bluebook]

6. Control of Refinery Vacuum Producing Systems, Wastewater Separators, and Process Unit Turnarounds, EPA-450/2-77-025 (October 1977).

7. 2007 Ozone Plan, San Joaquin Valley Unified Air Pollution Control District (April 30, 2007). http://www.arb.ca.gov/​planning/​sip/​2007sip/​sjv8hr/​sjvozone.htm.

8. RACT Demonstration for Ozone SIP, San Joaquin Valley Unified Air Pollution Control District (April 16, 2009).

B. Do the rules meet the evaluation criteria?

We believe these rules are consistent with the relevant policy and guidance regarding enforceability, RACT, and SIP relaxations. The TSD has more information on our evaluation.

C. EPA Recommendations To Further Improve the Rules

The TSD describes additional rule revisions that we recommend for the next time the local agency modifies the rules.

D. Public Comment and Final Action

Because EPA believes the submitted rules fulfill all relevant requirements, we are proposing to fully approve them as described in section 110(k)(3) of the Act. We will accept comments from the public on this proposal for the next 30 days. Unless we receive convincing new information during the comment period, we intend to publish a final approval action that will incorporate these rules into the federally enforceable SIP.

III. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews

Under the Clean Air Act, the Administrator is required to approve a SIP submission that complies with the provisions of the Act and applicable Federal regulations. 42 U.S.C. 7410(k); 40 CFR 52.02(a). Thus, in reviewing SIP submissions, EPA's role is to approve State choices, provided that they meet the criteria of the Clean Air Act. Accordingly, this action merely approves State law as meeting Federal requirements and does not impose additional requirements beyond those imposed by State law. For that reason, this action:

• Is not a “significant regulatory action” subject to review by the Office of Management and Budget under Executive Order 12866 (58 FR 51735, October 4, 1993);
• Does not impose an information collection burden under the provisions of the Paperwork Reduction Act (44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.);
• Is certified as not having a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities under the Regulatory Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 601 et seq.);
• Does not contain any unfunded mandate or significantly or uniquely affect small governments, as described in the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995 (Pub. L. 104-4);
• Does not have Federalism implications as specified in Executive Order 13132 (64 FR 43255, August 10, 1999);
• Is not an economically significant regulatory action based on health or safety risks subject to Executive Order 13045 (62 FR 19885, April 23, 1997);
• Is not a significant regulatory action subject to Executive Order 13211 (66 FR 28355, May 22, 2001);
• Is not subject to requirements of Section 12(d) of the National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act of 1995 (15 U.S.C. 272 note) because application of those requirements would be inconsistent with the Clean Air Act; and
• Does not provide EPA with the discretionary authority to address, as appropriate, disproportionate human health or environmental effects, using practicable and legally permissible methods, under Executive Order 12898 (59 FR 7629, February 16, 1994).

In addition, this rule does not have tribal implications as specified by Executive Order 13175 (65 FR 67249, November 9, 2000), because the SIP is not approved to apply in Indian country located in the State, and EPA notes that it will not impose substantial direct costs on tribal governments or preempt tribal law.

List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52

• Environmental protection
• Air pollution control
• Intergovernmental relations
• Ozone
• Reporting and recordkeeping requirements
• Volatile organic compounds

Authority: 42 U.S.C. 7401 et seq.

Dated: March 8, 2010.

Jared Blumenfeld,

Regional Administrator, Region IX.