UNITED STATES ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY REGION IX AIR DIVISION

Technical Support Document for The EPA ’ s Notice of Proposed Rulemaking for the California State Implementation Plan

The EPA ’ s Evaluation of

Antelope Valley Air Quality Management District, 8

- Hour Reasonably Available Control Technology

– State Implementation Plan Analysis (RACT SIP Analysis)

- Adopted September 19, 2006

“ 2006 RACT SIP TSD ”

Prepared by: Ja mes Shears and Stanley Tong Reviewed by: Andrew Steckel

November 2016- 2

- RULE IDENTIFICATION

-
Agency: Antelope Valley Air Quality Management District ( AV AQMD)

SIP Approved Version : There is no previous SIP approved AV AQMD RACT SIP for the 1997 8

- hour ozone standard.

Subject of this TSD: AV AQMD 8

- Hour Reasonably Available Control Technology

– State Implementation Plan Analysis (RACT SIP Analysis) Adopted

– September 19, 2006 Submitted

– January 31, 2007

Completeness Finding: Complete by operation of law: July 31, 2007

BACKGROUND

-
Volatile organic compounds (VOC) and nitrogen oxides (NOx) in the presence of sunlight can lead to the formation of ground

- level ozone or “ smog ” which can result in significant impacts to human health and the e nvironment

. Section 182 of the Clean Air Act (CAA) requires areas that are classified as moderate or above for ozone nonattainment to implement reasonably available control technology (RACT) for specific types of sources. The Antelope Valley Air Quality Management District ( AV AQMD) falls under this requirement as the District was classified as a moderate ozone nonattainment area for the 1997 8

- hour national ambient air quality standard (“NAAQS”) at the time it adopted its RACT SIP and was sub sequently

re classified as a severe 1 ozone nonattainment area for the 1997 8

- hour NAAQS for ozone (40 CFR 81.305).

Under CAA § 182(b)(2) and (f), AV AQMD must, at a minimum, adopt RACT level controls for sources covered by a Control Techniques Guidelines (CTG) document and for any major stationary source of VOC or NOx

. The EPA defines RACT as the “ lowest emissions limitation that a particular source is cap able of meeting by the application of control technology that is reasonably available considering technological and economic feasibility. ” 44 FR 53761 (September 17, 1979)

. A RACT analysis should, therefore, take into account the technological

1 Effective June 15, 2004, EPA designated and classified the ‘‘Los Angeles and San Bernardino Counties (Western Mojave Desert)’’ area in California under the CAA as ‘‘Subpart 2/ Moderate’’ nonattainment for the 1997 8

- hour ozone NAAQS. See 69 FR 23858, at 23884 (April 30, 2004). On May 8, 2012 ( 77 FR 26950 ), the EPA granted the State of California’s request to reclassify the Western Mojave Desert ozone nonattainment area from “Moderate” to “Severe

- 15” for the 1997 8

- hour ozone NAAQS. The Western Mojave Desert ozone nonattainment area includes the Antelope Valley AQMD and Mojave D esert AQMD. The EPA evaluated AVAQMD’s 2006 RACT SIP submittal as a moderate ozone nonattainment area since the District adopted its 2006 certification based on that classification. On March 13, 2014 AVAQMD provided additional information to supplement its 2006 RACT SIP, to address the EPA’s September 11, 2006 comments on the 2006 RACT SIP, and to address several CTGs that were issued between 2006 and 2008.

On October 23, 2015, AVAQMD submitted a RACT SIP analysis for the 2008 8

- hour ozone NAAQS, based on i ts classification as a “severe” ozone nonattainment area. We are reviewing that submittal in a separate technical support document (TSD).- 3

- and economi c feasibility of controls, and may differ from source to source and location to location.

RACT applies to existing sources in nonattainment areas and differs from the more stringent lowest achievable emission rate (LAER) controls required for new and modi fied major sources in nonattainment areas

. LAER is defined in 40 CFR 51.165(a)(1)(xiii) as “ the most stringent emissions limitation which is contained in the implementation plan of any State for such class or category of source

... or ... the most stringent emi ssions limit which is achieved in practice by such class or category of stationary sources. ” See also CAA Section 171(3)

. Unlike LAER, RACT allows for consideration of the economic impact of the controls

. Therefore, if a certain type of emission control or emission limitation is determined to be too costly in light of the amount of emission reduction it achieves, that control might not be considered RACT

. Also, as economic factors may vary within a State and between different States, a control technology or emission limitation approved as RACT in one location does not necessarily define RACT for another location

. RACT also differs from Maximum Available Control Technology (MACT), which is the level of control required for sources of hazardous air polluta nts (HAPs) in the National Emission Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutants ( NESHAPs ) set by the EPA. CAA Section 112(d)(3) requires that control requirements for a NESHAP shall not be less stringent than the emissions control that is achieved in practice b y the best controlled similar source for new sources, and the average emission limitation achieved by the best performing 12 percent for existing sources (commonly known as the “MACT floor”). Accordingly, a NESHAP is generally expected to be as stringent a s RACT. However, there are a few instances where this may not be true. These cases include situations where the NESHAP was promulgated a number of years ago and has not been updated, where the NESHAP has a higher applicability threshold (e.g., applies only to major sources of HAPs) or where it applies only to a limited number of compounds (e.g., only HAPs and not all VOCs).

Section IV.G of the EPA ’ s final rule to implement the 1997 8

- hour ozone NAAQS ( 70 FR 71612 , November 29, 2005) discusses RACT requirements

. It states in part that where a RACT SIP is required, State SIPs implementing the 8

- hour standard must assure that RACT is met, either through a certification that previously required RACT controls represent RACT for 8

- hour implementation purposes or through a new RACT determination

. 70 FR 71612 at 71655.

The preamble to the final rule further explain s that “ [ m ] any areas subject to the major source RACT requirement under the 8

- hour ozone standard have previously addressed the RACT requirement with respect to the 1

- hour ozone standard.... We believe that, in many cases, a new RACT determination under the 8

- hour standard would result in the same or similar control technology as the initial RACT determination under the 1

- hour standard because the fundamental control techniques, as described in the CTGs and ACTs, are still applicable. ” 70 FR 71612 at 71654.- 4

- It also explains that “ States and other interested parties should consider available information that may supplement the CTG and ACT documents. In cases where additional informati on is presented, for example, as part of notice

- and

- comment rulemaking on a RACT SIP submittal, States (and the EPA) would necessarily consider the additional data in reviewing what control obligation is consistent with RACT...

. [ T ] he State should submit a certification as part of its SIP revision, with appropriate supporting information, such as consideration of new data, that these sources are already subject to SIP

- approved requirements that still meet the RACT obligation. ” 70 FR at 71612 at 71655.

To help California and its local air districts with their RACT SIP certifications, on March 9, 2006, EPA Region IX sent a letter to the California Air Resource s Board (CARB) and local air districts discussing EPA Region IX ’ s understanding of what might constitute a minimally acceptable RACT SIP submittal

. In that letter we reminded States that we believed they must consider new information that has become availa ble and certify that a 1

- hour RACT determination, even where controls were required, still represent an appropriate RACT level of control for the 8

- hour ozone program

. The letter offered the following suggestions to be included in a RACT SIP analysis and i ndicated that the more rigorous the analysis and aggressive the requirements, the more likely the EPA would be able to approve them:

• Describe efforts to identify all source categories within the District requiring RACT, including CTG sources (i.e., covere d by an EPA Control Techniques Guidelines document) and major non

- CTG sources.

• Submit negative declarations where there are no facilities (major or minor) within the District covered by a CTG.

• For all categories subject to RACT, list the state/local regu lation that implements RACT

.

• Describe the basis for concluding that the regulations fulfill RACT

. Documents useful in establishing RACT include CTGs, Alternative Control Technique guidance (ACTs), MACT standards, New Source Performance Standards (NSPS), California Suggested Control Measures (SCM) and RACT/Best Available Retrofit Control Technology (BARCT) determinations, regulations adopted in other Districts, and guidance and rules developed by other states and local agencies.

• Where a District relies on the California Air Pollution Control Officer Association ’ s (CAPCOA ’ s) September 2003, Potential All Feasible Measures (AFM) Report to help demonstrate RACT, the RACT SIP should certify that the local regulations are equivalent to AFM, justify the assumpti on that the AFM fulfilled RACT in 2003, and include a certification/demonstration that no additional controls have become more reasonably available since then.

Where public commenters submit specific information to a State about controls that are reasonab ly available in light of technological and economic feasibility, the State should consider such information in developing its RACT SIP

. The EPA generally considers controls- 5

- that have been achieved in practice by a significant number of sources to be techno logically and economically feasible.

SUBMITTAL SUMMARY

–
The District adopted its RACT SIP certification for the 1997 ozone standard on September 19, 2006 and the California Air Resources Board (CARB) submitted it to the EPA on January 31, 2007

. AV AQMD performed its RACT SIP analysis based on an ozone non

- attainment classification of “ moderate ” 2 . This classification defines a major source as those facilities that emit or have the potential to emit at least 100 tons per year (tpy) of VOC or NOx. See CAA Section s 182(b)(2)(C), 182(f), and 302(j).

AV AQMD’s submittal included the following documents:

a. “ 8

- Hour R easonably Available Control Technology

– State Implementation Plan Analysis (RACT SIP Analysis) ”, dated August 2006 [hereinafter “ 20 06 RACT SIP ” ]

.

b. Resolution 06

- 07, “A Resolution of the Governing Board of the Antelope Valley Air Quality Management District Making Findings, Certifying the Notice of Exemption, Adopting the 8

- Hour Reasonably Available Control Technology

– State Implementation Plan Ana lysis (RACT SIP Analysis) and Directing Staff Actions”, dated September 19, 2006.

c. AVAQMD also separately provided a supplemental analysis titled, “8

- Hour Ozone Reasonably Available Control Technology RACT State Implementation Plan (SIP) Analysis

– Supplem ental Analysis”, dated March 13, 2014 , to address the EPA’s September 11, 2006 comments on the 2006 RACT SIP [hereinafter “2014 Supplemental Analysis”]

.

AV AQMD’s analysis included the following areas. Further discussion is provided below.

• E valuation of AV AQMD Rules and Regulations

• M ajor non

- CTG sources identified

• Negative declarations

EPA EVALUATION

–

The EPA evaluated t he following elements of AV AQMD ’ s 20 06 RACT SIP and its 2014 S upplemental A nalysis :

• Efforts to identify all source categories within the District requiring RACT

• N egative declarations where there are no facilities subject to a CTG

• The bases for concluding all local regulations fulfill RACT

2 2006 RACT SIP page 5.- 6

- T he following documents were also used to support our review:

• “ Final Rule to Implement the 8

- Hour Ozone National Ambient Air Quality Standard

– Phase 2 ” ( 70 FR 71612 ; November 29, 2005).

• “ 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).

• Enforceability

- Section 110(a) of the CAA requires enforceable emission limitations and other control measures. Several EPA guidance documents are used to evaluate rule enforceability, including “ Issues Relating to VOC Regulation Cutpoints, Deficiencies, and Deviations

, ” EPA, M ay 25, 1988 (The Blue Book), and “ Guidance Document for Correcting Common VOC & Other Rule Deficiencies, ” EPA Region 9, August 21, 2001 (the Little Bluebook).

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

• Memorandum from William T. Harnett to Regiona l Air Division Directors, (May 18, 2006),

“ RACT Qs & As

– Reasonably Available Control Technology (RACT) Questions and Answers ”

.

• RACT SIPs, Letter dated March 9, 2006 from EPA Region IX (Andrew Steckel) to CARB (Kurt Karperos) describing Region IX ’ s unders tanding of what constitutes a minimally acceptable RACT SIP.

• Letter dated April 4, 2006 from EPA Region IX (Andrew Steckel) to CARB (Kurt Karperos) listing the EPA ’ s current CTGs, ACTs, and other documents which may help to establish RACT.

• EPA ’ s CTGs and ACTs : https://www.epa.gov/ozone

- pollution/control

- techniques

guidelines

- and

- alternative

- control

- techniques

- documents

- reducing

• CARB ’ s emissions inventory database http://www.arb.ca.gov/app/em sinv/facinfo/facinfo.php

• AV AQMD , CARB

, and EPA Region IX databases of AV AQMD rules AV AQMD : http://avaqmd.ca.gov/rule

- book CARB: http://www.arb.ca.gov/rldb/rldb.htm EPA: http://www.epa.gov/approved

- sips/approved

- sips

- region

- 9

The following summarizes AV AQMD actions to address RACT requirements and the EPA ’ s evaluation of those actions.

**1. Efforts to identify all source categories within the District requiring RACT**

AVAQMD action : The August 2006 RACT SIP included the following document s :

• “Appendix A

– RACT Evaluation Table” identified all source categories covered by a CTG document. For each source category, the table either referred to an AVAQMD rule which the District asserts implemented RACT, or indicated that there were no sources in the source category.- 7

- • “Table 1

– Major Source Table” identified all major sources, including those that are not covered by a CTG document. Since AVAQMD is classified as a moderate ozone nonattainment area, a major source in AVAQMD is defined as a source that emits or has the po tential to emit at least 100 tons per year of VOC or NOx (CAA 182(b)(2), (f) , and 302(j) ). Table 1 (duplicated below) is AVAQMD’s listing of all facilities that have submitted applications for Tit le V Federal Operating Permits and the current relevant RACT guidance that applies to the source. AVAQMD’s Title V Federal Operating Permit Program

- Rule 3001 defines “major facility” in the federal ozone nonattainment area as a facility which emits or has the potential to emit 25 tons per year or more of VOC or N Ox emissions. 3

The 2006 RACT SIP states that t wo facilities in Table 1 , Antelope Valley Public Landfill and Lancaster Landfill and Recycling Center, are not major source s of ozone precursors. Northrup

Grumman and Lockheed Martin Skunk Works have a potent ial to emit ( PTE ) that exceed s the threshold for major sources of VOCs. A VAQMD states that Rule 1124, Aerospace Assembly and Com ponent Manufacturing Operations applies to both facilities.

Table 1

- Major Source Table

Source FOP * Description Applicable RACT Northrop

- Grumman 10231816 Aerospace research, development and manufacturing RACT applicable to control of VOC's from aerospace coatings and cleaning solvents use at existing aerospace manufacturing and rework operations including contractors and subcontractors

- 1124 Aerospace Assembly and Component Manufacturing Operations Lockheed Martin Skunk Works 9701754 Aerospace research, development and manufacturing RACT applicable to control of VOC's from aerospace coatings and cleaning solvents use at existing aerospace manufacturing and rework operations including contractors and subcontractors

- 1124 Aerospace Assembly and Component Manufacturing Operations Antelope Valley Public Landfill 121002106 Municipal solid waste disposal Not a major source of ozone precursors

Lancaster Landfill & Recycling Center 122802129 Municipal solid waste disposal Not a major source of ozone precursors

*FOP = Federal Operating Permit

EPA evaluation: For the CTG source categories, w e reviewed AVAQMD’s 2006 RACT SIP, Appendix A, listing of CTG s and the D istrict rules implementing those CTGs

. Specifically, for each CTG source category, AVAQMD identified whether it had a District r ule covering the CTG 4

, the District’s

3 See Regulation XXX, Rule 3001, Definitions (4/19/05), paragraph (S) “Major Facility” at http://avaqmd.ca.gov/rule

- book

. 4 Although AVAQMD’s September 2006 Final Staff Report Executive Summary ( p g . 1 ) incorrectly describes the CAA RACT requirement s to apply to “ major ” CTG sources, AVAQMD did use the correct criteria to identify all sources and source categories that are subject to the RACT Analysis (see p.9 of the August 2006 RACT SIP Analysis).- 8

- conclusion whether the rule met RACT, and any proposed action such as adopting a negative declaration or updating the rule to meet current RACT. Our September 11, 2006 comment letter listed seven rules that require d additional discussion on how they satisf ied RACT and listed eight other rules that may need to be submitted for SIP approval if they were required to implement RACT. AVAQMD’s 2014 Supplemental Analysis address es our comments on these rules . O ur evaluation of AVAQMD’s responses is provided in section 4 below.

For major stationary sources of VOCs or NOx , w e reviewed CARB’s emissions inventory database to determine if there were any major sources potentially missing from Table 1 of AVAQMD’s 2006 RACT SIP analysis . CARB’s emissions inventory for 2006 indicates the largest VOC source w as Lockheed Martin at 19.8 tpy and the largest NOx source w as Granite Construction at 57.2 tpy 5 , both well below the 100 tpy major source threshold for moderate ozone nonattainment areas.

AVAQMD indicated that approximately 95% of the VOC PTE emissions 6 at Northrup

- Grumman and Lockheed Martin Skunk Works are covered under Rule 1124, Aerospace and Component Manufacturing Operations (8/20/13), which was approved into the SIP on October 5, 2015 ( 80 FR 60040 ).

CARB’s 2006 emissions inventory also indicates both Antelope Valley Public Landfill (3.3 tpy) and Lancaster Landfill (2.7 tpy) have actual reactive organic compounds emissions well below the major source threshold.

Aside from the sources already identified in AVAQMD’s Table 1, there do not appear to be any other major non

- CTG sources. Based on Table 1 and Appendix A, we propose to conclude that AVAQMD properly identified all major non

- CTG sources requiring RACT, and identified all CTG source categories which require RACT.

**2. Submit negative declarations where there are no facilities subject to a CTG**

In lieu of adopting RACT rules, Districts may adopt negative declarations for CTG source categories if there are no sources in the District covered by the CTG. A negative declaration is not required for ACTs or for other non

- CTG source categories.

On January 31, 2007, AVAQMD submitted n egative d eclaratio ns for 14 CTG categories 7 and on January 7, 2011, it submi tted negative d eclarations for 3 additional CTG categories. The EPA approved AVAQMD’s negative declaration submittals on July 1, 2011 ( 76 FR 38572 ).

5 2006 CARB emissions inventory for Antelope Valley AQMD and email from V. Rausch (AV) to S. Tong (EPA) Re: Request for 2 AV permits, dated July, 5, 2016.

6 Email from T. Walters (AV) to J. Shears (EPA) Re: AV RACT SIP more questions, dated April 19, 2016.

7 Antelope Valley submitted 51 negative declarations. EPA determined, however, that only 14 of these w ere actually CTG categories that required a negative declaration, and that the remainder were for ACTs or other documents that do not require the adoption or submittal of a negative declaration. See EPA’s September 11, 2006- 9

- Table 1

– AVAQMD Negative Declarations

CTG Source Category CTG Reference Document Large Appliances, Surface Coatings EPA

- 450/2

- 77

- 034, Control of Volatile Organic Emissions from Existing Stationary Sources

– Volume V: Surface Coating of Large Appliances Wood Furniture Surface Coating EPA

- 453/R

- 96

- 007, Control of VOC Emissions from Wood Furniture Manufacturing Operations Gasoline Bulk Plants EPA

- 450/2

- 77

- 035, Control of Volatile Organic Emissions from Bulk Gasoline Plants Equipment Leaks from Natural Gas/Gasoline Processing Plants EPA

- 450/2

- 83

- 007, Control of Volatile Organic Compound Equipment Leaks from Natural Gas/Gasoline Processing Plants Leaks from Petroleum Refinery Equipment EPA

- 450/2

- 78

- 036, Control of Volatile Organic Compound Leaks from Petroleum Refinery Equipment Air Oxidation Processes (SOCMI) EPA

- 450/3

- 84

- 015 , Control of Volatile Organic Compound Emissions from Air Oxidation Process in Synt hetic Organic Chemical Manufacturing Industry (SOCMI) Reactor and Distillation Processes (SOCMI) EPA

- 450/4

- 91

- 031 , Control of Volatile Organic Compound Emissions from Reactor Process and Distillation Operations in SOCMI Tank Truck Gasoline Loading Termin als>76,000 L EPA

- 450/2

- 77

- 026, Control of Hydrocarbons from Tank Truck Gasoline Loading Terminals Manufacture of Synthesized Pharmaceutical Products EPA

- 450/2

- 78

- 029, Control of Volatile Organic Emissions from Manufacture of Synthesized Pharmaceutical Products Manufacture of Pneumatic Rubber Tires EPA

- 450/2

- 78

- 030, Control of Volatile Organic Emissions from Manufacture of Pneumatic Rubber Tires Manufacture of High

- Density Polyethylene, Polypropylene, and Polystyrene Resins EPA

- 450/3

- 83

- 008, Control of Volatile Organic Compound Emissions from Manufacture of High

- Density Polyethylene, Polypropylene, and Polystyrene Resins Equipment used in Synthetic Organic Chemical Polymers and Resin Manufacturing EPA

- 450/3

- 83

- 006, Control of Volatile Organic Compound Leaks from Synthetic Organic Chemical Polymer and Resin Manufacturing Equipment Refinery Vacuum Producing Systems, Wastewater Separators, and Process Unit Turnarounds EPA

- 450/2

- 77

- 025, Control of Refinery Vacuum Producing Systems, Wastewater Separators, and Process Unit Turnarounds

Magnet Wire Coating EPA

- 450/2

- 77

- 033, Control of Volatile Organic Emissions from Existing Stationary Sources, Volume IV: Surface Coating of Insulation of Magnet Wire Ship Repair Operations * 61 FR 44050 and EPA

- 453/R

- 94

- 032 Control Techniques Guidelines for Shipbuilding and Ship Repair Operations (Surface Coating) Storage of Petroleum Liquids in Fixed Roof Tanks * EPA

- 450/2

- 77

- 036

, Control of Volatile Organic Emissions from Storage of Petroleum Liquids in Fixed

- Roof Tanks Petroleum Liquid Storage in External Floating Roof Tanks * EPA

- 450/2

- 78

- 047

, Control of Volatile Organic Emissions from Petroleum Liquid Storage in External Floating Roof Tanks *These negative declarat ions were submitted on 1/7/2011.

comment letter Re: 8

- hour Ozone Reasonably Available Control Technology

- State Implementation Plan (RACT SIP) Analysis, dated August 2006 for additional details.- 10

- On February 17, 2004, AVAQMD rescinded Rule 1125, Metal Container, Closure, and Coil Coating Operations

. 8 AVAQMD should adopt a n updated negative declaration for the can coating portion of the CTG for Control of Volatile Organic Emissions from Existing Stationary Sources

- Volume II: Surface Coating of Cans, Coils, Paper, Fabrics, Automobiles, and Light

Duty Trucks (EPA

- 450/2

- 77

- 008 )

. **3. List the State/local regulations that implement RACT and 4. Describe the basis for concluding that all regulation**  **s fulfill RACT**

Rules needing further clarification that they still represent RACT if needed for RACT

AVAQMD action: AVAQMD’s 2006 RACT SIP Appendix A list s CTG s and non

- CTG source categories and match es those categories with corresponding District rules which implement RACT. The District generally concluded that the majority of its rules , with the exception of three rules (Rule 1124

– Aerospace Assembly and Component Manufacturing Operations; Rule 1110 E missions from Stationary Internal Combustion Engines (demonstration); and Rule 1110.2 Emissions from Stationary Internal Combustion Engines) met RACT and required no further action. 9

EPA evaluation:

• Rule 1124, Aerospace Assembly and Component Manufacturi ng Operations ( 12/13/96): AVAQMD concluded Rule 1 124 needed amending to implement RACT.

o Complete

– EPA approved Rule 1124 (8/20/13) into the SIP on October 5, 2015 ( 80 FR 60040 ).

• Rule 1110, Emissions from Stationary I nternal Combustion Engines (Demonstration) (11/6/81): AVAQMD concluded Rule 1110 no longer applies due to termination of the South Coast Air Quality Management District ( SCAQMD ) demonstration program and AVAQMD had no demonstration engines. AVAQMD rescinded Rule 1110 on January 15, 2013.

o Complete

– EPA approved the rescission on October 5, 2015 ( 80 FR 60040 ).

• Rule 1110.2, Emissions from Stationary, Non

- road & Portable Internal Combustion Engines ( 1 / 21 /0 3 ) : AVAQMD concluded Rule 1110.2 needs to be updated to meet current RACT by removing the agricultural exemption and addressing other EPA comments identified in EPA’s proposed limited approval/limited disapproval (69 FR 2148 2 , April 21, 2004).

o Inc omplete

– Rule 1110.2 ( 01/21/03 ) was submitted to the EPA on 04/01/03. On 4/21/04, the EPA proposed a limited approval/disapproval but did not finalize the action. The Dis trict’s 2014 Supplemental Analysis states the District will update the rule and/or adopt a separate agriculture internal combustion engine rule.

8 EPA approved this rescission on September 21, 2004 ( 69 FR 56355 ).
9 2006 RACT SIP, Chapter 3

, p g . 16

- 17

.- 11

- Rules needing further clarification that they still represent RACT if needed for RACT EPA’s September 11, 2006 comment letter 10 on AVAQMD’s 2006 RACT SIP requested additional analysis on sev eral rules to support the District’s conclusion that the rules met RACT. AVAQMD respon de d that at the time the rules were originally approved into the SIP by the EPA, the rules were determined to be “Beyond RACT.” 11 Consequently, AVAQMD stated that no further evaluation was deemed necessary.

While the rules may have satisfied RACT at the time of EPA ’s approval, RACT can change over time. EPA’s Phase II 8

- hour ozone implementation rule requires states to “...ensure that their SIPs accurately reflect RACT based on the current availability of technical ly and economically feasible controls.” ( 70 FR 71612

, 71655, November 29, 2005).

AVAQMD’s 2014 Supplemental Analysis and our evaluation of how it addresses the rules in question is provided below.

• Rule 461, Gasoline Transfer and Di spensing ( 9/8/95 ) : AVAQMD concluded Rule 461 needed amending to implement RACT.

o Complete

- EPA approved Rule 461 (10/21/08) into the SIP on January 31, 2011 ( 76 FR 5277 )

.

• Rule 462, Organic Liquid Loading (6/9/95) : Rule number was omitted from page A

- 34 of the 2006 RACT SIP

. AVAQMD concluded Rule 462 needed amending to address RACT deficiencies identified in EPA’s Proposed Rule: limited approval/disapproval ( 62 FR 26460 , May 14, 1997)

. 12

o Incomplete

- Rule not yet amended to address proposed limited approval/disapproval.

• Rule 463, Organic Liquid Storage (3/11/94) : Rule number was omitted from page A

- 34 of the 2006 RACT SIP. AVAQMD ’s 2014 Supplemental Analysis concluded Rule 463 needed amending to address RACT and that this rule was incorrectly designated as a negative declaration.

o Complete

- Subsequent discussions with AVAQMD revealed that although the Di strict has petroleum storage tanks, the tanks are below the CTG’s applicability threshold. 13 On January 7, 2011, AVAQMD submitted negative declarations for floating and fixed roof petroleum storage tanks and EPA approved them into the SIP on 76 FR 38572

10 See Table 1 in letter dated September 11, 2006, from A ndrew Steckel ( US EPA) to Alan De Salvio (AVAQMD), RE: “8

- hour Ozone Reasonably Available Control Technology

– State Implementation Plan (RACT SIP) Analysis, dated August 2006

.
11 See RACT SIP Analysis Final Staff Report dated 10/18/06

, p g. C

- 11.

12 Antelope Valley was formed from South Coast AQMD in July 1 997. We proposed a limited approval/disapproval of SCAQMD Rule 462 on May 14, 1997, prior to the separation of AVAQMD from SCAQMD. Our final rulemaking action on Rule 462 was published on November 13, 1997 ( 62 FR 60784 ), after Antelope Valley separated from SCAQMD and stated the final action was for SCAQMD and excluded Antelope Valley.

13 Email from T. Walters (AV) to S. Tong (EPA) Re: AV RACT SIP Rule 463, dated June, 29, 2016.- 12

- (7/1/11). AVAQMD’s RACT SIP submittal for the 2008 8

- hour ozone standard 14 also clarifies that this category should be a negative declaration.

• Rule 1102, Petroleum Solvent Dry Cleaners (12/7/90) : AVAQMD’s 2014 Supplemental Analysis states t his rule should be updated if it is determined to be cost effective to incorporate provisions that apply to all machines besides those using perchloroethylene ( PERC )

. o Update

– AVAQMD’s subsequ ent analysis for the 2008 8

- hour ozone RACT SIP indicate s it currently has no sources subject to the CTG. Its largest source is permitted to purchase 82 gallons annually which is well below the CTG’s 32,483 gallon applicability threshold. 15 This category sh ould be a negative declaration.

o Action

– Adopt negative declaration for EPA

- 450/3

- 82

- 009

, Control of Volatile Organic Compound Emissions from Large Petroleum Dry Cleaners

.

• Rule 1104, Wood Flat Stock Coating Operations (3/1/91) 16 : AVAQMD ’s 2014 Supplemental Analysis states this rule should be updated to reduce the VOC content of wood flat stock inks and wood flat stock coatings for exterior wood siding.

o Update

– AVAQMD’s subsequent analysis for the 2008 8

- hour ozone RACT SIP indicates there are currently no sources meeting the CTG threshold of 15 lb/day

. 17 This category should be a negative declaration.

o Action

– Adopt negative declaration for EPA

- 450/2

- 78

- 032

, Control of Volatile Organic Emissions from Existing Stationary Sources

– Volu me VII: Factory Surface Coating of Flat Wood Paneling

.

• Rule 1108, Cutback Asphalt: EPA suggested AVAQMD consider limiting the use of cutback asphalt to the fall and winter months similar to re gulations adopted by several Great Lakes States . EPA also state d that SCAQMD was evaluating the potential for limiting cutback asphalt or replacing it altogether with emulsion technology.

o Complete

– SCAQMD conclude d slow cure cutback asphalts do not emit as much VOC as suitable replacement emulsions and recommended n o changes to its rule. 18 AVAQMD accepted SCAQMD’s analysis and concluded Rule 1108 would not be amended. W e concur with SCAQMD and AVAQMD ’s evaluations.

• Rule 1146, Emissions of Oxides of Nitrogen from Industrial, Institutional, and Commercial Boilers, Stea m Generators, and Process Heaters: AVAQMD’s 2014

14 Submittal for SIP approval on October 23, 2015.

15 2015 RACT SIP, pg A

- 5.

16 AVAQMD 2006 RACT SIP pg A

- 13, lists 8/2/91 as the amended date, and was SIP approved 6/23/94 (59 FR 23255), 40 CFR 52.220(c)(186)(i)(C). The citation in 40 CFR 52.220 is for SC 110 4 (3/1/91) and not for the 8/2/91 amendments.

17 2015 RACT SIP, pg A

- 6.

18 Technical Assessment for Rule 1108

– Cutback Asphalt, South Coast Air Quality Management District, June 2008.- 13

- Supplemental Analysis states it will survey affected units for applicability and determine if it is feasible to update limits as RACT.

o Complete

- A review of CARB’s emissions inventory for 2006 indicates the largest NOx source in the District was 57.2 tpy, 19 well below the 100 tpy threshold for major stationary sources in moderate ozone nonattainment areas. RACT is required for stationary sources that are subject to a CTG and for major non

- CTG sources. CTGs cover stationary sources of VOC and EPA has not issued any CTGs covering NOx

sources . Since AVAQMD has no stationary sources of NOx that emit or have the potential to emit at least 100 tpy, this sour ce category is not subject to RACT. No further action is required at this time for RACT.

• Rule 1146.1, Emissions of Oxides of Nitrogen from Small Industrial, Institutional and Commercial Boilers, Steam Generators, and Process Heaters: AVAQMD’s 2014 Supplem ental Analysis and its 2015 RACT SIP for the 2008 8

- hour ozone standard states Rule 1146.1’s NOx limits are consistent with current RACT limits in San Joaquin Valley Unified Air Pollution Control District ( SJVUAPCD ) Rule 4307 as well as SCAQMD Rule 1146.1. It further states that t he SJVUAPCD and SCAQMD rules, as well as the TSD for the SCAQMD September 5, 2008 amendment of Rule 1146.1 will be used for updating requirements during the next rule update. The District co ncludes that n o action required at this time for RACT

. o Complete

- A review of CARB’s emissions inventory for 2006 indicates the largest NOx source in the District was 57.2 tpy, well below the 100 tpy threshold for major stationary sources in moderate ozone nonattainment areas. No further action is required at this time for RACT.

Rules that should be submitted for SIP approval if needed for RACT The EPA also checked whether the rules relied upon by the AVAQMD for their RACT SIP analysis were actually SIP

- approved and whether more recent versions of those rules had been adopted by the District but not yet submitted for SIP approval. This was done by cr oss matching EPA Region IX’s database of SIP

- approved rules against CARB’s and AVAQMD’S rules log databases. Table 2 of EPA’s September 11, 2006 comment letter listed eight rules (Rules 1110.2, 1128, 1130, 1134, 1141.1, 1145, 1168 , and 1176) that AVAQMD relied upon in its RACT SIP, but ha d not been submitted for SIP approval.

AVAQMD ’s 2006 RACT SIP ( p gs . C

- 11 to C

- 13 ) states that several of the above rules were adopted or amended by SCAQMD prior to July 1, 1997 when the Antelope Valley Air Po llution Control District ( AVAPCD ) was formed, but were not submitted as a SIP revision , or no t approved into the SIP by EPA until after the creation of AVAPCD (now AVAQMD). AVAQMD further states that EPA had not provided guidance regarding rules that were adopted or

19 Granite Construction has a permit condition limiting NOx from its stationary sources to 16.95 tpy. The operating permit does not regulate NOx from mobile sources on the facility. Antelope Valley Recycling and Disposal Company’s operating permit limits NOx emissions to 65 pounds per day (11.9 tpy). The permit also limits the internal combustion engine powering a fire pump to operating less than 200 hours per year and can only burn propane fuel, See email from V. Rausch (AV) to S. Tong (EPA) Re: Request for 2 AV permits, dated July, 5, 2016.- 14

- amended by SCAQMD prior to July 1, 1997, but submitted after the s tatutory creation of the AVAPCD , and that EPA's subsequent approval of at least several of these rules as submitted by the SCAQMD should have extended to areas under AVAQMD's jurisdiction. AVAQMD further states that in some cases it “does not have or maintain any records regarding the amendment and does not have access to such documentation and therefore cannot submit the rule as a SIP revision.” 20

The EPA does not have sufficient documentation to support th ese assertion s

. Nonetheless

, shortly after the creation of the AVAPCD on July 1, 1997, the District submitted a letter to the EPA confirming that the AVAPCD had assume d implementation authorities for SIP provisions submitted by the SCAQMD and approved by the EPA prior to July 1, 1997, but requesting that the EPA not treat pending and subsequent SIP submittals from SCAQMD as applicable to the Antelope Valley area. Specif ically, the letter request s among other things, that the EPA: (1) “[i]nclude specific notation in any currently pending SIP revisions submitted prior to July 1, 1997 by SCAQMD that such revisions, if approved, do not apply to the Antelope Valley area or AVAPCD” and (2) "[e]nsure that SIP submittals by SCAQMD after July 1, 1997 are specifically considered by USEPA to exclude the Antelope Valley area and AVAPCD. ” 21 Thus, it appears that any action by the EPA after July 1 , 1997 on a SIP rule submitted by the SCAQMD (whether submitted before or after the creation of the AVAPCD) did not apply to the Antelope Valley

area.

At least five of the eight rules that the EPA identified above appear to have been adopted by SCAQMD p rior to the creation of AVAQMD but approved by the EPA after July 1, 1997. See, e.g., 64 FR 23774 (May 4, 1999) (fully approving Rules 1128, 1130, 1141.1, and 1145) and 67 FR 62376 (October 7, 2002) (fully approving Rule 1176). Consequently, the EPA understands that these five rules were approved into the SCAQMD portion but not the AVAQMD portion of the Ca lifornia SIP.

Four of the eight rules (Rule 1128, 1130, 1134 and 1168) were subsequently submitted by the AVAQMD to the EPA , and approved into the SIP. 22

The status and evaluation of the remaining four rules are as follows:

• Rule 1110.2 Emissions from Stationary , Non

- road & Portable Internal Combustion Engines (1/21/03)

– see above

. AVAQMD concluded Rule 1110.2 needs to be updated to meet current RACT.

o Incomplete

– See earlier discussion in this section on Rule 1110.2 for additional details.

20 2006 RACT SIP pgs C12

- C13.

21 L etter from Charles Fryxell, Air Pollution Control Officer, AVAPCD, to Felicia Marcus, Regional Administrator, EPA Region IX, Re: Antel ope Valley APCD Applicable SIP, dated September 22, 19 97

.

22 Rule 1128 was rescinded on 11/19/13 and its requirements incorporated into Rule 1130. Rule 1130 (11/19/13) was SIP approved on 10/5/15 ( 80 FR 60040 ); Rule 1134 (1/19/10) was SIP approved on 1/18/12 ( 77 FR 2469 ) and Rule 1168 (9/20/11) was SIP approved on 9/20/12 ( 77 FR 58313 ).- 15

- • Rule 1141.1 Coatings and Ink Manufacturing (3/6/92): AVAQMD’s 2014 Supplemental Analysis states this rule will be updated to address deficiencies noted in the RACT rule analysis of SCAQMD Rule 1141.1 or the District will file a negative declaration.

o Complete

– This i s not a CTG category. We reviewed CARB’s 2006 emissions inventory and did not identify any major source s emitting at least 100 tpy of VOC in AVAQMD. The largest AVAQMD VOC source emitted less than 20 tpy actual emissions and is not engaged in the man ufacturing of coatings or inks

. No further action required for RACT.

• Rule 1145 Plastic, Rubber, and Glass Manufacturing (2/14/97) : AVAQMD’s 2014 Supplemental Analysis states the rule will be update d to address deficiencies noted in the RACT rule analysis of SCAQMD Rule 1145. AVAQMD also lists as an applicable CTG , EPA’s 2008 Miscellaneous Metal and Plastic Parts Coatings CTG (EPA

- 453/R

- 08

- 003)

. o Complete

– the 2008 CTG is not a required RACT element for the 1997 8

- hour ozone standard

. As stated above, AVAQM D does not appear to have any major VOC sources in this category.

• Rule 117 6 VOC Emissions from Wastewater Systems (5/13/94): AVAQMD’s 2014 Supplemental Analysis states it does not have any sources applicable to this rule and will file a negative declaration.

o Complete

– EPA’s Control of Refinery Vacuum Producing Systems, Wastewater Separators, and Process Unit Turnarounds (EPA

- 450/2

- 77

- 025) applies to controlling VOC emissions from petroleum refinery processes. AVAQMD does not have any refineries a nd does not have major sources of VOC, so this rule is not subject to RACT. AVAQMD already adopted a negative declaration for refinery wastewater separators in its 2006 RACT SIP

.

Public Comments

-
AVAQMD published a public hearing notice on August 19, 2006, and held the public hearing on September 19, 2006. The only comments received were those submitted by the EPA, and AVAQMD’s response to comments are found in p gs . C

- 11 to C

- 13 of the AVAQMD September 2006 Final Staff Report Appendix C, and p. C

- 11 of the AVAQMD Federal Negative Declaration for 51 Source Categories Final Staff Report, 10/18/06.

Summary and Required Actions

-

Based on our review, AVAQMD’s 2006 RACT SIP does not fully meet the CAA RACT requirements for the following reaso ns:

a

. Rule 1110.2 Emissions from Stationary, Non

- road & Portable Internal Combustion Engines (1/21/03) was submitted to the EPA on 04/01/03. Rule 1110.2 needs to be updated to meet current RACT by removing the agricultural exemption and addressing other EPA comments identified in our pr oposed limited approval/ disapproval or adopt a separate rule to regulat e NOx emissions from agricultural engines ( 69 FR 2148 2 , April 21, 2004).- 16

- b . Rule 462 Organic Liquid Loading (6/9/95) needs to be updated to address our proposed limited approval/disapproval pertaining to the definition of “facility vapor leak” ( 62 FR 26460

, May 14, 1997).

c. Adopt negative declaration s for : 1. EPA

- 450/3

- 82

- 009

, Control of Volatile Organic Compound Emissions from Large Petroleum Dry Cleaners

. 2. EPA

- 450/2

- 78

- 032, Control of Volatile Organic Emissions from Existing Stationary Sources

– Volume VII: Factory Surface Coating of Flat Wood Paneling

. 3. EPA

- 450/2

- 77

- 008

, Control of Volatile Organic Emissions from Existing Stationary Sources

– Volume II: Surface Coating of Cans, Coils, Paper, Fabrics, Automobiles, and Light

- Duty Trucks

- a dopt negative declaration for can coating portion of th is CTG.

Final disapproval will result in offset and highway sanctions unless EPA approves a SIP revision amending the above rules as fulfilling RACT within 18 months of the effective date of the disapproval. See CAA section 179(b) and 40 CFR 52.31. We will not finalize this partial disapproval, however, if we receive and fully approve these rules fulfilling RACT before finalizing action on the 20 06 RACT SIP. EPA is committed to working with CARB and the District to resolve these RACT deficiencies, and we encourage the State and Dist rict to submit a SIP revision correcting the identified deficiencies as expeditiously as practicable. A revised 20 06 RACT SIP demonstration will not be necessary if the submitted amended rules correct the identified deficiencies.

In addition, CAA section 110(c)(1) provides that EPA must promulgate a Federal Implementation Plan (FIP) within two years after finding that a State has failed to make a required submission or disapproving a SIP submission in whole or in part, unless EPA approves a SIP revision c orrecting the deficiencies within that two

- year period.

REFERENCES

-

1. AV AQMD “8

- Hour Reasonably Available Control Technology

– State Implementation Plan Analysis (RACT SIP Analysis)”, dated August 2006

.

2. AVAQMD “8

- Hour Ozone Reasonably Available Control Technology (RACT) State Implementation Plan (SIP) Analysis

– Supplemental Analysis”, dated March 13, 2014.

3. AV AQMD “8

- Hour Reasonably Available Control Technology

– State Implementation Plan Analysis (2015 RACT SIP Analysis)”, adopted July 21, 2015.

4. RACT SIPs, Letter dated March 9, 2006 from EPA Region IX (Andrew Steckel ) to CARB (Kurt Karperos) describing Region IX ’ s understanding of what constituted a minimally acceptable RACT SIP

.- 17

- 5. RACT SIPs, Letter dated April 4, 2006 from EPA Region IX (Andrew Steckel) to CARB (Kurt Karperos) listing EPA ’ s current CTGs, ACTs, and other documents which may help to establish RACT.

6. RACT Qs & As

– Reasonably Available Control Technology (RACT): Questions and Answers, May 18, 2006 Note from William T. Harne tt, Director, Air Quality Policy Division, to Regional Air Division Directors. http://www3.epa.gov/ttn/caaa/t1/memoranda/ractqanda.pdf

7. “ Final Rule to Implement the 8

- Hour Ozone Nat ional Ambient Air Quality Standard

– Phase 2 ” ( 70 FR 71612 ; November 29, 2005).

8. “ Implementation of the 2008 National Ambient Air Quality Standards for Ozone: State Implementation Plan Requirements’’ ( 80 FR 12264 ; March 6, 2015).

9. “ Issues Relating to VOC Regulation Cutpoints, Deficiencies, and Deviations, ” (a.k.a., Bluebook) EPA OAQPS, May 25, 1988 http://archive.epa.gov/ttn/ozone/web/pdf/voc_bluebook.pdf

10. “ Guidance Document for Corr ecting Common VOC & Other Rule Deficiencies, ” (a.k.a., Little Bluebook), EPA Region 9, August 21, 2001 http://www.arb.ca.gov/drdb/lbb2001.pdf

11. “ 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).

12. “ State Implementation Plans; Nitrogen Oxides Supplement to the General Preamble for the Implementation of Title I of the Clean Air Act Amend ments of 1990 ” (57 FR 55620, November 25, 1992) ( “ the NOx Supplement ” ).

13. EPA ’ s CTGs and ACTs https://www.epa.gov/ozone

- p ollution/control

- techniques

guidelines

- and

- alternative

- control

- techniques

- documents

- reducing

14. CARB ’ s emissions inventory database http://www.arb.ca.gov/app/emsinv/facinfo/facinfo.php

15. AV A QMD, CARB, and EPA Region IX databases of AV AQMD rules AV AQMD: http://avaqmd.ca.gov/rule

- book CARB: http://www.arb.ca.gov/rldb/rldb.htm EPA: http://www.epa.gov/approved

- sips/approved

- sips

- region

- 9

16. September 11, 2006 letter from Andrew Steckel (USEPA) to Alan De Salvio (AVAQMD), RE: “8

- hour Ozone Reasonably Available Control Technology

– State Implementation Plan (RACT SIP) Analysis, dated August 2006.- 18

- 17. E mail from V. Rausch (AV) to S. Tong (EPA) Re: Request for 2 AV permits, dated July, 5, 2016.

18. Email from T. Walters (AV) to J. Shears (EPA) Re: AV RACT SIP more questions, dated April 19, 2016.

19. Email from T. Walters (AV) to S. Tong (EPA) Re: AV RACT SIP Rule 463, dated June, 29, 2016.

20. Technical Assessment for Rule 1108

– Cu tback Asphalt, South Coast Air Quality Management District, June 2008

.

21. Letter from Charles Fryxell, Air Pollution Control Officer, AVAPCD, to Felicia Marcus, Regional Administrator, EPA Region IX, Re: Antelope Valley APCD Applicable SIP, dated September 2 2, 1997.