Technical Support Document 

for 

EPA's Notice of Proposed Rulemaking 

on revisions to the 

California State Implementation Plan 

as submitted by the State of California, Air Resources Board 

for the San Joaquin Valley Unified Air Pollution Control District 

 

EPA's Analysis of 

San Joaquin Valley Unified Air Pollution Control District’s 

Rule 4311, Flares 

United States Environmental Protection Agency, Region IX 

Air Division 

 

August 2011 

Prepared by: Nicole Law 

Reviewed by: Andrew Steckel
SJVUAPCD - Rule 4311, Flares; 

TSD, 8/2011 

2 

San Joaquin Valley Unified Air Pollution Control District (SJVUAPCD) 

Rule 4311, Flares 

I. Chronology of Rule Adoption and Submittal 

June 20, 2002 SJVUAPCD initially adopted Rule 4311. 

February 26, 2003 EPA approved the 2002 version of Rule 4311 (68 FR 8835) into the 

California State Implementation Plan (SIP). 

June 15, 2006 SJVUACPD revised Rule 4311. 

November 20, 2007 EPA proposed approval of the 2006 version, but never finalized this action. 

June 18, 2009 SJVUAPCD revised Rule 4311. 

 

January 10, 2010 The California Air Resources Board (ARB) submitted the 2009 version of 

Rule 4311 to EPA as a revision to the SIP. 

February 4, 2010 EPA found ARB’s 2010 submittal complete. 

Consequently, the June 20, 2002 version of Rule 4311 is currently the SIP approved version. 

II. Summary of Rule & Recent Amendments

SJVUAPCD Rule 4311, Flares, is designed to decrease volatile organic compound (VOC), 

oxides of nitrogen (NOx), sulfur (SO2 and H2S), carbon monoxide (CO) and particulate matter 

(PM) emissions from industries such as refineries, unrecoverable gases from oil wells, vented 

gases from blast furnaces, unused gases from coke ovens, and gaseous wastes from chemical 

industries by requiring that flares be operated in a prescribed manner, meet specific emission 

standards, and that flaring be minimized according to flare minimization plan (FMP) provisions. 

SJVUAPCD amended Rule 4311 twice since we approved the June 20, 2002 version of Rule 

4311 and incorporated it within the SIP. 

The June 15, 2006 amendments include: 

1. New definitions were added for Air Pollution Control Officer (APCO) and ARB. 

2. An exemption was added for facilities with a potential to emit less than 10 tons per year 

of VOC or NOx, consistent with SJVUAPCD’s CAA major source threshold. 

3. A compliance schedule was added for new and existing facilities emitting between 10 

and 25 tons per year of VOC and NOx. 

The June 19, 2009 amendments are summarized below. The most significant include 
SJVUAPCD - Rule 4311, Flares; 

TSD, 8/2011 

3 

requirements for FMPs, monitoring of flare activity and emissions, and related recordkeeping. 

o Several new terms were added to the definition section. (Section 3.0) 

o A requirement was added prohibiting flaring unless it is consistent with an approved 

FMP. (Section 5.8) 

o Petroleum refinery SO2 performance targets were added. Refineries must minimize SO2

flare emissions to less than 1.50 tons per MM barrels of crude processing capacity 

effective January 1, 2011 and to less than 0.50 tons per MM barrels of crude processing 

capacity effective January 1, 2017. (Section 5.9) 

o Recordkeeping provisions concerning FMPs, annual reporting of flare activity and flare 

monitoring data were added. (Sections 6.1.5, 6.1.6, and 6.1.7) 

o Flare reporting requirements were added for unplanned flaring events, reportable flaring 

events (per definition at section 3.31), and annual monitoring reports. (Section 6.2) 

o Test methods were revised to include provisions and methods for flare monitoring and 

vent gas flow verification. (Section 6.3) 

o FMP provisions were added concerning plan content and evaluation requirements, plan 

update requirements, timing and procedures. (Section 6.5) 

o Several monitoring requirements were added: 

o Monitor vent gas flow for flares subject to Section 5.8 (Section 5.10). 

o Monitoring requirements for petroleum flares or any flare with flaring capacity 

greater than 50 MM Btu (Sections 6.6-6.10): 

§ Vent gas composition. 

§ Pilot and purge gas. 

§ Water seal. 

§ General provisions of monitoring such as periods of inoperation and 

frequency of monitoring. 

§ Video monitoring (petroleum refinery flares only). 

o A new compliance schedule was added to enforce a prohibition on flaring once an 

exemption under section 4.0 has been lost. (Section 7.0) 

III. Rule Evaluation Criteria

The following criteria were used to evaluate the submitted rule: 

1. Enforceability - 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, 
SJVUAPCD - Rule 4311, Flares; 

TSD, 8/2011 

4 

August 21, 2001), and State Implementation Plans, General Preamble for the 

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

1992) were used to help evaluate compliance with the CAA §110(a)(2)(A) requirement 

for enforceability. 

2. RACT – SJVAPCD’s 2009 RACT SIP Demonstration (April 16, 2009), “Preamble, Final 

Rule to Implement the 8-hour Ozone National Ambient Air Quality Standard” (70 FR 

71612 November 29, 2005), Letter from William T. Hartnett to Regional Air Division 

Directors, “RACT Qs & As – Reasonable Available Control Technology (RACT) 

Questions and Answers,” (May 18, 2006), and other state and local rules for this category 

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

 

3. SIP Revisions - 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). 

IV. Evaluation of Enforceability and SIP Revisions

The monitoring, recordkeeping, reporting and other requirements generally ensure that the 

submitted rule can be enforced and that the rule is consistent with CAA §110(a)(2)(A). We 

propose to determine that our approval of the submittal would comply with CAA sections 110(l) 

and 193, because the proposed SIP revision would not interfere with the on-going process for 

ensuring that requirements for RFP and attainment of the National Ambient Air Quality Standards 

(NAAQS) are met, and the submitted SIP revision is more stringent than the rule previously 

approved into the SIP. 

V. Evaluation of RACT 

CAA §172(c)(1) requires nonattainment areas to implement all reasonably available control 

measures, including such reductions in emissions from existing sources in the area as may be 

obtained through the adoption, at a minimum, of reasonably available control technology 

(RACT/RACM), as expeditiously as practicable. The San Joaquin Valley is designated as 

nonattainment for the 1997 and 2006 fine particulate matter (PM2.5) National Ambient Air 

Quality Standards (NAAQS) and designated and classified as extreme nonattainment for the 1-

hour and 8-hour ozone NAAQS (see 40 CFR part 81). Flares emit PM2.5 and ozone precursors. 

Therefore, the SJVUAPCD must implement RACT/RACM for flares if those measures will 

advance attainment of the NAAQS for PM2.5 or ozone, when considered collectively with other 

reasonable measures. Additional control measures for flares may be required pursuant to CAA 

§172(c)(1) if both: (1) additional measures are reasonably available; and (2) these additional 

reasonably available measures will advance attainment in the area when considered collectively 

with other reasonable measures. In separate rulemaking(s), EPA will take action on the State’s 

RACM demonstrations for the PM2.5 and 8-hour ozone NAAQS based on an evaluation of the 

control measures submitted as a whole and their overall potential to advance the applicable 

attainment date(s) in the San Joaquin Valley. See 40 CFR 51.912(d) and 51.1010. 
SJVUAPCD - Rule 4311, Flares; 

TSD, 8/2011 

5 

On April 16, 2009, SJVUAPCD adopted its “2009 RACT SIP” which provides the District’s 

demonstration that RACT is implemented for all appropriate activities. In summary, the 2009 

RACT SIP asserts that the June 15, 2006 version of Rule 4311 partially fulfills RACT for reasons 

including: 

o There is no EPA CTG, ACT, NESHAP, or MACT to help define RACT. 

o The NSPS does not identify RACT for flares because the NSPS specifies no visible 

emissions and NOx and VOCs are both invisible gases. 

o Rule 4311 satisfies RACT for flaring in terms of emission limits and equipment standards. 

o The district is in the process of revising the rule to incorporate the use of FMPs. 

We agree that there is no state or national guidance clearly defining RACT for this category. 

There is also relatively limited precedent and experience with FMPs to control emissions. As a 

result, we have relied significantly on FMP regulations from two other air districts in California: 

o South Coast Air Quality Management District (SCAQMD) Rule 1118, Control of 

Emissions from Refinery Flares, adopted in 1998 and amended November 4, 2005; 

o Bay Area Air Quality Management District (BAAQMD) Rule 12-11, Flare Monitoring at 

Petroleum Refineries, adopted June 4, 2003; and, 

o BAAQMD Rule 12-12, Flares at Petroleum Refineries, adopted July 20, 2005 and 

amended April 5, 2006. 

The district rules generally prohibit routine flare activity and require facilities to collect and 

report information concerning the duration, frequency, and/or magnitude of flare activity. 

Furthermore, the rules require facilities to develop and implement FMPs to reduce future flaring 

activity. 

Additionally, 40 CFR Part 60.18 addresses operational requirements for flares and 40 CFR Part 

60 Subpart Ja (NSPS Ja) addresses Standards of Performance for Petroleum Refineries for which 

Construction, Reconstruction, or Modification commenced after May 14, 2007. Rule 4311 was 

evaluated primarily against NSPS Ja instead of Part 60.18 because NSPS Ja requires various 

work practice standards which are more comparable to SIP rule requirements, while Part 60.18 

describes operational requirements such as no visible emissions, maximum exit velocity, and 

presence of a pilot flame. 

Based on our analysis of the industry and these and related documents, we believe that an 

enforceable rule which includes three core requirements would satisfy RACT for flares. While 

we consider operational requirements such as having a pilot flame present at all times RACT, we 

also consider the following, which contribute to developing a strong FMP, as RACT for this 

geographical area: 

1. Analyze and minimize flaring events, such as through an FMP. At a minimum, 

FMPs generally should include: 

A. A description of each flare, including all connections to the flare and a 

process flow diagram of upstream equipment. 
SJVUAPCD - Rule 4311, Flares; 

TSD, 8/2011 

6 

B. Procedures to minimize or eliminate flaring. 

2. Monitor and report flaring events. 

3. Prepare and submit causal analysis for large flare events. 

These RACT elements are discussed further below. 

A. Flare Minimization Plans - One of the major revisions to Rule 4311 is the 

requirement for FMPs in section 6.5 which are designed to describe and reduce flaring. 

1. Description of flare and associated systems - SJVUAPCD 4311 section 6.5.1.2, 

BAAQMD 12-12 section 401.1, SCAQMD 1118 section (C) (2), and NSPS Ja 

section 60.103a (a) (1) all require a diagram of all connections to the flare. The 

district rules additionally require detailed process flow diagrams of all equipment 

that vents to each flare. This exercise provides the facilities and regulatory 

agencies with information that allows evaluation of flare design and operation. 

The SJVUAPCD Rule 4311 requirement is similar to the other district rules and 

more expansive than NSPS Ja. 

2. Procedures to minimize flaring - The main purpose of an FMP is to minimize 

flaring, so the requirements designed to minimize flaring are essential. 

SJVUAPCD 4311 section 6.5.1.3, BAAQMD 12-12 section 401.3, and SCAQMD 

1118 section (c)(2)(C) all require a description of equipment, process or 

procedures the operator plans to implement to minimize flaring. In addition, 

SJVUAPCD 4311 section 6.5.1, BAAQMD 12-12 section 401.4, and SCAQMD 

1118 section (e) (1) (C) require evaluations of prevention measures for flaring due 

to planned major maintenance activities (including startup and shutdown), gas 

quantity and quality changes, and recurrent failure of equipment or processes. 

The SJVUAPCD Rule 4311 requirement for procedures to minimize flaring is 

equivalent to the other district rules and more detailed than the NSPS Ja. A 

review of FMPs for refineries of similar size in SCAQMD and SJVUAPCD 

showed similar level of detail and requirements, which support our assessment 

that SJVUACPD’s requirements are as stringent as analogous requirements 

elsewhere.

1

 

B. Monitoring and reporting flare events - Flare monitoring and reporting requirements 

can provide information on flare activity and emissions needed to ensure rule compliance 

and prioritize additional flare reduction opportunities. The current rule in the SIP has 

minimal monitoring requirements, but the submitted revisions expand requirements 

regarding vent gas flow, vent gas composition, pilot and purge gas information, water 

seal monitoring and video monitoring, as summarized below. 

1. Vent gas monitoring - Rule 4311 section 5.10 requires vent gas flow 

 

1 Comparison of Kern Oil & Refining Co. Flare Minimization Plan, as submitted to SJVUAPCD, July 1, 2010 and 

Paramount Petroleum Requirements under paragraph (c)(2) and (c)(3) of Rule 1118, as submitted to SCAQMD, 

September 1, 2006 and December 29, 2006. Prepared by Nicole Law (EPA) on July 14, 2011. 
SJVUAPCD - Rule 4311, Flares; 

TSD, 8/2011 

7 

monitoring with a flow measuring device or parameter as specified in the permit 

to operate. Section 6.2.3 requires that annual monitoring reports include the total 

volumetric flow of vent gas for each day and the vent gas composition for each 

source test or each hour of flaring. Both BAAQMD 12-11 section 501 and 

SCAQMD 1118 section (g) (3) explicitly require continuous monitoring for 

volumetric gas flow flared, and NSPS Ja section 60.107a (a)(1) requires 

continuous monitoring for the concentration of SO2 emissions. BAAQMD 

requires monthly summary reports and SCAQMD requires quarterly. While we 

encourage SJVUAPCD to similarly explicitly require more frequent summary 

reports of continuous vent gas monitoring, the existing reporting requirements in 

section 6.2.3 seem to implicitly require continuous or near continuous monitoring. 

In addition, because of the limited experience with flare reduction programs, it is 

not clear that additional vent gas monitoring and recordkeeping is needed to 

ensure RACT for control of flaring. 

2. Pilot and purge gas monitoring - Rule 4311 section 6.7, BAAQMD 12-11 

section 504 and SCAQMD 1118 section (f)(3)(C) all require pilot and purge gas 

volumetric flow monitoring and the reporting requirements in Rule 4311 section 

6.2.3.5, BAAQMD 12-11 section 401.5, and SCAQMD section (f)(3)(C) include 

the type of pilot and purge gases, the volumetric flow for each day and for each 

month, and the means used to determine flow. This information is designed to 

help ensure continuous readiness of a flaring event and to quantify emissions from 

the pilot and purge gases. SCAQMD 1118 section (f)(3)(C) requires additional 

information on the pilot and purge gas including maximum total sulfur 

concentration, and the NSPS Ja for refineries does not address pilot and purge gas 

monitoring at all. Because the additional requirements in SCAQMD 1118 section 

(f)(3)(C) are somewhat redundant to information already available, it is not clear 

that these additional requirements are needed to ensure RACT for flaring. 

3. Water Seal Monitoring - BAAQMD 12-12 section 501 requires continuous 

monitoring and recording of water level and pressure. This is designed partly as a 

redundant assurance that the flare is operating properly and all flaring events are 

appropriately reported. SJVUAPCD section 6.8 requires water seal monitoring 

and daily records or as specified by the permit to operate. Because this 

requirement is somewhat redundant to vent gas and pilot/purge gas requirements, 

it is not clear that additional water seal monitoring is needed to ensure RACT for 

control of flaring. We note that SCAQMD 1118 and the NSPS Ja do not 

specifically address water seal monitoring. 

4. Video Monitoring – SJVUAPCD 4311 Section 6.10, SCAQMD 1118 section 

(g)(7) and BAAQMD 12-11 section 507 all require video monitoring for refinery 

flares. However, the other rules do not allow an alternative method, as does Rule 

4311 section 6.10. Video monitoring is, in large part, a redundant method to 

ensure proper flaring, flare temperature, combustion efficiency, vent gas flow, and 

duration of flare. SCAQMD does not require reporting of the video monitoring 

data, although BAAQMD 12-11 section 401.8 requires the archive of images 
SJVUAPCD - Rule 4311, Flares; 

TSD, 8/2011 

8 

recorded be included in the monthly flare report. While we encourage 

SJVUAPCD to add video monitoring requirements for flares, Rule 4311 obtains 

redundant information from other monitoring and reporting requirements such as 

vent gas monitoring, pilot gas flow, water seal monitoring, the flare report, and 

the annual monitoring report. We also note that NSPS Ja does not specifically 

address video monitoring. 

C. Causal Analysis - In addition to monitoring and FMP requirements, Rule 4311 also 

requires causal analysis reports be submitted annually for flare events where more than 

500,000 scf of vent gas is flared per calendar day or where sulphur oxide emissions 

exceed 500 lbs per calendar day. The causal reports require facilities to analyse what 

occurred during a flare event and evaluate prevention measures to prevent recurrence. 

SCAQMD 1118, BAAQMD 12-11, and NSPS subpart Ja similarly requires causal 

analysis to force sources to analyze whether flaring can be minimized. 

1. Causal Report Frequency - Rule 4311, section 6.2.2 requires the submittal of 

an annual report for flaring events, including causal analysis. In contrast, 

BAAQMD 12-12 section 406 requires casual analysis 60 days following the last 

day of the month in which flaring occurred. SCAQMD Rule 1118 section (b)(20) 

requires a Specific Cause Analysis within 30 days, describing the cause and 

duration of the flare event along with any corrective actions taken. NSPS Ja 

section 60.108a (6)(vi) requires the results of the root-cause analysis in the reports 

which are required every 6 months. We encourage SJVUAPCD to revise Rule 

4311 to similarly require causal analysis more frequently than annually. 

However, given the limited experience with this type of requirement, we do not 

have a clear basis to conclude that annual reporting is needed for RACT. 

2. Causal Report Components - Section 6.2.2 of Rule 4311 describes the 

following components that must be included in each causal analysis: 

§ an investigation to determine primary cause of the flare events, 

§ measures implemented to prevent a recurrence, 

§ an explanation of why flaring was an emergency and necessary to prevent 

accident, hazard, or release of vent gas directly to the atmosphere, and 

§ the date, time, and duration of the flaring event. 

These requirements are very similar to SCAQMD 1118 section (b)(20), 

BAAQMD 12-12 section 406 and NSPS Ja section 60.103a(b), except that 

BAAQMD 12-12 section 406 additionally requires a showing that the flaring is 

consistent with the FMP and the recorded volume of the vent gas flares, 

calculated methane, non-methane hydrocarbon, and SO2 emissions associated 

with the flare event. While we encourage SJVUAPCD to require a similar 

showing in the causal analysis required by Rule 4311, the relevant information is 

already required to be collected in SJVUAPCD Rule 4311 Sections 6.2.3.1 and 

6.6. 
SJVUAPCD - Rule 4311, Flares; 

TSD, 8/2011 

9 

D. RACT Summary - As discussed above, SJVUAPCD Rule 4311 is generally as 

stringent as other recently-adopted analogous rules regarding the three core RACT 

elements. We have identified a few areas where other rules are more stringent, notably: 

• Rule 4311 does not require continuous monitoring of vent gas or water seals. 

• Rule 4311 requires annual monitoring and flare causal reports, which are not as 

frequent as quarterly or monthly reports. 

• Rule 4311 does not require sulphur concentration of pilot and purge gases to be 

recorded. 

• Rule 4311 allows an alternative to video monitoring. 

• Rule 4311 does not require the operator to show in the causal report that flare 

events were consistent with FMPs. 

• Rule 4311 does not require the causal report to include recorded volume of vent 

gas flares, calculated methane, non methane hydrocarbon, and SO2 emissions. 

While we encourage SJVUAPCD to strengthen Rule 4311 in these respects, we do 

not believe it is appropriate to disapprove Rule 4311 as RACT because of these 

provisions at this time for reasons including: 

• Some of these provisions are more stringent in only one recent California rule that 

we are aware of, so probably very few sources are actually complying with the 

more stringent requirements. 

• Lacking significant regulatory experience with FMP requirements, we do not 

have clear evidence that the more stringent requirements will result in 

significantly more effective rules. 

• These arguably less stringent requirements in Rule 4311 are somewhat offset by 

other more stringent provisions in in Rule 4311, such as application of Rule 4311 

to smaller facilities than subject to the other comparative rules. 

VI. Comparative Review/Analysis of Non-RACT Provisions

In addition to the RACT-related provisions discussed above, we compare Rule 4311 below to 

other rules with respect to other provisions that are not essential for RACT. 

A. FMP update frequency - BAAQMD 12-12 section 404.1 requires annual FMP 

updates. SCAQMD 1118 section (e)(3) requires updates when the SO2 limit is exceeded, 

but since adoption of this provision, only one SCAQMD facility has updated an FMP 

because it exceeded its SO2 emission limit.2 Rule 4311 section 6.5.2 requires FMP 

updates every 5 years. NSPS Ja does not require FMP updates. The update requirements 

are intended to ensure FMPs are updated to reflect major facility process changes. 

B. Public Review Process of FMP - Rule 4311 relies on Rule 2201, Rule 2520, and 

Title V permits to provide for public and APCO review of FMPs. In addition, the public 

can request to view SJVUAPCD’s FMPs, regardless of public review processes. 

 

2 Phone conversation between Nicole Law (EPA) and Melesio Hernandez (SCAQMD) on March 23, 2011. 
SJVUAPCD - Rule 4311, Flares; 

TSD, 8/2011 

10 

Similarly, NSPS Ja does not require any public review process of submitted FMPs. In 

contrast, BAAQMD 12-12 section 403.3 and SCAQMD 1118 section (e)(2) both provide 

for a 60 day public review and require APCO response to comments (although it is rare 

for this public process to be implemented in SCAQMD because facilities are only 

required to prepare an FMP when the SO2 limit is exceeded). These processes allow the 

public to review the FMP, comment, and possibly improve the FMP. 

C. Notification Prior to Planned Flaring - Like BAAQMD 12-12 and NSPS Ja, Rule 

4311 does not require notifications to the APCO before planned flaring events, as does 

SCAQMD 1118 section (i)(4). Requiring facilities to notify the APCO in advance of 

flare events ensures that the operator has planned for upcoming flaring events. 

D. Flare Reporting Frequency - Rule 4311 section 6.2.3 requires annual flare reporting, 

while BAAQMD 12-11 section 401 requires monthly flare reporting, SCAQMD section 

(i)(5) requires quarterly flare reporting, and NSPS Ja requires semi-annual monitoring 

reports. Rule 4311 section 6.2.3’s annual reports must include daily volumetric flow of 

vent gas, information on the vent gas composition, and other specified information. The 

required contents of the flare reports in Rule 4311 section 6.2.3 and BAAQMD 12-11 

section 401 are nearly identical and the SCAQMD 1118 flare report requires very similar 

information. The more frequent reports ensure the facilities are keeping adequate records 

of flaring events, and these records can assist in developing better FMPs. Although 

SJVUAPCD does not require as frequent flare reporting, Rule 4311 does require the same 

information in the flare report as the other district rules. 

E. Flow Verification Report Requirements - Rule 4311 section 6.2.3.8 requires a flow 

verification report in the annual monitoring report, but does little to describe the contents 

of this report beyond the test methods listed in section 6.3.5. In contrast, BAAQMD 12-

11 section 402 requires a flow verification report submitted every 6 months to include a 

comparison of the vent gas monitoring against the contemporaneous vent gas flow 

testing. Similarly, SCAQMD Rule 1118 section (j)(1)(C) requires that all gas flow 

meters be verified for accuracy against the specifications and parameters in Attachment A 

every 12 months. SCAQMD 1118 section (c) (1)(C) also requires an annual leak survey 

on all pressure relief devices connected to a flare, but Rule 4311 does not have an 

equivalent provision. NSPS Ja does not have a similar verification report requirement. A 

flow monitoring report shows operators and the APCO that the monitors are in good 

operating order. While it is more desirable for Rule 4311 to specifically outline the 

required components of the flow verification report, the methods for the verification 

report are already specified in the rule.

F. Smaller Flare Reporting - Rule 4311 section 3.31, BAAQMD 12-12 section 208, 

SCAQMD Rule 1118 sections (i) (2) and (i) (4), and NSPS Ja 60.108a (c)(6) require 

reporting for flaring of vent gas exceeding 500,000 scf per day or 500 lbs SO2 per day. 

However, SCAQMD Rule 1118 sections (c)(1)(D) and (c)(1)(E) additionally require a 

specific cause analysis for emissions exceeding 100 lbs VOC, and analysis to determine 

the relative cause of other flare events where more than 5,000 scf of vent gas is 

combusted. While this additional requirement for causal reports of small flares should 
SJVUAPCD - Rule 4311, Flares; 

TSD, 8/2011 

11 

improve FMPs, Rule 4311, BAAQMD 12-12, and NSPS Ja all lack this additional 

requirement. 

G. SO2 Limits - Rule 4311 section 5.9 establishes a SO2 limit of 0.5 tons per million 

barrels of crude processing capacity fully effective by 2017. In contrast, SCAQMD Rule 

1118 section (d)’s analogous SO2 limits are fully effective by 2012. BAAQMD 12-12 

and NSPS Ja do not have analogous SO2 limits. 

H. Monitoring System Inoperation - Rule 4311 section 6.9.1, SCAQMD Rule 1118 

sections (g)(5)(A)(i-ii), and BAAQMD 12-11 section 506.1 all limit the inoperation 

period of flare monitoring systems to help ensure monitoring is accurate and in working 

order during flare events. The inoperation periods allowed vary depending on the 

district. BAAQMD 12-11 section 506.1 allows 30 days of inoperation per calendar year, 

Rule 4311 allows 14 days of inoperation in a 18-consecutive month period, and 

SCAQMD distinguishes between planned and unplanned inoperation. Breakdowns and 

unplanned maintenance shall not exceed 96 hours per quarter and prior to planned 

maintenance the APCO must be notified and the maintenance shall not exceed 14 days 

per 18 month period. NSPS Ja does not discuss monitoring system breakdowns or 

maintenance. Although SCAQMD Rule 1118 has more requirements for monitoring 

system inoperation, Rule 4311 has very similar requirements to BAAQMD Rule 12-11 

and is more stringent than it in some ways. 

I. Additional Monitoring - In addition to similar elements as required by Rule 4311 

section 6.2.3, BAAQMD 12-11 section 401 additionally requires monthly reporting of 

hourly volumetric flow of vent gas, a description of any flaring over 1 million scf gas 

over 24 hours, an archive of images recorded for the month, and calculated methane and 

non-methane emissions for each day. Similarly, SCAQMD 1118 section (i)(5)(A)-(B) 

additionally requires quarterly reports including alternative flare vent gas sampling 

guidelines, pilot flame thermocouple monitoring, and an explanation of each flare 

monitoring downtime period. 

J. Analysis Summary - As discussed above, SJVUAPCD Rule 4311 is generally as 

stringent as other recently-adopted analogous rules. Notable areas where other rules are 

more stringent include: 

• Rule 4311 FMP update frequency is less frequent than some other district rules. 

• Rule 4311 does not describe a specific public review process for submitted FMPs. 

• Rule 4311 does not require prior notification of planned flaring events. 

• Rule 4311’s flare reporting frequency is less frequent than some other district 

rules. 

• Rule 4311 requires a flow verification report, but does not specify the components 

of that report. 

• Rule 4311 does not require reporting of smaller flares. 

While we encourage SJVUAPCD to strengthen Rule 4311 in these respects, we do 
SJVUAPCD - Rule 4311, Flares; 

TSD, 8/2011 

12 

not believe it is appropriate to disapprove Rule 4311 because of these provisions at this 

time for reasons including: 

• Some of these provisions are more stringent in only one recent California rule that 

we are aware of, so probably very few sources are actually complying with the 

more stringent requirements. 

• Lacking significant regulatory experience with FMP requirements, we do not 

have clear evidence that the more stringent requirements will result in 

significantly more effective rules. 

• These arguably less stringent requirements in Rule 4311 are somewhat offset by 

more stringent provisions in Rule 4311, such as application of Rule 4311 to 

smaller facilities than subject to the other comparative rules. 

• We do not believe these provisions are required to implement RACT. 

VII. Recommendations for Future Revisions

We recommend that SJVUAPCD consider developing separate rules for petroleum refinery 

flares and non-refinery flares. 

Regarding petroleum refinery flares, we recommend the following changes to Rule 4311: 

o Require continuous vent gas flow monitoring as is required in BAAQMD 12-11 section 

501 and SCAQMD 1118 section (g)(3). 

o Require a more frequent monitoring report. BAAQMD 12-11 section 401, SCAQMD 

1118 section (i)(5), and NSPS Ja section 60.108a require monthly, quarterly, and semiannual monitoring reports. 

o Require additional information on the pilot and purge gas as in BAAQMD 12-11 section 

401.5 and SCAQMD 118 section (f)(3)(C). 

o Require continuous water seal monitoring and recording as in BAAQMD 12-12 section 

501. 

o Require video monitoring at all times the flare is operational as in SCAQMD 1118 

section (g)(7) and BAAQMD 12-11 section 507 and remove the alternative monitoring 

option from Rule 4311 section 6.10. 

o Require a causal analysis of flaring events on a more frequent basis. BAAQMD 12-12 

section 406 requires the analysis within 60 days following the last day of the month in 

which the flaring event occurred, and SCAQMD 1118 section (b)(20) requires it to be 

submitted within 30 days of the event. We recommend the causal analysis report be 

submitted no later than 45 days following the end of a flaring event. 

o Require additional information, as is required in BAAQMD 12-12 section 406, be 

included in the causal analysis such as: 

o Why flare event is consistent with the FMP; 

o Calculated emissions/volume of vent gas, calculated methane, non-methane 

hydrocarbon, and SO2. 

o Increase the frequency of the FMP update. BAAQMD 12-12 section 404.4 requires 
SJVUAPCD - Rule 4311, Flares; 

TSD, 8/2011 

13 

annual FMP updates and SCAQMD 1118 section (e)(3) requires FMP updates when the 

annual SO2 performance targets are exceeded. 

o Provide for an annual 60 day public review and APCO response to public comments as in 

both SCAQMD 1118 section (e)(2) and BAAQMD 12-12 section 403.3. Since 

SJVUAPCD currently lacks a public review process, we request that the FMPs at least be 

submitted to EPA for comment until the rule is revised again to include a public review 

process. 

o Planned flare events should be subject to prior reporting as is required in SCAQMD 1118 

section (i)(4). 

o Require the flow verification report to specify accuracy or performance parameters for 

the gas flow measurement instruments and test the reliability of vent gas flow monitoring 

systems at least yearly as is required in BAAQMD 12-11 section 402 and SCAQMD 

1118 section (j)(1)(C). 

o Require facilities conduct annual leak surveys on pressure relief devices connected 

directly to a flare and repair leaking pressure relief devices as is required in SCAQMD 

(c)(1)(C). 

o Provide for a causal analysis for flare events where the volume of gas combusted is 

between 5,000 scf and 500,000 scf as in SCAQMD 1118 section (c)(1)(E). 

o Distinguish between planned and unplanned maintenance on flare monitors as does 

SCAQMD 1118 section (g)(5)(A)(i)-(ii). Additionally, consider the following 

requirements: 

o Require notification for planned maintenance; 

o Require more stringent limits on inoperation periods (e.g. 96 hours in any 

monitoring reporting quarter). 

o Annual monitoring reports should reflect more detailed information collected through 

continuous monitoring as in BAAQMD 12-11 section 401 and SCAQMD 1118 section 

(i)(5)(A)-(B). (e.g. hourly vent gas volumetric observations as opposed to daily) 

Regarding non-petroleum refinery flares, SJVUAPCD should provide a more detailed RACT 

analysis of these flares. In particular, this analysis should examine the cost and technical 

feasibility of applying equally stringent controls as petroleum refinery flares. Furthermore, any 

applicability cut-off, such as the 5.0 MM and 50MM Btu per hour flaring capacity cut-offs, 

should be explained and justified according to major source thresholds and cost and technical 

feasibility. 

 

In general, the CAA allows sources to designate material as confidential business information 

when submitting information to EPA. To avoid potential conflict or confusion between these 

federal provisions and analogous state and local provisions that may be incorporated into the 

federally enforceable SIP, section 6.5.4 should be removed from the rule. We believe sources 

could protect their CBI under State law regardless of whether State law provisions are referenced 

in the rule. 

 

VIII. EPA Action

Section 110(k) of the CAA contains provisions governing EPA's review of plans and 

regulations submitted by State of California, air districts, and localities for inclusion in the 
SJVUAPCD - Rule 4311, Flares; 

TSD, 8/2011 

14 

California State Implementation Plan. EPA can propose one of four actions on Rule 4311: full 

approval, conditional approval, limited approval/disapproval, or a full disapproval. 

We find that Rule 4311 does not contain appendix D/RACT deficiencies and fulfills the 

requirements of Section 182(b)(2). Consequently, EPA proposes a full approval of the June 19, 

2009 adopted version of Rule 4311 and inclusion into the California State Implementation Plan. 

IX. References

SJVUAPCD, Rule 4311 - Flares, adopted June 20, 2002. 

SJVUAPCD, Rule 4311 – Flares, adopted June 20, 2006. Change copy. 

 

SJVUAPCD, Rule 4311 – Flares, adopted June 20, 2006. 

SJVUAPCD, Rule 4311 - Flares, adopted June 18, 2009. Change copy. 

SJVUAPCD, Rule 4311 - Flares, adopted June 18, 2009. 

“Final Draft Staff Report for Proposed Amendments to Rule 4311 - Flares,” San Joaquin Valley 

Unified Air Pollution Control District, June 18, 2009. 

“Issues Relating to VOC Regulation Cutpoints, Deficiencies, and Deviations,” (a.k.a., 

Bluebook)EPA OAQPS, May 25, 1988. 

“Guidance Document for Correcting Common VOC & Other Rule Deficiencies,” (a.k.a., Little 

Bluebook), EPA Region 9, August 21, 2001. 

Portions of the proposed post-1987 ozone and carbon monoxide policy that concern RACT, 52 

FR 45044, November 24, 1987. 

“State Implementation Plans, General Preamble for the Implementation of Title I of the Clean 

Air Amendments of 1990” 57 FR 13498, April 16, 1992. 

“Preamble, Final Rule to Implement the 8-hour Ozone National Ambient Air Quality Standard” 

70 FR 71612; Nov. 29, 2005. 

Letter from William T. Hartnett to Regional Air Division Directors, “RACT Qs & As – 

Reasonable Available Control Technology (RACT) Questions and Answers,” May 18, 2006. 

South Coast Air Quality Management District Rule 1118, Control of Emissions from Refinery 

Flares, adopted in 1998 and amended November 4, 2005. 

SCAQMD Final Staff Report for Rule 1118, October 2005. 

Bay Area Air Quality Management District Rule 12-11, Flare Monitoring at Petroleum 
SJVUAPCD - Rule 4311, Flares; 

TSD, 8/2011 

15 

Refineries, adopted June 4, 2003. 

BAAQMD Rule 12-12, Flares at Petroleum Refineries, adopted July 20, 2005 and amended 

April 5, 2006. 

BAAQMD Staff Report, Proposed Regulation, Regulation 12 – Miscellaneous Standards of 

Performance, Rule 12 – Flares at Petroleum Refineries, July 8, 2005. 

“Reasonably Available Control Technology (RACT) Demonstration for Ozone State 

Implementation Plans (SIP)” SJVAPCD, April 16, 2009.