Technical Support Document

for

EPA's Notice of Proposed Rulemaking

for the 

California State Implementation Plan

Feather River Air Quality Management District

Rule 10.1 New Source Review 

Prepared by:

Laura Yannayon

Reviewed by:

Gerardo Rios

Air Division, Permits Office

United States Environmental Protection Agency, Region IX

San Francisco, California

February 8, 2013
Table of Contents

Section Page

Introduction 1

NSR Program SIP Revision Submittal 1

Background 1

Rule Summary 2

Rule Evaluation 2

Section 110(l) of the Act 5

Section 193 of the Act 6

Recommendations 6

Attachments 7
1

Introduction

Part D of title I of the Clean Air Act (CAA or Act) contains the requirements for areas 

designated “nonattainment” for any of the National Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS). 

Among other things, Part D requires pre-construction permit programs for certain new or 

modified stationary sources of nonattainment pollutants in nonattainment areas, referred to as 

“Nonattainment NSR” (NSR). The NSR program applies to “major” stationary sources and 

“major modifications” as those terms are defined in 40 CFR Part 51, Subpart I. 

NSR Program SIP Revision Submittal

Rule 10.1 –New Source Review (NSR) was adopted by the Feather River Air Quality 

Management District (FRAQMD or District) on February 6, 2012 and submitted to EPA via the 

California Air Resources Board (ARB) by a letter dated September 21, 2012. The District 

adopted Rule 10.1 to implement the federal nonattainment NSR program requirements in the 

District.

ARB is the governor’s designee for submitting official revisions of the California State 

Implementation Plan (SIP) to EPA, and FRAQMD is the local agency responsible for regulating 

the construction and modification of stationary sources within portions of Sutter and Yuba 

Counties. 

Background

On July 27, 2011, EPA finalized a limited approval and limited disapproval of FRAQMD Rule 

10.1 –New Source Review (NSR). See 76 FR 44809. The effect of this action was to incorporate 

Rule 10.1 into the SIP and to trigger sanctions clocks with respect to certain provisions of the 

rule that did not satisfy the requirements of section 110 and title I, part D of the CAA. Sanctions 

will be imposed under section 179 of the Act according to 40 CFR 52.31 unless EPA approves 

SIP revisions that correct the identified rule deficiencies by February 26, 2013. FRAQMD’s 

submitted Rule 10.1 is intended to address these previously identified rule deficiencies. 

The CAA defines a “nonattainment” area as any area that does not meet (or that contributes to 

ambient air quality in a nearby area that does not meet) the national primary or secondary 

NAAQS for a pollutant. CAA 107(d)(1)(A)(i). The FRAQMD contains all or parts of the 

Sacramento Valley (Sutter County portion), the Yuba City-Marysville (all of Sutter County and a 

portion of Yuba County) and the Sutter Buttes (Sutter County portion) Air Basins. The 

Sacramento Valley portion is currently designated and classified as severe nonattainment for the 

1997 and 2008 8-hour ozone NAAQS and designated nonattainment for the 2006 24-hour PM2.5

NAAQS. The Sutter Buttes portion is currently designated and classified as moderate 

nonattainment for the 1997 8-hour ozone NAAQS and designated nonattainment for the 2006 

24-hour PM2.5 NAAQS. The Yuba City-Marysville portion is currently designated nonattainment 

for the 2006 24-hour PM2.5 NAAQS. See 40 CFR 81.305.
2

Therefore, California is required to implement a SIP-approved NSR program for the Feather 

River area that applies, at minimum, to the following NAAQS pollutants and precursor 

pollutants: volatile organic compounds (VOCs), nitrogen oxides (NOx), particular matter of 2.5 

microns or less (PM2.5) and sulfur oxides (SOx). VOCs and NOx are subject to NSR as precursors 

to ozone, and NOx and SOx are subject to NSR as precursors to PM2.5. See 40 CFR 

51.165(a)(1)(xxxvii)(C). Rule 10.1 constitutes the District’s non-attainment major source 

program, as well as its minor source program, for all regulated NSR pollutants.

Rule Summary

Rule 10.1 contains the substantial requirements of the NSR program and is comprised of nine 

sections: Section A – Purpose, Section B – Applicability, Section C – Effective Date, Section D 

– Definitions, Section E – Requirements, Section F – Calculations, Section G – Air Quality 

Impact Analysis, Section H – Administrative Requirements, and Section I – Power Plants. 

Sections A and B include provisions that outline the purpose and applicability of the rule. 

Section D contains 55 definitions, 10 of which are new. Section E contains the requirements that 

apply to projects undergoing new source review, including Best Available Control Technology 

(BACT) and emission offset requirements. Section F contains the calculation methodologies to 

be used to make various determinations throughout the rule. Section G contains the requirements 

for performing an Air Quality Impact Analysis. Section H contains provisions for determining 

when an application is complete, what is required to make a preliminary decision, which air 

quality models must be used, public notice requirements, requirements for a final action, and 

other administrative provisions. Section I contains specific requirements for power plant 

applications. 

Rule Evaluation

This Technical Support Document (TSD) provides EPA’s evaluation of the District’s revised 

Rule 10.1 (including revisions made by the District to address the deficiencies identified in our 

July 27, 2011 final action on FRAQMD’s NSR program submittal). We have reviewed Rule 10.1 

for compliance with the requirements of section 110 and part D of title I of the Act and EPA’s 

current implementing regulations at 40 CFR 51.160 through 51.165. 

For a more comprehensive analysis of how Rule 10.1 satisfies the applicable requirements of the 

Act and 40 CFR 51.160 through 51.165, please also see the TSD supporting our July 27, 2011 

limited approval and limited disapproval of Rule 10.1 at 76 FR 44809. “Technical Support 

Document for EPA’s Notice of Proposed Rulemaking for the California State Implementation 

Plan, Feather River Air Quality Management District, Rule 10.1 New Source Review,” May 9, 

2011. We also considered the following materials in our review: General Preamble for the 

Implementation of Title I of the Clean Air Act Amendments of 1990 (see 57 FR 13498, April 16, 

1992), EPA’s Emission Offset Interpretive Ruling (40 CFR part 51, Appendix S), and EPA’s 

policy document entitled, “Improving Air Quality with Economic Incentive Programs,” which 

was published in January 2001. EPA has condensed the approval criteria contained in these 

various materials in this TSD, which describes reasons for our proposed action on the Rule 10.1 
3

SIP submittal. All references below to “Rule 10.1” are to the rule as amended February 7, 2012, 

unless otherwise noted.

Rule 10.1 – New Source Review

In our May 19, 2011 Notice of Proposed Rulemaking on Rule 10.1 (see 76 FR 28944), we 

identified the following deficiencies and suggested corrections:

1. Add definitions for the terms “commence,” “begin actual construction,” and “necessary 

preconstruction approvals or permits.” 

2. Add a provision, pursuant to 40 CFR 51.165(a)(5)(ii), which requires new source review 

for a source or modification which becomes major due to a relaxation in a federallyenforceable limit. Such sources and modifications shall be subject to new source review 

“as though construction had not yet commenced.”

The District revised Rule 10.1 to address each of these deficiencies. The revisions made to Rule 

10.1, including those which address the deficiencies identified in EPA’s previous rulemaking, 

are discussed below.

Item 1: Definitions have been added for each of the following terms: Begin Actual 

Construction, Commence and Necessary Preconstruction Approvals or Permits. These new 

definitions are either identical or equivalent to EPA’s definitions in 40 CFR 51.165(a)(1) and 

therefore correct the identified deficiencies. 

Item 2: New language consistent with the requirements of 40 CFR 51.165(a)(5)(ii) has been 

added to Section B.2. This new language satisfies the identified deficiency.

Other Revisions:

A. New definitions have been added for the following terms: Class I Area, Construction, 

Federally Enforceable, PM2.5, Significant, Significant Emissions Increase, Sutter Buttes 

Nonattainment Area for Ozone (SBNA) and Yuba City-Marysville Nonattainment Area 

for PM2.5 (YC-MNA). These new definitions are either identical or equivalent to EPA’s 

definitions in 40 CFR 51.165(a)(1) or 40 CFR 51.100; or they adequately define the

SBNA and YC-MNA by referencing EPA’s definitions for these areas in 40 CFR 81.305. 

The definition of “Significant” has been properly delineated between the 3 different 

attainment areas in the District and their respective non-attainment classifications. These 

new definitions are acceptable. 

B. The definition of “Major Modification” has been revised so that it only applies to major 

sources that are located within one of the three non-attainment areas within the District, 

rather than the entire District. The thresholds for triggering a major modification have

been changed to be based on a “significant emission increase” rather than 25 tpy for NOx 

and VOC. This change allows the definition to specify the major modification thresholds 

for all non-attainment pollutants by referencing a significant threshold table which
4

includes all NAAQS. These changes provide clarity, are consistent with the requirements 

of 40 CFR 51.165 and are therefore acceptable.

C. The definition of “Precursor” has been revised to add Nitrogen and Sulfur Oxides as 

precursors to PM2.5. This revision is consistent with the definition of regulated NSR

pollutant in 40 CFR 51.165 (a)(1) and is therefore acceptable.

D. Subsections E.1.a and b have been revised to add language requiring sources located in

the SBNA and YC-MNA portions of the FRAQMD which emit NOx, VOC or PM2.5 as 

applicable, to apply BACT at new major sources or modifications that result in major 

modifications. These revisions bring the rule up to date with the District’s recent nonattainment classifications for ozone in the SBNA and PM2.5 in the YC-MNA, as required 

by 40 CFR 51.165, therefore these revisions are acceptable.

E. Subsection E.2.a.2 has been added to the rule to specify that PM2.5 offsets are required for 

projects located in the YC-MNA area if the emission increase would result in a new 

major source or major modification. This revision is consistent with the 40 CFR 51.165 

requirements for PM2.5 nonattainment areas, and is therefore acceptable.

F. Section E.2 contains several tables which list the required offset ratios based on the 

pollutant being emitted and the location of the source. The tables have been edited to 

provide separate tables for federal NOx, VOC, PM10 and PM2.5 offset thresholds and State 

PM10, NOx and VOC offset thresholds. Edits have also been made to clarify that in each 

case, the offsets must come from the same non-attainment area as the proposed source. 

EPA has reviewed these revisions and the offset thresholds specified for each pollutant

and determined that they are all equal to, or more stringent than, those required by 40 

CFR 51.165 and the CAA. Therefore EPA finds these revisions acceptable.

G. Section E.8 has been added to specify when the APCO must consult with the Federal 

Land Manager on projects that have potential visibility impacts on Class I areas. These 

thresholds are based on reasonable emission rates and location of the facility. Therefore 

EPA finds this new provision acceptable to satisfy the requirements of 40 CFR 51.307.

H. Subsection E.2.f.3 has been added to clarify that interpollutant offsets between PM2.5 and 

its precursors are only allowed at specific ratios as approved into the SIP. At this time, no 

such ratios have been approved into the Feather River SIP, therefore no interpollutant 

offsets can be used for PM2.5. This new language is consistent with EPA policy which 

requires the use of a SIP approved PM2.5 interpollutant offset ratio. Therefore EPA find 

this revision is acceptable.

I. Other minor editorial changes have been made throughout the rule, such as updating 

cross-references to various renumbered sections to ensure accuracy of rule citations.

New Deficiencies:
5

A. Sections B.4 and B.5 have been added to the rule and provides that if EPA re-designates 

specific non-attainment portions of the District to attainment for PM2.5 or ozone, then 

Section E of the rule shall not apply to those areas. While the District is allowed to 

include provisions that would change the applicability of the rule based on a 

redesignation by EPA to attainment, the District cannot exempt sources from all of the 

requirements of Section E of the rule, as some of the subsections contain requirements 

that apply to minor sources. (e.g., Subsection E.3, which prohibits a new source from 

causing or making worse an ambient air quality standard.) Based on a redesignation to 

attainment, Sections B4 and B.5 should only exempt a source from the requirements of 

E.1, E.2, E.5, E.7 and E.8. Therefore the inclusion of new Sections B.4 and B.5creates a 

new disapproval issue for Rule 10.1. 

B. The definition of “NSR Regulated Pollutant” does not specify that gaseous emissions 

which condense to form either PM10 or PM2.5 must be counted as PM10 or PM2.5, 

respectively. This revision to the definition of NSR Regulated Pollutant was made as part 

of our Phase II rulemaking for Implementation of the New Source Review (NSR) 

Program for Particulate Matter Less Than 2.5 Micrometers (PM2.5). See 73 FR 28321. 

This omission creates a deficiency which must be corrected by providing this clarification 

regarding the treatment of condensable gaseous emissions within the definition NSR 

Regulated Pollutant or the definitions of PM10 and PM2.5.

Section 110(l) of the Act

Section 110(l) states: “Each revision to an implementation plan submitted by a State under this 

chapter shall be adopted by such State after reasonable notice and public hearing. The 

Administrator shall not approve a revision of a plan if the revision would interfere with any 

applicable requirement concerning attainment and reasonable further progress (as defined in 

section 7501 of this title), or any other applicable requirement of this chapter.”

With respect to the procedural requirements of CAA section 110(l), based on our review of the 

public process documentation included in FRAQMD’s September 21, 2012 rule submittal, we 

find that the State has provided sufficient evidence of public notice and opportunity for comment 

and public hearings prior to adoption and submittal of these rules to EPA. 

With respect to the substantive requirements of section 110(l), our approval of revised Rule 10.1 

(to replace current SIP Rule 10.1) would strengthen the SIP-approved nonattainment NSR and 

minor NSR programs in the FRAQMD compared to the existing SIP program as approved July 

27, 2011. As discussed above, the District has added several required definitions to Rule 10.1 

and corrected a provision that was inconsistent with the applicable NSR regulations in 40 CFR 

51.165. The rule revisions strengthen the nonattainment NSR program in the FRAQMD by 

clarifying its applicability and compliance provisions and addressing NSR requirements that the 

current SIP program fails to adequately address. None of the revisions to Rule 10.1 relax any 

control requirement or related compliance provision.
6

In addition, we are unaware of any reliance by FRAQMD on the continuation of any aspect of 

the permit-related rules for the purpose of continued attainment or maintenance of the NAAQS. 

Given all these considerations, we propose to conclude that our approval of Rule 10.1 into the 

California SIP would not interfere with any applicable requirement concerning attainment and 

reasonable further progress (RFP) or any other applicable requirement of the Act.

Section 193 of the Act

Section 193 of the Act, which was added by the Clean Air Act Amendments of 1990, includes a 

savings clause which provides, in pertinent part: “No control requirement in effect, or required to 

be adopted by an order, settlement agreement, or plan in effect before November 15, 1990, in 

any area which is a nonattainment area for any air pollutant may be modified after November 15, 

1990, in any manner unless the modification insures equivalent or greater emission reductions of 

such air pollutant.” Rule 10.1—nor any earlier version of this rule – was approved into the SIP 

as of the November 15, 1990 applicability date of Section 193; therefore this provision does not 

apply to this rulemaking action. 

Recommendations

Pursuant to section 110(k)(3) of the Act, we recommend a limited approval / limited disapproval 

of the submitted NSR rule. We recommend limited approval based on our determination that the 

rule complies with applicable statutory and regulatory provisions requiring regulation of 

stationary sources in general and requiring permit programs for major stationary sources in 

particular, including section 110(a)(2)(C) and part D of title I of the Act. In support of this 

recommendation, we have concluded that our approval of Rule 10.1 complies with section 110(l) 

and 193 of the Act because the new rule does not relax control technology and offset 

requirements and therefore would not interfere with the strategy for attainment of the Ozone or 

PM2.5 NAAQS in FRAQMD or the continued attainment of the other NAAQS in FRAQMD. We 

recommend limited disapproval to correct the deficiencies listed below. If we finalize this action 

as proposed, our action would be codified through revisions to 40 CFR 52.220 (identification of 

plan).

Deficiencies as listed in this TSD under subsection entitled “New Deficiencies.”

1. Sections B.4 and B.5 have been added to the rule and provides that if EPA re-designates 

specific non-attainment portions of the District to attainment for PM2.5 or ozone, then 

Section E of the rule shall not apply to those areas. While the District is allowed to 

include provisions that would change the applicability of the rule based on a 

redesignation by EPA to attainment, the District cannot exempt sources from all of the 

requirements of Section E of the rule, as some of the subsections contain requirements 

that apply to minor sources. (e.g., Subsection E.3, which prohibits a new source from 

causing or making worse an ambient air quality standard.) Based on a redesignation to 

attainment, Sections B4 and B.5 should only exempt a source from the requirements of 
7

E.1, E.2, E.5, E.7 and E.8. Therefore the inclusion of new Sections B.4 and B.5creates a 

new disapproval issue for Rule 10.1. 

2. The definition of “NSR Regulated Pollutant” does not specify that gaseous emissions 

which condense to form either PM10 or PM2.5 must be counted as PM10 or PM2.5, 

respectively. This revision to the definition of NSR Regulated Pollutant was made as part 

of our Phase II rulemaking for Implementation of the New Source Review (NSR) 

Program for Particulate Matter Less Than 2.5 Micrometers (PM2.5). See 73 FR 28321. 

This omission creates a deficiency which must be corrected by providing this clarification 

regarding the treatment of condensable gaseous emissions within the definition NSR 

Regulated Pollutant or the definitions of PM10 and PM2.5. 

Attachments

1. Submitted FRAQMD Rule 10.1 – New Source Review, adopted February 6, 2012.

2. FRAQMD Staff Report for Proposed Amendments: Regulation X Rule 10.1, New Source 

Review; undated.

3. “Technical Support Document for EPA’s Notice of Proposed Rulemaking for the 

California State Implementation Plan, Feather River Air Quality Management District, 

Rule 10.1 New Source Review,” May 9, 2011.