UNITED STATES ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

REGION IX AIR DIVISION

Technical Support Document

for

EPA ’ s Direct Final Rulemaking

for the California State Implementation Plan

Feather River Air Quality Management District’s

Rule 3.2 2

, Stationary Internal Combustion Engines

Prepared by: Kevin Gong

Dec ember 1

, 2014 2



Agency: Feather River Air Quality Management District (FRAQMD)

SIP Approved Rule: A previous version of this rule was included into the

SIP with a limited approval and limited disapproval action on March 1, 2012 in 77 FR 12493.

Subject of this TSD: FRAQMD Rule 3.22

, Stationary Internal Combustion Engines

 Adopted October 6, 2014

 Submitted to California A ir R esources B oard (CARB) October 24, 2014 and to US EPA November 0 6 , 2014

 Determined complete on December 18, 2014

.

RULE SUMMARY

Under Section 107(d) of the Clean Air Act (CAA), EPA designated portions of Yuba and Sutter counties nonattainment for the following three National Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS): 1

- hour ozone, 1997 8

- hour ozone and 2008 8

- hour ozone . These areas ar e regulated by the Feather River Air Quality Management District (FRAQMD).

Rule 3.2 2 regulates oxides of nitrogen (NOx) , volatile organic compounds (VOCs) and carbon monoxide (CO) emissions from internal combustion engines with a rated brake horse power of 50 or greater

.

This rule applies to all stationary internal combustion (IC) engines used in industrial, institutional, and commercial operations. The rule includes exemptions for IC engines in emergency use, low use, and certain types of agricultural u se conditions.

The rule includes sections for exemptions, definitions, operating and compliance requirements, test methods, and recordkeeping and reporting requirements.

The rule’s emissions limits differ based on location. Part of the FRAQMD lies within the Sacramento Federal Nonattainment Area, and has more stringent limits.

The rule limits for criteria pollutants are detailed below , in parts per million by

volume at 15% O 2

. 3

 Engine Type Pollutant North FRAQMD South FRAQMD

Spark

- Ignited Rich Burn NOx 90 25

VOC 250 250

CO 4,000 4,000

Spark Ignited Lean

Burn NOx 150 65

VOC 750 750

CO 4,000 4,000

Compression Ignited NOx 600 80

VOC 750 750

CO 4,000 4,000

EPA EVALUATION EPA primarily evaluates rules in three criteria : the enforceability of the rule, the stringency of the rule as required by the NAAQS, and the rule’s compliance with Clean Air Act sections 110(l) and 193 on SIP relaxation. Our evaluation of R ule

3.22’ s compliance with these criteria follows.

Enforceability Section 110(a)(2)(A) of the Clean Act requires that the rule be enforceable. The Bluebook ( Issues Relating to VOC Regulation Cutpoints, Deficiencies, and

Deviations , EPA, May 25, 1988)

, the Little Bluebook ( Guidance Document for Correcting Common VOC & Other Rule Deficiencies, EPA Region 9, August 21, 2001) , US EPA’s Alternative Control Techniques Document NO x Emissions from Stationary Reciprocating Internal Combustion Engines (EPA

- 453/R

- 93

- 032, July 1993) , and CARB’s Determination of Reasonably Available Control technology and Best Available Retrofit Control Technology for Stationary Spark

- Ignited Internal Combustion Engines (November 2001) were used to help evaluate compliance with this requirement

.

EPA previously acted in a limited approval of a version of Rule 3.22 in 2012. In our November 2011 Technical Support Document associated with this action , we noted that a provision allowing portable analyzers to be used in place of appropriate source testing measures undermined the enforceability of this rule. The 2014 version of this rule does not include this provision, and thus corrects the deficiency that barred full approval.

Other requirements found in Rule 3.22 are clear and comprehensive. T he

m onitoring, recordkeeping and reporting sections sufficiently ensure that affected sources and regulators can evaluate and determine complian ce with Rule 3.22 consistently.

Stringency 4



Section 172(c)(1) of t he CAA requires nonattainment areas to implement all

reason ably available control measures (RACM), including such reductions in emissions from existing sources in the area as may be obtained through the adoption, at a minimum, of reasonably available c ontrol technology (RACT), as expeditiously as practicable.

O zone nonattainment areas classified as moderate or above must require RACT

for all major sources of NOx ( CAA section 182(f); 40 CFR section 51.912(a) )

. As mentioned earlier, t he FRAQMD regulates an ozone nonattainment area that is

classified as severe for the 1997 and 2008 8

- hour ozone standard s

. FRAQMD

defines this severe nonattainment area as “South FRAQMD” for the purposes of regulation.

W e have determined that the NOx requirements for South FRAQMD in this rule fulfil RACT requirements because they are as stringent as CARB ’ s RACT/BARCT guidance and other California District rules for this category , including Placer County Air Pollution Control District (PCAPCD) Rule 242 and Sacramento Metropolitan Air Quality Management District (SMAQMD) Rule 412, and more stringent than EPA ’ s 1993 ACT. The Northern portion of the FRAQMD is not required to meet specific stringency requirements due to their attainment status.

SIP Relaxation

CAA s ection 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 th e modification of any SIP

- approved control requirement in effect before November 15, 1990, in a nonattainment area.

We propose to determine that our approval of the submittal would comply with

CAA sections 110(l) and 193 because the submitted SIP revision would not

interfere with the on

- going process for ensuring that requirements for RFP and
attainment of the NAAQS are met. T he emission limits in the submitted rule have not changed, and are therefore as stringent as the current applicable SIP

.

RECOMMENDATIONS FOR THE NEXT RULE REVISION

- The following revisions are not currently the basis for rule disapproval, but are recommended for

the next time the rule is amended.

1. Consider lower emissions limits consistent with South Coast Air Qualit y Management District’s Rule 1110.2 (2010).

EPA ACTION 5



The submitted Rule 3.2 2 corrects deficiencies found in existing Rule 3.22

. EPA

staff reco mmends the approval of Rule 3.22 into the California State Impl emen tation Plan.

REFERENCES

1. F eather R iver Air Quality Management District Rule 3.2 2

, a dopted 10/ 6 / 14

2. Staff Report for FR AQMD Rule 3.22, Comments Attachment, and other SIP

submittal documents , received November 6 , 2014

3. Sacramento Metropolitan Air Qual ity Management District Rule 412 (A dopted 6 / 1 / 95 ) and Placer County Ai r Pollution Control District 242

. (Adopted 4 / 10 / 03 )

4. “Alternative Control Techniques Document

– NOx Emissions from Stationary Reciprocating Internal Combustion Engines ” ( EPA

- 453/R

- 93

- 032, July 1993 )

. http://www.epa.gov/groundlevelozone/SIPToolkit/ctg_act/199307_nox_epa
453_r

- 93

- 032_internal_combustion_engines.pdf

5. “Determination of Reasonably Available Control Technology and Best Available Retrofit Control Technology for Stationary Spark

- Ignited Inte rnal Combustion Engines ” ( California Air Resources Board, November

, 2001 )

. http://www.arb.ca.gov/ractbarc/rb

- iceall.pdf