1 

United States Environmental Protection Agency, Region 9 

Air Division 

Technical Support Document 

for 

EPA’s Notice of Proposed Rulemaking 

for the 

California State Implementation Plan 

Imperial County Air Pollution Control District’s 

Rule 400.3, Internal Combustion Engine(s) 

Prepared by: Idalia Perez 

July 2014 
2 

Imperial County Air Pollution Control District (ICAPCD) 

Submitted Rule 

ICAPCD Rule 400.3, Internal Combustion Engine(s) 

ß Adopted: October 22, 2013 

ß Submitted: February 10, 2014 

ß Determined complete: April 9, 2014 

Previous Rule Submittals 

There are no outstanding submittals of Rule 400.3. 

SIP-Approved Rule 

There is no SIP-approved version of Rule 400.3. 

Rule Summary 

Rule 400.3 regulates emissions of oxides of nitrogen (NOx) and CO from internal combustion 

engines with a brake horsepower greater than 50. 

The emission limits in the Rule are (Section C): 

ß 90 ppm of NOx for rich-burn engines; 

ß 150 ppm of NOx for lean-burn engines; 

ß 600 ppm of NOx for diesel engines; 

ß 2500 ppm of CO for all engines. 

The rule language has various exemptions in Section D, including an exemption for engines used 

exclusively in agricultural operations. 

Monitoring, recordkeeping and other compliance requirements are contained in various 

provisions in Sections E, F, G, H and I. 

Effects on Emissions 

The staff report indicates that implementation of Rule 400.3 will not reduce NOx emission from 

diesel engines because there is an existing state requirement (Title 13, CCR, section 2423) that is 

stricter than the emission requirements of Rule 400.3. The District does not indicate if they 

expect NOx reductions from the implementation of the rich-burn and lean-burn emission limits 

in the rule. The staff report indicates that the District did not find any of these types of engines 

that were out of compliance with the rule limits. The District sent additional information 

regarding existing engines located in major sources subject to Rule 400.3. See Email from Reyes 

Romero, ICAPCD, to Idalia Perez, USEPA Region 9, on July 25, 2014 and attachment. The 

information provided indicated that there are no non-emergency engines located at major NOx 

sources in Imperial County. 

Rule Evaluation Criteria 

We have primarily used the following three criteria to evaluate Rule 400.3: 
3 

Rule Stringency In ozone nonattainment areas classified as moderate or above, the SIP 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 of volatile 

organic compounds (VOCs) or nitrogen oxides (NOx) (see CAA sections 182(b)(2) and (f)). 

The ICAPCD regulates an ozone nonattainment area classified as moderate for the 1997 8-hour 

ozone standards and as marginal for the 2008 8-hour ozone standards (see 40 CFR 81.305). 

Therefore, the CAA section 182(b)(2) RACT requirement for the 1997 8-hour ozone standards 

applies to this area. 

Enforceability CAA section 110(a)(2)(A) requires that regulations submitted to EPA for 

approval into a SIP must be clear and legally enforceable. 

SIP Revisions CAA section 110(l) prohibits EPA from approving any SIP revision that 

would interfere with any applicable requirement concerning attainment and reasonable 

further progress (RFP) or any other applicable requirement of the CAA. In addition, CAA 

section 193 prohibits the modification of any SIP-approved control requirement in effect 

before November 15, 1990 in a nonattainment area without ensuring equivalent or greater 

emissions reductions. 

Guidance and policy documents that we used to define specific enforceability and RACT 

requirements include the following: 

ß Issues Relating to VOC Regulation, Cutpoints, Deficiencies, and Deviations (the “Blue 

Book”), US EPA, OAQPS (May 25, 1988). 

ß Guidance Document for Correcting Common VOC and Other Rule Deficiencies, EPA 

Region IX (August 21, 2001, the “Little Bluebook”). 

ß State Implementation Plans; General Preamble for the Implementation of Title I of the 

Clean Air Act Amendments of 1990, 57 FR 13498 (April 16, 1992); 57 FR 18070 (April 

28, 1992). 

ß State Implementation Plans; Nitrogen Oxides Supplement to the General Preamble for 

the Implementation of Title I of the Clean Air Act Amendments of 1990 (the “NOX

Supplement to the General Preamble”), US EPA, 57 FR 55620 (November 25, 1992). 

ß U.S. EPA. Alternative Control Techniques Document – NOx Emissions from Stationary 

Reciprocating Internal Combustion Engines. EPA-453/R-93-032, July 1993 

http://www.epa.gov/ttnnaaqs/ozone/ctg_act/199307_nox_epa453_r-93-

032_internal_combustion_engines.pdf

ß California Air Resources Board. Determination of Reasonably Available Control 

Technology and Best Available Retrofit Control Technology for Stationary Spark-Ignited 

Internal Combustion Engines. (Engine RACT Determination) November 2001 

http://www.arb.ca.gov/ractbarc/rb-iceall.pdf. 

Evaluation of Rule Stringency 

According to information provided by the District, there are only four emergency engines located 

at major NOx sources located in Imperial County. These are exempt from the emission limitation 

of the Rule. See Section D.4. The District also indicated that there are no non-emergency engines 

located at major sources in Imperial County. Since there are no major sources subject to this rule 
4 

that are required to meet RACT, Rule 400.3 is not required to implement RACT requirements 

and at this time we are not making a determination of its ability to implement RACT. 

Nonetheless, we note that there are multiple rules in ozone nonattainment air districts in 

California that have more stringent emissions limits, including Feather River AQMD Rule 3.22, 

Sacramento Metropolitan AQMD Rule 412, San Joaquin Valley APCD Rule 4702 and Ventura 

County APCD Rule 74.9, as well as rules in district in California that are in attainment for ozone 

that also have more stringent emissions limits, including Bay Area AQMD Rule 9-8 and San 

Diego APCD Rule 69.4. Additionally, the ARB RACT and BARCT Determination (November 

2001) suggests more stringent limits as RACT and there is a statewide requirement that is more 

stringent for compression engines (Title 13, CCR, section 2423), as the District itself states in the 

staff report. 

Evaluation of Enforceability 

Some of the criteria essential in practically enforceable rules include clear statements of 

applicability, specificity of the standard that must be met, explicit statements of compliance time 

frames, explicit statements of the size of exempt units and the length of time of exempt periods, 

and inclusion of record keeping requirements. We believe the submitted rule adequately fulfills 

the relevant criteria identified above and ensures that the rule requirements are adequately 

enforceable. Specifically, the rule: 

· is generally clear and has clear applicability; 

· includes adequate recordkeeping and other compliance provisions; 

· has adequate testing and compliance timeframes. 

Evaluation of SIP Revision Criteria 

The submitted rule is not currently in the SIP, so approval of the requirements would strengthen 

the SIP. Therefore, we propose to determine that an approval of the submittal would comply with 

CAA sections 110(l) and 193 because (1) the proposed SIP revision would not interfere with the 

on-going process for ensuring that requirements for RFP and attainment of the NAAQS are met, 

and (2) the submitted SIP revision is more stringent than the existing SIP requirements. 

Suggested Rule Improvements 

Although not currently basis for rule disapproval, EPA recommends that the ICAPCD make the 

following improvement in the next revision of Rule 400.3. 

· The District should lower the emission limits in Section C to be consistent with other 

nonattainment areas in California. 

· The District should eliminate the blanket exemption for agricultural units in Section D.2. 

Instead the Rule can exempt low use units or units used at narrowly defined agricultural 

operations (e.g. engines used exclusively to power a wind machine). See San Joaquin 

Valley APCD Rule 4702. 

· The District should include a method for calculating hours of operation based upon fuel 

usage in section E.1.e. 

· The District should clarify in Section G.2.a that engines which have not been tested 

because they have not been in operation are tested once operations resume. See South 

Coast Rule at page 23: “If the engine has not been operated within three months of the 

date a source test is required, the source test shall be conducted when the engine resumes 
5 

operation for a period longer than either seven consecutive days or 15 cumulative days of 

operation.” 

Recommendation 

EPA staff recommends full approval of ICAPCD submitted Rule 400.3 for incorporation into the 

California Applicable SIP. 

Other References 

1. Submitted Rule 400.3 

2. Staff Report for Rule 400.3 

3. Email from Reyes Romero, ICAPCD, to Idalia Perez, USEPA Region 9, on July 25, 

2014. 
1

Perez, Idalia

From: Reyes Romero <ReyesRomero@co.imperial.ca.us>

Sent: Friday, July 25, 2014 1:47 PM

To: Perez, Idalia; Steckel, Andrew

Cc: Brad Poiriez; monicasoucier@co.imperial.ca.us

Subject: List of Title V Sources in Imperial County and Imperial Landfill Documentation

Attachments: Imperial Title V Sources and Imperial Landfill Emissions Inventory.pdf

Hi Idalia: 

Attached is a copy of undated list of Title V Sources in Imperial County which includes title V applicability requirements 

and IC engines operated at the facilities. I am also attaching emissions inventory for Imperial Landfill, Inc. This facility is 

a Non-Major source which is subject to Title V program due to landfill NESHAP applicability to this facility. The emissions 

inventory data shows that this facility is not a major source of NOx or VOC emissions. Please notice that this facility 

operates 3 prime IC engines, two of which are less than 50 HP and therefore not subject to Rule 400.3. If you need 

more information, please give me a call, 

Thanks, 

Reyes Romero 

Assistant APCO 

150 S 9th Street 

El Centro, CA 92243 

(760) 482 4606 

reyesromero@co.imperial.ca.us