STAFF REPORT

Rule 3.8: Gasoline Dispensing Facilities

Rule 3.9: Storage of Petroleum Products

Date of Release: June 2, 2014

Schedule of Meetings

Rule Workshop: April 17, 2014

Public Hearing: June 2, 2014

Feather River AQMD

1007 Live Oak Blvd, Suite B-3,

Yuba City, California 95991
Table of Contents

Contents Page 

1. Executive Summary...........................................................................................1

2. Background........................................................................................................1

3. Legal Mandate ...................................................................................................2

4. Proposed Rule Requirements.............................................................................3

5. Socioeconomic Impact.......................................................................................5

6. Impacts of the Proposed Rule ............................................................................5

7. Estimated Cost Impact .......................................................................................6

8. Environmental Review and Compliance ...........................................................6

9. Required Findings..............................................................................................6

10. References..........................................................................................................7

...........................................

Appendix A: Rule Analysis

Appendix B: Public Notice

Appendix C: Comments and Responses
Proposed Rules: 3.8 & 3.9 June 2, 2014 

- 1 -

1.0 Executive Summary:

Feather River Air Quality Management District (District) is a Bi-County agency that administers local, 

state, and federal air quality management programs for Yuba and Sutter Counties. Because portions of the 

District have been designated as nonattainment for failing to meet the federal 8-hour ground-level ozone 

standard, the United States Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) requires the District to control 

emissions from stationary and area sources, such as gasoline fueling and storage. The Federal Clean Air 

Act (CAA) requires an analysis of whether the District rules meet each Reasonably Available Control 

Technology (RACT) standard for sources in nonattainment areas. The District’s RACT analysis 

determined that Rule 3.8 was not meeting the control standards.

District Rule 3.8, Storage and Transfer of Gasoline, was adopted in June of 1991. For the 2014

amendments, the District proposes to rename this rule “Gasoline Dispensing Facilities.” The rule will 

effectively require existing Aboveground Storage Tanks (ASTs) and Underground Storages Tanks 

(USTs) with Phase I vapor recovery to perform annual leak tests. Also, all newly installed ASTs will be 

required to meet the Phase I Enhanced Vapor Recovery (EVR) and the Standing Loss Control (SLC)

requirements, whereas the newly installed USTs will only need to meet the Phase I EVR requirements, 

since SLC requirements aren’t applicable to USTs. These new requirements will demonstrate a 98% 

control efficiency for vapors displaced during the loading of gasoline into the storage tanks. 

To help clarify and organize the requirements in Rule 3.8, some of the existing requirements from the 

rule, specifically those regarding bulk facilities and dispensing into gasoline delivery vessels, will be 

moved to Rule 3.9. 

Gasoline Dispensing Facilities are generally categorized into two separate groups: retail and non-retail 

facilities. The changes to Rule 3.8 will mainly be affecting those non-retail facilities because the retail 

facilities already have to comply with the Benzene Airborne Toxic Control Measure (ATCM) as adopted 

by the California Air Resources Board (CARB). The Benzene ATCM is more restrictive than proposed 

Rule 3.8, mainly because retail facilities have a much higher throughput of gasoline than non-retail 

facilities, so control requirements have been mandated on retail facilities since 1988. 

The District has around 60 permitted non-retail gasoline storage tanks within Yuba and Sutter counties. 

Amendments to these rules are expected to lower VOC emissions from gasoline dispensing facilities in 

the District by 0.15 tons per year.

2.0 Background:

Ozone

Ozone is formed when volatile organic compounds (VOCs) react with nitrogen oxides (NOx) in the 

presence of sunlight, and is one component of smog. It is a strong irritant that attacks the respiratory 

system and leads to the damage of lung tissues. Exposure to ozone aggravates asthma, bronchitis and 

other respiratory diseases, as well as cardiovascular diseases. VOC reductions are necessary to attain and 

maintain the state ambient air quality standard for ozone.

Ambient Air Quality Standards

The EPA and the California Air Resources Board (CARB) have adopted ambient air quality standards 

(national standards “NAAQS” and California standards “CAAQS”) to determine outdoor pollutant levels 

considered safe for the public. The standards are health-based and designed to provide protection for the 

most sensitive groups. 
Proposed Rules: 3.8 & 3.9 June 2, 2014 

- 2 -

The Clean Air Act (CAA) requires that EPA designate air districts not meeting the NAAQS as

“nonattainment” and to prepare a plan describing how the standards will be met. On the state level, the 

California Clean Air Act (CCAA) requires the District to develop a plan to achieve attainment with the 

state ozone standard. 

Gasoline Dispensing and Storage Regulations

The EPA has published several Control Techniques Guidelines (CTG) related to gasoline dispensing and 

storage. These CTGs include Design Criteria For Stage I Vapor Control Systems Gasoline Service 

Stations (November 1975); Control of Hydrocarbons From Tank Truck Gasoline Loading Terminals 

(October 1977); Control of VOC Emissions from Bulk Gasoline Plants (December 1977); Control of 

VOC Emissions from Storage of Petroleum Liquids in Fixed Roof Tanks (December 1977); and Control 

of VOC Leaks from Gasoline Tank Trucks and Vapor Collection Systems (December 1978). The CTGs 

are used to define the Reasonably Available Control Technology (RACT) standards for each specific 

source category.

In 1988 the California Air Resources Board (CARB) adopted an Airborne Toxic Control Measure 

(ATCM) to reduce public exposure to benzene from motor vehicle refueling operations at retail 

service stations. The ATCM required station owners to install vapor recovery system that were 

certified by the CARB to meet pollution control standards. The systems generally fall into 2 different 

categories: Phase I Vapor Recovery equipment and Phase II Vapor Recovery equipment. Phase I 

covers those emissions created when the transport vessels deliver the gasoline to the storage tanks 

whereas Phase II covers those emissions created from fueling the vehicles from the storage tanks. 

The initial Phase I and Phase II certifications from CARB demonstrated a 95% control efficiency. 

However, these controls were then tightened to 98% when Enhanced Vapor Recovery (EVR) systems 

were employed. In 2005, retail GDFs with USTs had to upgrade their vapor recovery equipment to Phase 

I EVR. Then, in 2009, retail GDFs with USTs were required to upgrade their vapor recovery equipment to 

Phase II EVR. 

CARB is currently focused on implementing EVR for retail GDFs with ASTs. All retail ASTs will be 

required to use a Phase I EVR system by July 1, 2014.

FRAQMD Rules 3.8/3.9 

District Rule 3.8 Storage and Transfer of Gasoline was adopted in June 1991. The Rule required gasoline 

vapors to be controlled by 90% or more during gasoline transfer from a delivery vessel into a stationary 

storage tank, except as exempted by the rule. The 1991 rule also contained requirements for bulk loading 

facilities and terminals. 

District Rule 3.9 Storage of Petroleum Products was adopted in June 1991. The 1991 rule was designed to 

control emissions of large organic liquid storage tanks that contained materials other than gasoline.

3.0 Legal Mandate:

Federal Mandates

Portions of the District were designated as nonattainment for the 1997 Ozone 8-hour NAAQS. The Sutter 

Buttes were designated subpart 1 and the southern portion of Sutter County was designated Serious

nonattainment as part of the Sacramento Federal Nonattainment Area (SFNA), which also includes all of 

Sacramento and Yolo counties and portions of Placer, El Dorado, and Solano counties. The District is

required to evaluate the local District rules to determine whether all Reasonably Available Control 
Proposed Rules: 3.8 & 3.9 June 2, 2014 

- 3 -

Technologies (RACT) are being implemented in areas that are designated as moderate nonattainment and 

above, such as in the SFNA.

An analysis of the existing CTGs was required as part of the RACT analysis, and was due to the EPA by 

September 2006. The District completed its RACT analysis, and upon review, it was determined to be 

deficient in regards to Rule 3.8 not meeting all of the control requirements in the CTGs. Since the District 

has gasoline storage tanks located in the SFNA, the District is required to amend Rule 3.8 to be as 

stringent as the CTG. Once amended, the District will also have to submit Rule 3.8 to the State 

Implementation Plan to correct the deficiency.

State Mandates

The CCAA requires areas designated as nonattainment for ozone to develop a plan, in accordance with 

section 40913 of California Health and Safety Code (CH&S Code), to achieve California’s ambient air 

quality standard by the earliest practical date by adopting cost-effective control measures.

The SFNA portion of Sutter County is designated as “severe” nonattainment for the state ozone standard. 

CH&S Code section 40920 requires the District to adopt a control measure that will use Best Available 

Retrofit Control Technology (BARCT) for all existing stationary sources in this area. BARCT, as defined 

in the CH&S Code, is as “an emission limitation that is based on the maximum degree of reduction 

achievable, taking into account environmental, energy and economical impacts by each class or category 

of source.

Yuba County and the northern area of Sutter County are designated as “nonattainment-transitional” for 

the state ozone standard. CH&S Code section 40925.5 requires the District to adopt a control measure that 

will use RACT for all existing stationary sources in these areas.

All Feasible Measures Requirements

CH&S Code section 40914 requires the District’s plan to demonstrate that the plan includes “every 

feasible measure" to control emissions. All feasible control measures are those which have the most 

effective regulatory emissions standards demonstrated in California’s air districts. 

The District has evaluated the standards in the rule against similar requirements recently adopted by other 

districts. The District has determined that the standards are feasible and have been achieved in practice.

4.0 Proposed Rule Requirements:

For this rule amendment, the District is focusing on non-retail tanks since they are not subject to the 

Benzene ATCM. The District is proposing to require annual testing on some of the existing storage tanks 

and requiring all new tanks to meet the current CARB Phase I EVR and SLC standards. These control 

requirements have been proven to be effective at controlling the VOC emissions from retail gasoline 

storage tanks, and so they should be equally effective at controlling the VOC emissions from non-retail 

tanks.

The District has reviewed the potential rule requirements for Phase II systems, but has chosen not to 

include them in this rule development proceeding. For many districts in serious or severe nonattainment designations for ozone, there was a need for immediate emission reductions and so Phase 

II requirements were a cost effective implementation choice. However, since 1998, EPA has required 

manufacturers to phase in new vehicles equipped with an Onboard Refueling Vapor Recovery 

(ORVR) system. These ORVR systems prevent gasoline vapors from being released from the car 
Proposed Rules: 3.8 & 3.9 June 2, 2014 

- 4 -

during refueling, so they effectively perform the same function as a Phase II system on the gasoline 

storage tank. Since 2006, nearly 99% of all gasoline powered vehicles are equipped with ORVR.

On May 9, 2012, the EPA signed a notice of final rulemaking determining that ORVR systems are in 

widespread use such that it is no longer required to mandate Phase II systems. Hence, the District is 

not including any Phase II requirements in Rule 3.8. Please note that all retail gasoline stations are 

still required to maintain their Phase II systems in accordance with the CARB’s Benzene ATCM.

Rule 3.8 Changes

The District is proposing to update the rule to require CARB certified Phase I vapor recovery 

systems for all new non-retail gasoline dispensing facilities. Phase I controls target gasoline vapors 

that are generated during the transfer from the transport vessels into the stationary storage tanks. The 

current CARB certifications for Phase I Enhanced Vapor Recovery (EVR) have a 98% control 

efficiency, which is more restrictive than the current language in Rule 3.8 requiring only 90% 

control.

The District has permitted a number of non-retail tanks over the last two decades using the 90% 

provision. The majority of these tanks have an extremely low gasoline throughput, and so it was 

determined to not be cost effective to retrofit or replace these tanks to meet the new requirements. If 

these existing tanks are replaced, the replacements tanks will be required to meet the new Phase I 

control requirements at the time of replacement.

The District also has a number of non-retail tanks that were installed prior to June 1991, which were 

exempted from the 90% control requirement if the monthly throughput for the tank was 25,000 

gallons per month or less. The District has reduced the monthly throughput exemption from the 

Phase I requirements to 10,000 gallons per month in accordance with the CTG. 

Gasoline dispensing equipment is also subject to wear and tear during its use, which may cause a 

tank to constantly leak vapors. The District has previously required all permitted tanks to have a 

maintenance and inspection schedule so that obvious defects can be fixed. However, some leaks may 

be harder to detect. The District will be requiring each tank that has a 90% Phase I control efficiency 

or higher to annually demonstrate that the tank is vapor tight through CARB Test Procedure TP201.3,TP-201.3B, or TP-206.3, as applicable. These tests, which are known as the Static Pressure 

Decay Test, involve pressuring a gasoline tank with nitrogen and then recording the tank pressure 

after 5 minutes. If the tank loses too much pressure, then there is a leak that needs to be fixed. 

Comparison of Similar Gasoline Rules enacted in the State

As stated earlier, numerous districts across California have already enacted similar gasoline rules. 

Since there are a few variations in the requirements stated in these rules, a side-by-side comparison 

was performed. These comparisons can be seen below in Table 1. 
Proposed Rules: 3.8 & 3.9 June 2, 2014 

- 5 -

Table 1: Comparison of District Rules

FRAQMD

Proposed Rule

Other District Limits

Sac Metro

AQMD

Yolo-Solano

AQMD

Placer

APCD

Bay Area

AQMD

Rule Number 3.8 448 2.22 213 8.7

Rule Date 6/2/2014 2/26/2009 Draft 2/12/2014 2/21/2013 11/6/2002

Applicability

Exemption Levels

Tanks <250 gallons Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes

Agricultural Tanks Yes Yes Yes <550 gallons <550 gallons

Requirements

Executive Order Required Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes

Annual Static Decay Test Yes Yes Yes No Yes

The main variation between the various District rules is whether to require agricultural tanks to meet 

the rule standards. Since FRAQMD has historically exempted these tanks used exclusively in 

agricultural operations, FRAQMD is not looking to set rule standards for them at this time. 

Rule 3.9 Changes

The changes being made to Rule 3.9 are primarily for clarity. No new standards are being introduced at 

this time. Rule 3.8 was simplified to contain the requirements for only gasoline dispensing facilities, so 

the standards for gasoline bulk plants, terminals, and delivery vessels were transferred into Rule 3.9.

5.0 Socioeconomic Impact:

Yuba and Sutter Counties have a combined population of less than 500,000 persons. The Required 

Assessment in subsection (d) of the California Health and Safety Code (Section 40728.5) states, “This 

section does not apply to any district with a population of less than 500,000 persons.” A socioeconomic 

impact analysis is not required.

6.0 Emission Impacts of the Proposed Rule:

Staff estimates that there will be around 30 existing tanks which may require slight adjustments, such as 

purchasing a pressure-vacuum valve. These tanks would also be required to be tested annually to make 

sure that they are vapor tight. The District anticipates the rule to save around a 0.13 tons/year of VOC 

from existing tanks from being emitted into the atmosphere. This number is based on emission factors 

provided by the 1997 CAPCOA Gasoline Service Station Industry Wide Risk Assessment as it applies to 

the 2012 reported throughput numbers for non-retail stations in Yuba and Sutter.

Staff estimates that there will be 1-2 new storage tanks installed per year in the future. Since these tanks 

will be required to use Phase I EVR, there will be an anticipated savings of around 0.02 tons/year of VOC 

due to the higher control efficiencies.
Proposed Rules: 3.8 & 3.9 June 2, 2014 

- 6 -

7.0 Estimated Cost Impact:

CH&S Code section 40703 requires the District, in the process of the adoption of any rule or regulation, 

to consider and make public its findings related to the cost effectiveness of the rule. Cost effectiveness for 

rulemaking purposes is calculated by dividing the cost of air pollution controls required by the rule by the 

amount of air pollution reduced. 

The majority of Air Districts within California have had the requirement to install and maintain CARB 

certified pre-EVR Phase I systems on their non-retail tanks since the 1990s. To meet this pre-EVR 

requirement, tanks in Yuba and Sutter would need to install a pressure-vacuum valve and be tested for 

leaks once per year. The pressure vacuum valve is estimated to cost around $80 whereas the annual test is 

estimated to cost around $500 per test. These requirements have been widely accepted as being cost 

effective in reducing VOC emissions across the state of California.

New tanks will be required to meet the Phase I EVR standard. The slight increase in costs to install EVR 

equipment as opposed to pre-EVR requirement were found to be negligible when compared to the total 

cost of the installation. Hence, this requirement was also found to be cost effective.

8.0 Environmental Review and Compliance:

The amendments to Rule 3.8 and Rule 3.9 are categorically exempt from the California Environmental 

Quality Act (CEQA) under Sections 15307 and 15308 of the State CEQA Guidelines and no exceptions 

to these exemptions apply. This exemption is allowed when the rule will help improve air quality in Yuba 

and Sutter County. California Public Resources Code (Section 21159) requires an environmental analysis 

of the reasonably foreseeable methods of compliance. The District has concluded that no reasonably 

foreseeable adverse environmental impacts will be caused by adoption of the proposed rule.

9.0 Required Findings:

The California Health and Safety Code, Division 26, Air Resources, requires local Districts to comply 

with a rule adoption protocol as set forth in Section 40727 of the Code. This section has been revised 

through legislative mandate to contain 6 findings that the District must make when developing, amending, 

or repealing a rule. These findings and their definitions are listed in the following table.
Proposed Rules: 3.8 & 3.9 June 2, 2014 

- 7 -

Table 2: Required Findings

FINDING DEFINITION REFERENCE

Authority A district shall adopt rules and regulations and 

do such acts as may be necessary or proper to 

execute the powers and duties granted to, and 

imposed upon, the district by this division and 

other statutory provisions

California Health and Safety Code, Sections 

40000, 40001, and 40702 are provisions of 

law that provide air districts with the 

authority to adopt these proposed rules.

Necessity The District has demonstrated that a need for 

the rule, or for rule amendment or repeal.

It is necessary for districts to adopt these 

amendments to comply with state law and to 

ensure consistency with neighboring air 

districts.

Clarity The rule is written or displayed so that its 

meaning can easily be understood by the 

persons directly affected by it

There is no indication, at this time, that the 

proposed rules are written in such a manner 

that it cannot be easily understood by 

persons affected by the rules.

Consistency This rule is in harmony with, and not in conflict 

with or contradictory to, existing statutes, court 

decisions, or State or federal regulations.

These rules are consistent with applicable 

statutory requirements.

NonDuplicationThe rule does not impose the same requirements 

as an existing State or federal regulation, unless 

the District finds that the requirements are 

necessary and proper to execute the powers and 

duties granted to, and imposed upon, the district

The proposed rules do not impose 

requirements that duplicate existing laws or 

regulations.

Reference Any statute, court decision, or other provision of 

law that the district implements, interprets, or 

makes specific by adopting, amending, or 

repealing a regulation.

The proposed rules have been developed to 

meet the requirements of the State 

Implementation Plan.

10.0 References:

- Federal Register Notice – Air Quality: Widespread use for Onboard Refueling Vapor Recovery and 

Stage II Waiver, 77 FR 28772, Published May 16, 2012. 

- Benzene Airborne Toxic Control Measure (ATCM) for Retail Service Stations, Title 17, Cal. Code 

Regulations, Section 93100, Adopted May 13, 1988. 

- Design Criteria for Stage I Vapor Control Systems Gasoline Service Stations, Published November 

1975. 
APPENDIX A

Rule Analysis
APPENDIX B

Public Notice
APPENDIX C

Comments and Responses