United States Environmental Protection Agency

Region IX Air Division

Technical Support Document

for

EPA’s Notice of Proposed Rulemaking

for the

California State Implementation Plan

as Submitted by the California Air Resources Board

EPA’s analysis of

Eastern Kern Air Pollution Control District

Rule 202 − Permit Exemptions

February 17, 2015

Prepared by Larry Maurin and Jefferson Wehling

Approved by Gerardo Rios1



### Eastern Kern Air Pollution Control District (EKAPCD or District)

Submitted Rule

• Rule 202, Permit Exemptions , was originally adopted on April 18, 1972 under th e title, Exemptions . The rule has been revised ten times since the las t SIP-approved version of the rule was approved by EPA on July 6, 1982. See T able 1 below for a list of the adoption and submittal dates for revisions of Rule 202. While each of these revisions was submitted to EPA for inclusion in the SIP, EPA has not taken action on any of these submittals. The current rule revision was adopted o n January 13, 2011 and was submitted by the California Air Resources Board (CARB) on Jun e 21, 2011. While EPA can only take action on the most current submittal, we list below all of the changes made since Rule 202 was last SIP approved.

Table 1. Adoption and corresponding submittal dates
of EKAPCD Rule 202 revisions

Adoption Date Submittal Date April 25, 1983 July 19, 1983 November 18, 1985 June 22, 1987 August 22, 1989 January 28, 1992 April 30, 1990 January 28, 1992 August 19, 1991 January 28, 1992 May 2, 1996 July 23, 1996 January 8, 1998 May 18, 1998 March 13, 2003 June 5, 2003 January 8, 2004 February 20, 2004 January 13, 2011 June 21, 2011

Applicable State Implementation Plan (SIP) Rule

• Rule 202, Exemptions – The SIP approved version of this rule was adopted on December 15, 1980, submitted on March 23, 1981, and approved into the SIP on July 6, 1982 (47 FR 29231).

Background

Eastern Kern County is currently classified as a ma rginal nonattainment area for the 2008 and 1997 federal 8-hour ozone standards, a serious nona ttainment area for PM 10 , and attainment or unclassifiable for all other National Ambient Air Q uality Standards (NAAQS).

Agricultural operations are a significant source of air pollution throughout the state of California, including Eastern Kern County. Historically, agricu ltural operations had been exempted from many regulatory requirements, including the need fo r air pollution permits. On September 22, 2003, California Senate Bill 700 (SB 700) became la w and removed the blanket permitting exemption for agricultural sources provided under C alifornia Health & Safety Code (CH&SC)2

section 42310(e) and subjected large agricultural s ources to various permit requirements for the
first time.

EKAPCD was required to amend and adopt a number of rules to comply with the requirements of SB 700, including revisions to Rule 202. The sta te law also requires permits and emission mitigation for Large Confined Animal Facilities (LC AF) as defined by CARB.

Purposes of Rule and Descriptions of Rule Amendment s

Rule 202 – Permit Exemptions was originally developed as part of the District’s New Source Review (NSR) permitting program. The rule identifie s processes, articles, machines, equipment, or other contrivances for which an Authority to Con struct (ATC) and/or Permit to Operate (PTO) is not required. Rule 202 also requires recordkeepi ng to verify and maintain certain exemptions. While EPA can only act upon the most recent submitt ed version of Rule 202, we have reviewed all of the changes made since EPA last approved Rul e 202 into the Kern County portion of the
California SIP 1 . EPA has evaluated the following list of revisions made to the existing SIP approved version of Rule 202, compared with the app roved version of Rule 202.

1. Existing Rule 202 – Exemptions was revised as follows:

• Section a is now listed in section I.B. The exempti on was revised to reference the definition in Rule 102, Definitions , which is SIP approved, rather than the definition in
the CH&SC.

• Section b is now listed in section II.B. The exempt ion was revised to clarify which types of vehicles are exempt from permitting requirements including locomotives, airplanes, and watercraft used to transport passengers or frei ght, excluding equipment used for dredging of waterways or pile driving adjacent to o r in waterways.

• Section c is now listed in section I.A. The exempti on has been revised to apply only to “incinerators,” rather than “equipment,” used in co nnection with structures designed for and used exclusively as a dwelling for not more tha n four families.

• Section d.1 is now listed in section II.L.4.

• Section d.3 is now listed in section II.A.2. This e xemption has been revised to lower the power rating for the exemption of piston-type inter nal combustion engines. The maximum continuous design power rating is now 50 br ake horsepower. The maximum exempt rating was formerly 500 brake horsepower. In addition, the exemptions for internal combustion engines used in agricultural op erations necessary for the growing of crops or for the raising of fowl or animals, as wel l as those not attached to a stationary
foundation have been removed.

• Section d.4 is now listed in section II.C. This exe mption has been revised in several ways. The exemption for water cooling ponds has bee n removed. In addition, the

1 In 1992 the western portion of Kern County was inc orporated into San Joaquin Valley Air Pollution Con trol District (SJVAPCD) leaving the remaining eastern po rtion as the Kern County Air Pollution Control Dist rict (KCAPCD). On May 13, 2010, the Kern County APCD was renamed the Eastern Kern APCD. Submitted Rule 202 will only update the Eastern Kern APCD portion of the California SIP.3

exemption now excludes cooling towers with a circul ation rate of more than 1,000 gallons/minute or used for cooling liquids containi ng volatile organic compounds are no longer exempt.

• Sections d.6 and e.7 have been combined and are now listed in section II.F. The exemption has been revised in several ways. Rather than only exempting “presses” for extruding metals, minerals, plastics or wood, or “e quipment” used for compression or injection molding; the provision now exempts any “s ource operation” used exclusively for “extruding or compression molding of rubber pro ducts or plastics,” and limits the exemption to operations where no plasticizer or blo wing agent is present. Overall, fewer types of materials and processes qualify for an exe mption.

• Section d.7 is now listed in section II.A.4. The ex emption has been revised to specify that only natural gas or liquefied petroleum gas-fired e quipment used for space-heating is exempted.

• Section d.10 is now listed in section II.L.2. Addit ional language has been added to this exemption to clarify that any engine or other equip ment associated with the exempted equipment used exclusively to compress or hold dry natural gas is not exempted from the requirement to obtain a permit.

• Section d.13 is now listed in section II.E.3.

• Section e.2 is now listed in section II.L.1. New la nguage was added to limit applicability to only “conventional” brazing, soldering, or weldi ng operations and to clarify that any engine or other equipment associated with the exemp ted equipment, is not exempted from the requirement to obtain a permit.

• Section e.3 is now listed in sections II.E.1 & 2. T he exemption for ovens used in bakeries has been narrowed to only include those producing l ess than 1,000 pounds of product per operating day, and only if exempted by Subsection I I.A.1, or if electrically heated.

• Section f is now listed in section II.A.1. This exe mption has been revised to lower the maximum heat input rating for steam generators, ste am superheaters, water boilers, water heaters, steam cleaners, and closed transfer system s from 35 to 5 MM BTU/hr. New language was also added to restrict the chemical co mposition of the natural gas and/or liquefied petroleum gas used to no more than 5 perc ent by weight hydrocarbons heavier than butane (as determined by test method ASTM E-26 0-73) and no more than 0.30 grains of total sulfur per 100 standard cubic feet of gas (as determined by test method ASTM D-1072-80).

• Section h.3 is now listed in section II.G.6. This e xemption has been revised to limit applicability to the storage of liquefied gases in unvented (except for emergency relief) pressure vessels.

• Section h.4.a is now listed in section II.G.3. The exemption has been revised to limit applicability only to storage of unheated organic m aterial that is not used as a fuel.

• Section h.4.b is now listed under II.G.4.c. The exe mption was revised to add storage of non-air-blown asphalt, in addition to fuel oils, as long as the specific gravity is 0.9042 or higher.4

• Section h.4.c is now listed in section II.G.4.a. Th e exemption has been revised by limiting applicability to storage of petroleum distillates w ith a capacity of less than 19,800 gallon (471 bbls) or less, whereas no maximum volume is sp ecified in the current SIP-approved version of the rule. The existing storage capacity limitation of 40,000 gallons has been
removed.

• Section h.5 is now listed in sections II.G.5 and II .H.6. The exemption has been revised and now includes store greases in addition to refin ed lubricating oils.

• Section h.6, as it pertained to “solvent rinsing co ntainers” is now listed in section II.I.2.a. The exemption has been revised in several ways. Th e term “solvent rinsing containers” has been replaced by the term “cleaning equipment,” and additional wording added to clarify that cleaning equipment does not include em ission control enclosures. Language was also added to limit the exemption to equipment with a surface area of 10.0 rather than 10.8 square feet; using solvents with an initi al boiling point of 120 ° C; and must be located at a stationary source losing less than 25 gallons of solvent per year to the atmosphere.

• Section h.7 is now listed in section II.G.7.

• Section h.9 is now listed in section II.G.2. The ex emption has been revised to specify the storage of “unheated organic material” rather than “gasoline.”

• Section i is now included in section I.B. Self-prop elled mobile construction equipment is
included in the definition of “Motor Vehicle” in EK APCD Rule 102, Definitions . “Motor Vehicle” is defined in EKAPCD Rule 102, Definitions as a subset of “Vehicle” which is self-propelled

.

• Section j is now included in section I.B. Mobile ag ricultural implements used in agricultural operations are included in the definit ion of “Vehicle” in EKAPCD Rule 102, Definitions . “Vehicle” is defined in EKAPCD Rule 102, Definitions , as a device by which any person or property may be propelled, move d, or drawn upon a highway, excepting a device moved exclusively by human power

.

• Section l is now listed in section I.C. The exempti on has been reworded for clarification.

• Section n is now listed in section II.M. The exempt ion has been updated and defines the term “Low Emitting Unit” as “a source operation tha t meets the emissions limits specified in either Subsection 1 or 2 below and com plies with Section IV, Recordkeeping

, of this Rule.
1. A source operation with a potential to emit any unc ontrolled affected pollutant at a rate of less than or equal to 2 pounds in any 24- hour period, or
2. A source operation with a potential to emit uncontr olled Oxides of Nitrogen (NO x ) or Volatile Organic Compounds (VOCs) at a rate of less than or equal to 10 pounds in any 24-hour period and less than or equal to 180 pounds in any calendar year.”

2. Additional changes were made to Rule 202 by ad ding the following Administrative
Provisions:5

The rule was reformatted from a continuous listing of exempt equipment and operations into the following four main sections:

• Section I, entitled California Health and Safety Co de (CH &SC) Exemptions, lists specific types of equipment or operations for which the District is prohibited by state law (California Health and Safety Code (CH & SC), Secti ons 42310(a) & 41753) from requiring a permit. While sections I.A and I.B were formerly listed in sections a and c,
sections I.C and I.D have been added and are discus sed in further detail in Section III
below.

• Section II, Additional Exemptions lists the specific equipment, operations or process es exempt from obtaining a permit to operate. Most of these exemptions were formerly
listed in sections d-n. A discussion of the revisio ns to these provisions is provided above in Section I and a discussion of any new provisions is provided below in Section III.

• Section III, Provisions for Permitting Otherwise Ex empt Source Operation provides that, notwithstanding provisions of Sections I and II of the Rule, an Authority to Construct and Permit to Operate may be required for source operations subject to any p rohibitory rule or regulation, including, but not limited to NSPS or N ESHAPS. A permit may also be required if there is potential to pose a significan t risk to public health, or if the source operation is proposed as part of soil or groundwate r remediation project.

• Section IV, Recordkeeping specifies the recordkeeping required for various ex emptions to verify and maintain applicability of any exempti on.

3. The following new exemptions were added to Rul e 202 and are listed by categorization:

A. Equipment or processes that are exempted from a cor responding EKAPCD prohibitory rule which requires emission controls

• II.A.3 − Gas turbine engines with a maximum heat in put rating of 3,000,000 Btu per
hour or less at Standard Conditions as defined in Rule 102, Definitions (Rule 425).

• II.D − Printing, coating, or laminating facilities using less than 2 gallons per day of graphic arts materials. Graphic arts materials are any ink, coating, adhesive, fountain solution, thinner, retarder, or cleaning solution ( Rule 410.7).

• II.G.1 − Storage of JP-8, NATO F-34, NATO F-35, and JP-8+100 engine fuels as defined in military specification number MIL-DTL-83 133 (Rule 411).

• II.H − Loading racks (as defined in Rule 102) used exclusively for transfer of the following materials (Rule 413):
1. Unheated organic materials not used as a fuel with an initial boiling point of

150 ° C (302 ° F) or greater as measured by test method ASTM D-86;

2. Petroleum distillates with 0.8251 specific gravity or higher (40 ° API or lower) as measured by test method API 2547 or ASTM D-1298-80;
3. Unrefined oil, asphalt, or residual oil from tanks not requiring permits in accordance with this Rule;

4. Unrefined oil with 0.8762 specific gravity or highe r (30 ° API or lower) as measured by test method API 2547 or ASTM D-1298-80;6 5. Unrefined oil, asphalt, or residual oil from a deli very vehicle if loading equipment is attached to such vehicle; and
6. Refined lubricating oil.

• II.I.2. – Unheated, non-conveyorized cleaning equip ment (not including emission control enclosures): a. with an open surface area of 10.0ft 2 or less, and an internal volume 92.5 gallons or less; b. using only organic solvents with an initial bo iling point of 120 ° C (248 ° F) or greater as determined by ASTM 1078-78; and c. located at a stationary source losing less tha n 25 gallons of solvent per year to the atmosphere from all such equipment at the stationar y source. Solvent lost shall not include solvent recycled or disposed of properl y. Any person claiming exemption pursuant to this subsection shall maintai n adequate monthly records to document his exempt status (Rules 410 and 410.3).

B. Sources with insignificant emissions

• II.G.4.b − Storage of unrefined oil with a specific gravity of 0.8762 or higher (30 ° API or lower) as measured by test method API 2547 o r ASTM D-1298-80 with a capacity of 100 bbl or less.

• II.J − Abrasive Blasting Equipment:
1. Blast cleaning cabinets in which a suspension of ab rasive in water is used;
2. Any manually-operated abrasive blast cabinet, vente d to a dust-filter, where the
total internal volume of the blast section is 50 cu bic feet or less;
3. Enclosed equipment used exclusively for shot blast removal of flashing from rubber and plastics at sub-zero temperatures;
4. Shot peening operations, provided no surface materi al is removed; and
5. Portable sand/water blaster equipment and associate d piston type internal combustion engine, provided water in the mixture is maintained at 66% or more by volume during operation of such equipment. Pisto n type internal combustion engines must be exempt pursuant to Subsection II.A. 2.

• II.L.3 – Unvented (except for emergency pressure re lief) pressure vessels associated with a source operation exempt from permit.

• II.N − Temporary Source Operation: Any source opera tion, as defined in Rule 102, Definitions that has not occurred in the previous 2 calendar y ears, will operate for less than 12 consecutive months, and expected to emit le ss than 500 pounds of affected pollutants during the operation period.

Any source seeking Temporary Source Operation exemption must comply with the following provisions.
1. An application and filing fee in accordance with Di strict Rule 301 shall be submitted to the Control Officer to qualify for the exemption listed in this section. Additionally, application shall be subject to appli cation processing and priority7 processing fees as stated in Rule 303. Such applica tion shall include: identification of source operation, documentation o f expected emissions, and proposed form and location of records to be used to verify qualification for exemption. Such requests shall be acted upon by the District within 30 days. Each request for reapplication shall be accompanied by f iling fee in accordance with District Rule 301; and
2. Sufficient records verifying compliance with Temporary Source Operation limits
shall be collected and maintained in accordance wit h Section IV.A (Recordkeeping) of the rule.

C. Equipment or operations which are not subject to NS R program requirements because they are not stationary sources

• I.D − Portable engines and/or equipment associated with such engines qualifying for and in compliance with CARB's statewide registratio n system.

• II.I.1 − Equipment used for application of architec tural surface coatings. Architectural surface coating is defined as any coating applied t o stationary structures and their appurtenances, to mobile homes, to pavements, or to curbs.

D. Agricultural source exemptions added pursuant to SB 700 and CARB definition of Large Confined Animal Facility (LCAF) II.K. – This provision was added to read as follows :

An Agricultural Facility or Confined Animal Facilit y (CAF) 2 (as defined in Rule 102, Definitions ) that meets all of the following requirements:
1. Actual emissions are less than one-half the Major S ource thresholds as defined in District Rule 201.1, Permits to Operate for Sources Subject to Title V o f the Federal Clean Air Act Amendments of 1990 , Section II.U; and

2. Houses quantities of each class of animal less than :

1,000 milk-producing dairy cows; 2,500 horses; 3,000 swine; 3,500 beef cattle; 7,500 calves, heifers, or other cattle; 15,000 sheep, lambs, or goats; 30,000 rabbits or other animals not in this list; 100,000 turkeys; 650,000 chickens other than laying hens; 650,000 laying hens; 650,000 ducks.

2 Confined Animal Facility (CAF) as defined in SIP u nder EKAPCD Rule 102, Definitions , is effectively equivalent to the CARB definition of Large Confined Animal Fac ility (LCAF).8

Rule Evaluation

EPA is primarily using the following two criteria t o evaluate Rule 202.

1. Enforceability – CAA §110(a)(2)(A) requires that re gulations submitted to EPA for SIP approval must be clear and legally enforcea ble.
2. New Source Review Program Requirements − 40 CFR part 51, Subpart I – Review of New Sources and Modifications, which allo ws permit authorities to exempt small sources from permit requirements if re gulating those sources is not necessary for the area to attain or maintain any NA AQS.

The Clean Air Act through 40 CFR 51.160 – 51.165 re quires States (Districts in California) to establish a program for preconstruction review of n ew or modified major stationary sources (New Source Review – NSR), including procedures for authorizing construction of such sources (40 CFR 51.160(a)). The District issues permits ref erred to as Authority to Construct (ATC) to
authorize construction of new and modified sources.

Rules 201 – Permits Required , 202 – Permit Exemptions , and 210.1 – New and Modified Stationary Source Review (NSR) are the major components of EKAPCD’s NSR program. Rule 201 requires sources to obtain an ATC for cons truction and PTO for operation of sources as part of NSR. Rule 202 identifies which s ources are not required to obtain an ATC and/or PTO. Rule 210.1 establishes the requirem ents for new and modified stationary sources to ensure that the operation of such sources does not interfere with the attainment or maintenance of National Ambient Air Q uality Standards. Under the federal NSR program, all major stationary sources (ones wit h potential emissions over specified thresholds) are required to obtain an ATC prior to construction. For minor sources (nonmajor), a district has flexibility to determine whi ch types and sizes of sources are required to obtain an ATC as necessary to ensure at tainment and maintenance of the NAAQS in accordance with their SIP approved attainm ent plan (40 CFR 51.160(e)). This technical support document discusses only Rule 202 which we are evaluating for approval into the Eastern Kern portion of the Calif ornia SIP.

Rule 202 – Permit Exemptions – Numerous revisions have been made to Rule 202,
which are described above in the section titled “Pu rposes of Rule and Descriptions of Rule Amendments.” These changes include not only ad ministrative changes to the rule such as re-numbering and updating the format, but a lso the addition of general provisions, revisions, deletions and additions to t he types of equipment exempted from permit requirements. The administrative changes to the rule generally provide additional clarity to the rule and do not affect the stringenc y of the District’s NSR program and therefore do not require further evaluation. The ne w general provisions, revisions, and additions to the exemptions found in the current SI P-approved rule version of Rule 202 are evaluated below as necessary to further explain why the changes are acceptable.

1. Revision of Existing Rule 202 Exemptions

• Section b is now listed in section II.B. The exempt ion was revised to more specifically define the type of vehicles which are exempt from p ermit requirements including9

locomotives, aircraft, marine vessels and recreatio nal watercraft which are not considered stationary sources under the NSR program. The revis ions also strengthen the SIP by excluding from exemption equipment used for dredgin g of waterways or pile driving adjacent to or in waterways. These revisions make t he SIP no less stringent.

• Section c is now listed in section I.A and has been revised to apply only to incinerators, rather than any equipment, used in connection with structures. This revision strengthens
the SIP.

• Section d.3 is now listed in section II.A.2. The ex emption has been revised to lower the power rating for exemption of piston-type internal combustion engines. The maximum continuous design power rating is now 50 brake hors epower. The maximum exempt rating was formerly 500 brake horsepower. In additi on, the exemptions for internal combustion engines used in agricultural operations necessary for the growing of crops or for the raising of fowl or animals, as well as thos e not attached to a stationary foundation have been removed. The removal of these exemptions occurred in 2003 in accordance with the exemption of agricultural operations from permitting requirements being removed from the California Health and Safety Code. These revisions strengthen the SIP.

• Section d.4 is now listed in section II.C. The exem ption has been revised in several ways by removing exemption for water cooling ponds and l imiting applicability only to water cooling towers. In addition, the exemption now incl udes cooling towers with a circulation rate of more than 1,000 gallons/minute or used for cooling liquids containing volatile organic compounds are no longer exempt, thus streng thening the SIP.

• Sections d.6 and e.7 have been combined and are now listed in section II.F. The exemption has been revised in several ways. Rather than only exempting “presses” for extruding metals, minerals, plastics or wood, or “e quipment” used for compression or injection molding; the provision now exempts any “s ource operation” used exclusively for “extruding or compression molding of rubber pro ducts or plastics,” and limits the exemption to operations where no plasticizer or blo wing agent is present. Overall fewer types of materials and processes qualify for an exe mption. Exemption for equipment used exclusively for the extrusion of plastics already e xists in the current approved version of the SIP. There is no significant difference in emis sions between the extrusion of rubber and plastics. The inclusion of this provision merel y provides additional clarity. The revisions to this exemption make the SIP no less st ringent.

• Section e.2 is now listed in section II.L.1. The ex emption has been revised to specify applicability to “conventional” brazing, soldering, or welding operations only. For clarity, the rule has been revised to state that any interna l combustion engine or other equipment associated with the exempted equipment that would o therwise require permits is not exempt. This clarification has been added in order to improve enforceability and to prevent sources from claiming exemption for equipme nt by association with exempt equipment.

• Section e.3 is now listed in sections II.E.1 & 2. T he exemption for ovens used in bakeries has been narrowed to now only apply to those produc ing less than 1,000 pounds of product per operating day, and only if exempted by Subsection II.A.1, or if electrically heated. These ovens were exempted because they were deemed by the District to have10

insignificant emissions. Therefore, the revisions a re acceptable because they make the SIP no less stringent.

• Section f is now listed in section II.A.1. The exem ption has been revised to lower the maximum heat input rating for steam generators, ste am super heaters, water boilers, water heaters, steam cleaners, and closed transfer systems from 35 to 5 MMBTU/hr. New language was also added to restrict the chemical co mposition of the natural gas and/or liquefied petroleum gas used to no more than 5 perc ent by weight hydrocarbons heavier than butane (as determined by test method ASTM E-26 0-73) and no more than 0.30 grains of total sulfur per 100 standard cubic feet of gas (as determined by test method ASTM D-1072-80). All of these modifications to the rule serve to further limit and clarify which equipment is exempt from permit requi rements and strengthen the SIP.

• Section h.4.b, now listed under II.G.4.c, now inclu des storage of non-air-blown asphalt. Although this constitutes a categorical expansion o f the exemption, the minimum specific gravity of 0.9042 for materials specified for stora ge in this exemption has remained the same. The revisions made to this exemption are acce ptable because they make the SIP no less stringent.

• Section h.4.c is now listed in section II.G.4.a. Th e exemption has been strengthened by limiting applicability to storage of petroleum dist illates with a capacity of 19,800 gallons (471 bbls) or less, whereas no maximum volume for s torage equipment is specified in the current SIP-approved version of the rule. Additiona lly, the term “petroleum distillates” has replaced “fuel oils”, narrowing the exemption, as petroleum distillates are considered
to be a subset of fuel oils.

• Section h.5 is now listed in sections II.G.5 and II .H.6. The exemption has been revised to expand applicability to storage of greases in addit ion to refined lubricating oils. Because of the high specific gravity rating of greases, the y are not a significant contributor of VOC emissions. The revisions to the exemption make the SIP no less stringent.

• Section h.9 is now listed in section II.G.2. The ex emption has been reworded and expanded to apply to the storage of “unheated organ ic material” rather than “gasoline.” While gasoline is considered to be a subset of unhe ated organic materials, few unheated organic materials which are commonly stored in tank s have a lower specific gravity and are more volatile than gasoline. Therefore, the rev isions to this exemption are acceptable because they make the SIP no less stringent.

2. Addition of New Administrative Provisions EKAPCD added a number of new general provisions to Rule 202. These new general provisions are described above in the “Purposes of Rule and Rule Amendments”
section of this document.

• Section III, Provisions for Permitting Otherwise Ex empt Source Operation requires otherwise exempt pieces of equipment to operate und er a permit if it is part of a process that requires an ATC. Section III also identifies w hen an otherwise listed piece of equipment may not be exempt from permit requirement s, for example when the equipment is subject to a NSPS or NESHAP. In genera l, this section places additional11

restrictions on the exemptions listed in Sections I and II and provides that the Control Officer may determine when a source that is otherwi se listed in the rule may require an ATC. Since this language narrows the scope of the e xemptions listed in the current SIPapproved version of Rule 202, this revision provide s a strengthening of the SIP.

• Section IV, Recordkeeping adds the requirement for recordkeeping to verify an d maintain any exemption. This new requirement greatly strengt hens enforceability of Rule 202 as required by CAA §110(a)(2)(A).

3. Addition of New Exemptions not included in current SIP-approved rule

In the “Purpose of Rule and Description of Rule Ame ndments” section of this document we grouped all new exemptions into 4 groups according to the basis for the exemption. The discussion of the impact and approvability of these changes are provided below utilizing the same 4 groupings.

A. Equipment or processes that are exempted from a cor responding EKAPCD prohibitory rule which requires emission controls Under this grouping we have included equipment or p rocesses that are exempted from prohibitory rule requirements due to output, size, low emissions or type of fuel used. These exemptions in such rules are typically based on a district’s determination, made during the rule adoption process, that it is not re asonable to subject such sources to control requirements because they are small and it is not cost-effective. EPA considers the District’s decision to establish permit exempti on thresholds that mirror prohibitory rule applicability or exemption thresholds to be re asonable because these emission units are not subject to any emission control requirement s. Because no additional emission reductions would occur if such sources were require d to obtain an ATC, the addition of these exemptions has no effect on the District’s ab ility to attain or maintain any NAAQS and the exemptions are therefore approvable.

B. Sources that have insignificant or de minimus emiss ions After review of the sources listed in this category , EPA concurs with the District that the listed sources have very low levels of emissions du e to the type of process (e.g. mechanical or physical processes) and that they can be classified as insignificant emissions and/or they are equipment or activities t hat have been identified by EPA as trivial in EPA’s guidance document entitled “EPA Wh ite Paper for Streamlined Development of Part 70 Permit Applications” (See At tachment #7). Exempting these types of sources from permit requirements is consis tent with the flexibility allowed to states to exempt from permit requirements sources t hat are not likely to interfere with their ability to attain and maintain the any NAAQS. See 40 CFR 51.160(e).

C. Equipment or operations which are not subject to NS R program requirements because they are not stationary sources 40 CFR 51.160(a) states that a NSR program must app ly to “the construction or modification of a facility, building, structure, or installation... .” NSR programs do not apply to mobile sources (including portable equipme nt) or other activities that have been12

specifically excluded such as routine repairs or ma intenance. Therefore EPA finds that the new exemptions for equipment not subject to the NSR program is acceptable.

D. Agricultural source exemptions added pursuant to SB 700 and CARB definition of Large Confined Animal Facility (LCAF) Before SB 700 was adopted in 2003, air districts in California were prohibited by state law from requiring permits for pollutants emitted f rom agricultural sources. Because this prohibition existed in state law (CH&SC 42310(e)), most districts did not provide specific exemptions for agricultural sources from t he requirement to obtain an ATC and/or PTO in their local permit exemption rule. S B 700 ended the prohibition contained in CH&SC 42310(e). As part of this rule revision, t he District has added new language to implement revised state law under SB 700 by adding the following specific exemption thresholds for agricultural sources:

Section II.K provides a new exemption from permit r equirements for agricultural facilities and confined animal facilities (as defin ed in EKAPCD Rule 102) that meet both sets of eligibility criteria in sections II.K.1 and II.K.2.

• Section II.K.1 restricts the exemption to agricultu ral facilities or confined animal facilities that maintain actual emissions (excludin g fugitive PM 10 emissions) of less than one-half the Major Source thresholds as define d in District Rule 201.1, Permit to Operate for Sources Subject to Title V of the Feder al Clean Air Act Amendments of
1990 , Section II.U.

• Section II.K.2 further restricts the exemption to c onfined animal facilities that maintain less than the listed number of specified a nimals. These facility-size thresholds are based on the definition developed un der state law by CARB as to what
constitutes a LCAF. CARB based the definition of LC AF on the number of animals housed daily at the facility and mainly focused the ir determination on air emission impacts from these sources in the San Joaquin Valle y and South Coast (Los Angeles region) which are both “extreme” nonattainment area s for ozone and for which the major source threshold is 10 tons per year (tpy) fo r ozone precursors (VOC and NO x ). As such, the size cuts established in CARB’s LCAF d efinition correspond to VOC emissions (i.e., the predominant ozone precursor em itted by such facilities) of less than 10 tpy. See page 33 of CARB’s Staff Report: In itial Statement of Reasons for Rulemaking, release date May 6, 2005, prepared in c onnection with developing the
definition for LCAF.

Based on these limitations, we are proposing to fin d that the minor source exemption satisfies 40 CFR 51.160(e).

4. CAA Section 110(l) Evaluation

CAA section 110(l) states: “Each revision to an imp lementation plan submitted by a State under this chapter shall be adopted by such State a fter reasonable notice and public hearing.13

The Administrator shall not approve a revision of a plan if the revision would interfere with any applicable requirement concerning attainment an d reasonable further progress (as defined in section 7501 of this title), or any othe r 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 the Ju ne 21, 2011 submittal, we find that EKAPCD has provided sufficient evidence of public n otice and opportunity for comment and public hearings prior to adoption and submittal of Rule 202.

We have evaluated Rule 202 for consistency with CAA section 110(l). Except for the new exemptions provided in Section II.K which are discu ssed in more detail below, we find that potential emission increases due to the new permit exemptions, are offset by potential emission reductions from existing exemptions having been made significantly more stringent. For example, the applicability of severa l existing exemptions in Rule 202, such as the one for piston-type internal combustion engines and the one for low emitting units, have been significantly narrowed (e.g., from 500 to 50 b hp) or limited (e.g., from “sources of minor significance which may be specified by the ... control officer” to “potential to emit any uncontrolled pollutant at a rate of less than o r equal to 2 pounds in any 24-hour period” or (for VOC) “less than or equal to 10 pounds ...”), thereby offsetting potential incremental emissions increases associated with the new permit exemptions added to Rule 202.

We have also evaluated Section II.K of Rule 202 for consistency with CAA section 110(l). The new permitting exemption for certain new or mod ified minor agricultural sources would
allow such new sources and modifications to avoid n ew source review, and the related air quality evaluations and control technology review. However, we find that the exemption would not interfere with reasonable further progres s and attainment of any of the NAAQS within the area under EKAPCD jurisdiction or any ot her applicable requirement of the CAA. As discussed further in the paragraphs that follow, this is because of the limited nature of the exemption, the presence of other regulatory control s for exempt agricultural sources, the low ambient concentrations for the NAAQS pollutants wit hin the EKACPD other than ozone, and the continuing downward trend in emissions expected within the EKAPCD.

First, with respect to the limited nature of the ex emption, we note that the exemption applies only to new or modified agricultural sources less t han 50 tpy (including fugitive emissions other than fugitive PM 10 ) in actual emissions based on EKAPCD’s designation s and classifications for the various NAAQS and the CAA r equirements under Title V. The exemption is further limited with respect to VOC em issions by excluding LCAF that are defined in terms that would generally trigger the p ermit requirement at emissions levels far less than 50 tpy of VOC. For instance, for dairy fa cilities, LCAF is defined as 1,000 milkproducing dairy cows and, based on CARB estimates p resented in the CARB staff report cited above, a 1,000-cow dairy corresponds to VOC e missions of approximately 7.2 tpy. Thus, the emissions from exempt new or modified min or agricultural sources would be minimal and the foregone emissions reductions that might theoretically have been applied to
such sources would be even less.14

Second, certain exempt new or modified agricultural sources would be subject to controls in other regulations that would serve to limit the pot ential for significant emissions impacts from such sources. These regulations include EKAPCD Rule 417 (“Agricultural and Prescribed Burning”), last approved by EPA at 69 FR 21713 (April 22, 2004); EKAPCD Rule 421 (“Orchard Heaters”), last approved at 37 F R 19812 (September 22, 1972); and the California Department of Pesticide Regulation’s Fum igant Regulations, last approved at 77 FR 65294 (October 26, 2012).

Third, with respect to the “criteria” or “NAAQS” po llutants other than ozone and PM 10 , the area within EKACPD jurisdiction is designated as “a ttainment” or “unclassifiable,” see 40 CFR 81.305, and ambient concentrations of these pol lutants are low notwithstanding the fact that, historically, minor agricultural sources have not been subject to NSR permitting or related controls. For instance, preliminary data pu blished by CARB indicates that the annual
and 24-hour PM 2.5 design values measured in the EKAPCD in 2013 (at t he monitoring site in Mojave), are 7.2 micrograms per cubic meter (μg/m 3 ) and 24 μg/m 3 , respectively, and are well below the corresponding NAAQS of 12.0 μg/m 3 and 35 μg/m 3 , respectively, Thus, we find that the continuation of the de facto status q uo with respect to certain minor agricultural sources being exempt from NSR would not interfere w ith continued attainment of the applicable NAAQS.

Fourth, while a portion of the EKACPD is classified as “serious” nonattainment for the PM 10 NAAQS, ambient concentrations are well below the ap plicable NAAQS of 150 μg/m 3 notwithstanding the historic lack of NSR controls o n minor agricultural sources. For instance, preliminary CARB data indicates that, from 2009-201 3, the highest 24-hour concentration of

PM 10 measured in the EKAPCD was 120 μg/m 3 in 2013 (at the site in Mojave), a value that is 20% below the applicable NAAQS of 150 μg/m 3 . Moreover, CARB emission inventory projections for EKAPCD predict that PM 10 emissions will remain at approximately 27 tons per (annual average) day through 2025. See CARB Alm anac Emission Projection Data (published in 2013) for EKAPCD for years 2012 and 2 025. Once again, under the assumption that minor agricultural sources are not subject to NSR. Thus, we find that the permit exemption for certain minor agricultural sou rces would not interfere with attainment
of the PM 10 NAAQS in the EKAPCD.

Lastly, EPA has classified “Eastern Kern,” which in cludes all of the EKAPCD except for Indian Wells Valley, as “marginal” nonattainment fo r the 1997 and 2008 ozone NAAQS. See 40 CFR 81.305. “Marginal” areas are not required to submit attainment demonstration plans but are given only three years from the effective d ate of the designation to attain the standard. With respect to the 1997 ozone NAAQS, EPA has deter mined, based on ambient ozone concentration data for 2009-2011, that Eastern Kern attained the standard by the applicable attainment date. See 77 FR 71551 (December 3, 2012) . Also, we note that CARB data predicts a continuing downward trend for both VOC a nd NO x emissions in EKAPCD through 2025 under the current regulatory program f or stationary, mobile, and area sources that does not include NSR for minor agricultural so urces. See CARB Almanac Emission Projection Data (published in 2013) for EKAPCD for years 2012 and 2025. Given the15

ambient concentration data and emissions projection s, we conclude that the permit exemption for certain minor agricultural sources would not in terfere with continued attainment of the 1997 ozone NAAQS. With respect to the 2008 ozone NA AQS, the applicable attainment date is in July 2015, and if Eastern Kern were to fail t o attain the standard by that date, the area
would be reclassified as “moderate” and thereafter be required to submit an attainment demonstration plan. Any such plan will need to acco unt for the permit exemptions in Rule 202 in developing the control strategy or take the necessary steps under state law (CH&SC 42301.16(c)) to remove the exemption if the EKAPCD decides to do so.

Therefore, for the reasons discussed above, EPA con cludes that the new exemption in Rule 202 for certain new or modified minor agricultural sources contained in Section II.K would not interfere with attainment and RFP or any other applicable requirement of the CAA.

Rule Deficiencies

No deficiencies were found that would prevent EPA f rom recommending full approval of
EKAPCD Rule 202 into the SIP.

EPA Action

EPA has reviewed the submitted rule in accordance w ith the Rule Evaluation criteria described earlier in this document. Consistent with the requi rements of 40 CFR Subpart I, all major stationary sources are required to obtain an ATC pe rmit prior to construction. For minor sources, EPA believes that the emissions from the types and sizes of equipment and operations exempted from NSR permit requirements are consistent with th e flexibility afforded to states to regulate only those sources as necessary to assure attainmen t and maintenance of the NAAQS (40 CFR 51.160(e)).

As discussed in the Rule Evaluation section of this document, we have evaluated the revised rule for consistency with CAA Section 110(l) requirement s. We conclude that the new and revised exemptions would not interfere with reasonable furt her progress and attainment of any of the NAAQS in the EKAPCD or any other applicable require ment of the CAA and thus is approvable under section 110(l) of the CAA because of (1) the limited nature of all new exemptions, (2) the narrowing of several existing exemptions, (3) the p resence of other regulatory controls for exempt agricultural sources, (4) the low ambient co ncentrations for the NAAQS pollutants in EKAPCD other than ozone, and (5) emission projectio ns that assume no NSR controls for minor agricultural sources yet decline or hold steady wel l into the future for PM 10 and the ozone

precursors.

EPA recommends full approval of the following EKAPC D rule for incorporation into the California Applicable SIP, pursuant to section 110( k)(3) of the CAA as amended in 1990:

• Rule 202 – Permit Exemptions (amended on January 13, 2011, submitted on June 21

, 2011), replacing Rule 202, Exemptions , approved into the SIP on July 6, 1982 (47 FR 29231).16

EPA Recommendations

The following revisions to Rule 202 are not current ly the basis for rule disapproval, but are recommended as improvements when this rule is amend ed.

• Section II.L.1: The term “conventional” should be d efined in Rule 202 to clarify how it relates to brazing, soldering, or welding operation s.

• Language should be added to section II.K to clarify that this exemption does not apply to any federal major source or major modification to a major source which requires a permit pursuant to Title I or Title V of the Clean Air Act

.

Attachments
1. EKAPCD Rule 202, Permit Exemptions, as submitted on June 21, 2011.
2. EKAPCD Staff Report (Rule 202) dated January 13, 20 11.
3. CARB Staff Report: Initial Statement of Reasons for Rulemaking, Public Hearing to Consider the Large Confined Animal Facility Definit ion, May 6, 2005. (Cover Only and page 33)
4. EKAPCD Board Letter (Rule 202) dated January 8, 200 4. 5. California Senate Bill 700, dated September 22, 200 3.
6. EKAPCD Board Letter (Rule 202) dated March 13, 2003

. 7. U.S. EPA, “EPA White Paper for Streamlined Developm ent of Part 70 Permit Applications” dated July 10, 1995.
8. EKAPCD SIP Approved Rule 202, approved July 6, 1982

. 9. CARB, “Select 8 Summary,” summarizes 2012 and 2013 Ozone ambient monitoring data from monitoring sites within Eastern Kern.
10. CARB, “Select 8 Summary,” summarizes 2012 and 2013 PM 2.5 and PM 10 monitoring data from monitoring sites within EKAPCD.
11. CARB, “Select 8 Summary,” summarizes 2009-2013 PM 10 ambient monitoring data from monitoring sites within EKAPCD.
12. CARB, “Almanac Emission Projection Data, 2012 Estim ated Annual Average Emissions, Kern County APCD.”
13. CARB, “Almanac Emission Projection Data, 2025 Forec asted Annual Average Emissions, Kern County APCD.”
14. EKAPCD SIP Approved Rule 102 (“Definitions”), appro ved May 4, 2012 (77 FR 26448).
15. CARB, “Area Designations for National Ambient Air Q uality Standards, 8-Hour Ozone,”
June 2013.
16. CARB, “Area Designations for National Ambient Air Q uality Standards, PM 10 ,” September 2013.
17. EKAPCD, “Eastern Kern Air Pollution Control Distric t Boundary Map.”