2012-10201. Revisions to the California State Implementation Plan, Imperial County Air Pollution Control District  

  • Start Preamble

    AGENCY:

    Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

    ACTION:

    Proposed rule.

    SUMMARY:

    EPA is proposing to approve revisions to the Imperial County Air Pollution Control District (ICAPCD) portion of the California State Implementation Plan (SIP). These revisions concern oxides of nitrogen (NOX) emissions from certain boilers, process heaters and steam generators. We are approving a local rule that regulates 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 May 29, 2012.

    ADDRESSES:

    Submit comments, identified by docket number EPA-R09-OAR-2012-0274, by one of the following methods:

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

    2. Email: steckel.andrew@epa.gov.

    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 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 Start Printed Page 25110should not be submitted through www.regulations.gov or email. 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 email directly to EPA, your email 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: Generally, documents in the docket for this action are available electronically at 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 at www.regulations.gov, some information may be publicly available only at the hard copy location (e.g., copyrighted material, large maps), 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.

    Start Further Info

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Andrew Steckel, EPA Region IX, (415) 947-4115, steckel.andrew@epa.gov.

    End Further Info End Preamble Start Supplemental Information

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

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

    Table of Contents

    I. The State's Submittal

    A. What rule did the State submit?

    B. Are there other versions of this rule?

    C. What is the purpose of the submitted rule?

    II. EPA's Evaluation and Action

    A. How is EPA evaluating the rule?

    B. Does the rule meet the evaluation criteria?

    C. EPA Recommendations To Further Improve the Rule

    D. Public Comment and Final Action

    III. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews

    I. The State's Submittal

    A. What rule did the State submit?

    Table 1 lists the rule addressed by this proposal with the date that it was adopted by the local air agency and submitted by the California Air Resources Board (CARB).

    Table 1—Submitted Rule

    Local agencyRule No.Rule titleAdoptedSubmitted
    ICAPCD400.2Boilers, Process Heaters and Steam Generators02/23/1007/20/10

    On August 25, 2010, EPA determined that the submittal for ICAPCD Rule 400.2 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 this rule?

    There are no previous versions of Rule 400.2.

    C. What is the purpose of the submitted rule?

    NOX helps produce ground-level ozone, smog and particulate matter, which harm human health and the environment. Section 110(a) of the CAA requires States to submit regulations that control NOX emissions. Rule 400.2 regulates emissions of NOX from boilers, process heaters and steam generators with a heat input rating of 5 MMBtu/hour or more. EPA's technical support document (TSD) has more information about this rule.

    II. EPA's Evaluation and Action

    A. How is EPA evaluating the rule?

    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 NOX or VOC major source in nonattainment areas classified as moderate or above (see sections 182(b)(2) and 182(f)), and must not relax existing requirements (see sections 110(l) and 193). The ICAPCD regulates an ozone nonattainment area classified as moderate (see 40 CFR part 81). Because Rule 400.2 regulates major stationary sources of NOX, it must fulfill NOX RACT requirements. On December 3, 2009, EPA determined that ICAPCD attained the 1997 8-hour NAAQS for ozone based upon ambient air monitoring data showing the area had monitored attainment during the 2006-2008 monitoring period (74 FR 63309). This determination suspended some of the planning requirements related to attainment of the 1997 8-hour ozone NAAQS but not the Section 182(b)(2) and 182(f) RACT requirements for major NOX emission sources. The ICAPCD also regulates a serious PM-10 nonattainment area, and is therefore subject to the requirement under sections 189(b)(1)(B) and 189(e) of the Act to implement Best Available Control Measures (BACM, which includes Best Available Control Technology or BACT) for control of PM-10 and PM-10 precursor emissions.

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

    1. “State Implementation Plans; Nitrogen Oxides Supplement to the General Preamble; Clean Air Act Amendments of 1990 Implementation of Title I; Proposed Rule,” (the NOX Supplement), 57 FR 55620, November 25, 1992.

    2. “Issues Relating to VOC Regulation Cutpoints, Deficiencies, and Deviations,” EPA, May 25, 1988 (the Bluebook).

    3. “Guidance Document for Correcting Common VOC & Other Rule Deficiencies,” EPA Region 9, August 21, 2001 (the Little Bluebook).

    4. “State Implementation Plans for Serious PM-10 Nonattainment Areas, and Attainment Date Waivers for PM-10 Nonattainment Areas Generally; 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).

    5. “PM-10 Guideline Document,” EPA 452/R-93-008, April 1993.

    6. “Determination of Reasonably Available Control Technology and Best Available Retrofit Control Technology for Industrial, Institutional, and Commercial Boilers, Steam Generators, and Process Heaters,” CARB, July 18, 1991.

    7. “Alternative Control Techniques Document—NOX Emissions from Industrial/Commercial/Institutional (ICI) Boilers,” US EPA 453/R-94-022, March 1994.

    8. “Alternative Control Techniques Document—NOX Emissions from Utility Boilers,” US EPA 452/R-93-008, March 1994.

    B. Does the rule meet the evaluation criteria?

    We believe this rule is 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 Rule

    The TSD describes additional rule revisions that we recommend for the next time the local agency modifies the rule but are not currently the basis for rule disapproval.Start Printed Page 25111

    D. Public Comment and Final Action

    Because EPA believes the submitted rule fulfills all relevant requirements, we are proposing to fully approve it 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 this rule 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 proposed action merely proposes to approve State law as meeting Federal requirements and does not impose additional requirements beyond those imposed by State law. For that reason, this proposed 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 disproportionate human health or environmental effects with practical, appropriate, and legally permissible methods under Executive Order 12898 (59 FR 7629, February 16, 1994).

    In addition, this proposed action 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.

    Start List of Subjects

    List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52

    • Air pollution control
    • Environmental protection
    • Intergovernmental relations
    • Nitrogen dioxide
    • Ozone
    • Particulate matter
    • Reporting and recordkeeping requirements
    End List of Subjects Start Authority

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

    End Authority Start Signature

    Dated: April 13, 2012.

    Jared Blumenfeld,

    Regional Administrator, Region IX.

    End Signature End Supplemental Information

    [FR Doc. 2012-10201 Filed 4-26-12; 8:45 am]

    BILLING CODE 6560-50-P

Document Information

Comments Received:
0 Comments
Published:
04/27/2012
Department:
Environmental Protection Agency
Entry Type:
Proposed Rule
Action:
Proposed rule.
Document Number:
2012-10201
Dates:
Any comments must arrive by May 29, 2012.
Pages:
25109-25111 (3 pages)
Docket Numbers:
EPA-R09-OAR-2012-0274, FRL-9665-7
Topics:
Air pollution control, Environmental protection, Intergovernmental relations, Nitrogen dioxide, Ozone, Particulate matter, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements
PDF File:
2012-10201.pdf
Supporting Documents:
» Imperial County Rule 400.2 Technical Support Document
» Imperial County Rule 101 Reference Rule
» Cost Effectiveness Evaluation
» Nox Emissions Reductions Evaluation
» Imperial County Rule 400.2 RESPONSE TO INDUSTRY COMMENTS
» Imperial County Rule 400.2 SPRECKELS HOLLY SUGAR COMMENT LETTER 2 FEB 23 2010
» Imperial County Rule 400.2 Staff Report
» Imperial County Rule 400.2 Proof of Publication
» Imperial County Rule 400.2 Clean Copy of the Rule
» Imperial County Rule 400.2 Minute Order
CFR: (1)
40 CFR 52