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

San Joaquin Valley Unified Air Pollution Control District 

Rule 4682, Polystyrene, Polyethylene, and Polypropylene Products Manufacturing

June 13, 2011

Prepared by Mae Wang
Agency: San Joaquin Valley Unified Air Pollution Control District (SJVUAPCD)

SIP Approved Rule:

SJVUAPCD Rule 4682, Polystyrene Foam, Polyethylene, and Polypropylene Manufacturing

(originally adopted on May 21, 1992, amended June 16, 1994, approved on June 13, 1995, 60 FR 

31086).

SJVUAPCD Rule 1020, Definitions (originally adopted on 6/18/1992, amended on 1/15/2009,

approved on 8/28/2009, 74 FR 44291.

Subject of this TSD:

SJVUAPCD Rule 4682, Polystyrene, Polyethylene, and Polypropylene Products Manufacturing 

Amended September 20, 2007; Submitted March 7, 2008.

Rule Summary 

Rule 4682 was designed to reduce emissions of volatile organic compounds (VOC) and 

trichlorofluoromethane (CFC-11) and dichlorofluoromethane (CFC-12) from the manufacturing, 

processing, and storage of products composed of polystyrene, polyethylene, or polypropylene. 

The currently submitted version of the rule contains revisions that expand the rule to include 

reduction or control of VOC emissions from all manufacturing processes, including storage and 

curing. The rule requires facilities to comply with one of the following four options: a limit on 

the emissions of VOC for each 100 pounds of material processed, use of a non-VOC blowing 

agent, use of an approved emission control system with product storage in a controlled 

warehouse, or a demonstration that emissions are no greater than those that would occur with an 

approved emission control system. The first option, a limit on the VOC emissions for each 100 

pounds of material processed, is a new option that was not contained in the previous version of 

the rule. 

Changes from the approved SIP rule include:

Sections 1.0 (Purpose) and 2.0 (Applicability) were amended for clarity. 

The following definitions were added to Section 3.0: APCO, ARB, Approved Emission Control 

System, EPA, Manufacturing Emissions, Manufacturing Operation, and Raw Material. 

Language was added to Section 5.0 (Requirements) to state that Section 5.1 shall be effective 

until September 20, 2010, and Sections 5.3 through 5.5 shall be effective on and after September 

20, 2010. 

Section 5.3 through 5.5 were added to identify the emission control options with which operators 

must comply after September 20, 2010. 
3

Section 5.6 (Compliance Plan) was added to require submission of a Compliance Plan and 

identify the necessary information to be included in the Plan. 

Section 6.1 (Recordkeeping) was amended to require records to demonstrate compliance with 

Section 5.3.1, and to require that records be kept at the facility for 5 years. 

Section 6.2 (Test Methods) was amended to include methods for determining control efficiency 

of emission control systems, capture efficiency of emission capture control systems, and the 

VOC contained in polymeric materials. Language was added to state that a violation of any of 

the methods is considered a violation of the rule, and that alternative methods may be used if 

approved in writing by the APCO and EPA. 

Section 7.0 (Compliance Schedule) was amended to include the new compliance date of 

September 20, 2010. 

EPA Evaluation

The following criteria and guidance documents were used to evaluate the submitted rule:

1. Enforceability - The Bluebook (Issues Relating to VOC Regulation Cutpoints, 

Deficiencies, and Deviations, EPA, May 25, 1988) and the Little Bluebook (Guidance 

Document for Correcting Common VOC & Other Rule Deficiencies, EPA Region 9, 

August 21, 2001) were used to help evaluate compliance with the CAA §110(a)(2)(A) 

requirement for enforceability. 

2. RACT - EPA’s document entitled, “Control of VOC Emissions from Polystyrene Foam 

Manufacturing” (EPA-450/3-90-020, September 1990), and other state and local rules for 

this category were used to help evaluate the RACT requirements of CAA §182(b)(2) and 

§182(f). 

3. SIP Relaxation - Where previous versions of rules have been SIP approved, new 

submittals must comply with CAA §110(l) and §193 regarding SIP relaxations. We have 

evaluated this SIP revision to determine whether it would interfere with any applicable 

requirement concerning attainment and reasonable further progress (RFP) or any other 

applicable requirement of the Act (CAA 110(l)) or modify, in a nonattainment area, any 

SIP-approved control requirement in effect before November 15, 1990 (CAA 193).

4. Compliance averaging times – “Averaging Times for Compliance With VOC Emission 

Limits – SIP Revision Policy,” memorandum from John R. O’Connor, OAQPS, dated 

January 20, 1984.

With the exception of the one enforceability issue identified in the Rule Deficiency 

section below, SJVUAPCD Rule 4682 fulfills the relevant criteria summarized above. Rule 

4682 improves the SIP by clarifying language, adding definitions, and adding control 
4

requirements. This rule also improves the SIP by adding requirements for compliance plans, 

recordkeeping, and testing. The rule is generally clear and contains appropriate monitoring, 

reporting, and recordkeeping requirements to ensure the emission limits are adequately 

enforceable. 

The SJVUAPCD regulates an extreme 8-hour and extreme 1-hour ozone nonattainment 

area (40 CFR 81). On April 16, 2009, SJVUAPCD adopted its “2009 RACT Demonstration for 

Ozone SIP,” which provides the District’s demonstration that RACT is implemented for all 

appropriate activities. Rule 4682 was included as part of this demonstration. SJVUAPCD’s 

2009 RACT Demonstration asserts that Rule 4682 fulfills CAA RACT requirements for reasons 

including: 

1. The requirements in Rule 4682 are consistent with recommendations contained in 

EPA’s Control Technique Guidelines and Alternative Control Technology documents.

2. The requirements in Rule 4682 are consistent with the Standards of Performance for 

New Stationary Sources (NSPS) in 40 CFR Part 60, Subpart DDD – Standards of 

Performance for Volatile Organic Compound Emissions from the Polymer 

Manufacturing Industry. 

3. The requirements of Rule 4682 are consistent with rules from the Bay Area Air 

Quality Management District and South Coast Air Quality Management District that 

regulate this source category. 

With the exception of the deficiency discussed below, we concur that Rule 4682 fulfills RACT 

for the above reasons. Additionally, we are not aware of any more stringent controls adopted or 

demonstrated to be reasonably available for this industry. 

Rule Deficiency

The following deficiency precludes full approval of the rule into the SIP:

Section 5.3.1: This section establishes an emission limit of 2.4 pounds of VOC per 100 pounds 

of total material processed, as averaged on a monthly basis. EPA generally cannot approve 

compliance periods exceeding 24 hours unless specific criteria are met. These criteria are 

discussed in a memorandum from John R. O’Connor, OAQPS, dated January 20, 1984, 

“Averaging Times for Compliance With VOC Emission Limits – SIP Revision Policy.” 

The O’Connor memo states that longer averaging times may be permitted under certain 

conditions in cases where daily emissions cannot be determined or the application of RACT for 

each emission point (line, machine, etc.) is not economically or technically feasible on a daily 

basis. The staff report for Rule 4682 does not provide a clear explanation of why daily emissions 

cannot be determined. Additionally, South Coast Air Quality Management District (SCAQMD) 

Rule 1175 and Maricopa County (Arizona) Rule 358 contain similar limits without the monthly 

averaging. SJVUAPCD will need to demonstrate why an emission limit that appears to have 

been achieved in practice by existing operations in other districts cannot be met on a daily basis 

in the SJVUAPCD. We understand that certain types of facilities may have more difficulty than 
5

others in meeting the 2.4 pounds VOC limit. To address this concern, some other district rules 

have set limits ranging from 2.4 pounds to 3.2 pounds, depending on the type of facility (such as 

cup molding, shape molding, or block molding). If needed, SJVUAPCD could consider such an 

approach as well. 

The O’Connor memo also stresses that real reductions in actual emissions must be 

achieved and that the emission limits should reflect typical real-life production rates and 

operating hours. These criteria should be supported by historical production and operation data. 

The staff report for Rule 4682 does not provide clear historical production and operating rates. 

Instead, the information provided in Appendix B of SJVUAPCD’s staff report for Rule 4682 

appears to be largely estimated inventories and emissions reductions based on potential or 

allowable emissions. 

Additional Recommendations 

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

recommended for the next time the rule is amended. 

 

Section 5.3.5.1: We recommend the following language, “The beads used in manufacturing 

have an annual-average VOC content of less than 4.2% per by weight as certified by the 

manufacturer; and” 

EPA Action

SJVUAPCD Rule 4682 strengthens the SIP, and the associated District staff report 

estimates that it will reduce VOC emissions by 0.4 tons per day. The rule largely fulfills the 

relevant Clean Air Act §110 and Part D requirements, but the deficiency discussed above 

precludes full SIP approval. EPA staff recommends a simultaneous limited approval and limited 

disapproval of Rule 4682 pursuant to CAA §110(k)(3) and §301(a).

Attachments

1. Submitted SJVUAPCD Rule 4682, Polystyrene, Polyethylene, and Polypropylene Products 

Manufacturing, amended September 20, 2007.

2. Applicable SIP Rule 4682, amended June 16, 1994.

3. O’Connor memo, January 20, 1984.