[Federal Register Volume 60, Number 75 (Wednesday, April 19, 1995)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 19554-19555]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 95-9707]



=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

40 CFR Part 52

[CA 144-4-6973a; FL-5194-5]


Approval and Promulgation of Implementation Plans; California 
State Implementation Plan Revision, South Coast Air Quality Management 
District and Ventura County Air Pollution Control District

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

SUMMARY: EPA is proposing to approve revisions to the California State 
Implementation Plan (SIP) which concern the control of volatile organic 
compound (VOC) emissions from bakery ovens and the coating of metal 
parts and products.
    The intended effect of proposing approval of these rules is to 
regulate emissions of VOCs in accordance with the requirements of the 
Clean Air Act, as amended in 1990 (CAA or the Act). EPA's final action 
on this notice of proposed (NPRM) will incorporate these rules into the 
federally approved SIP. In addition, final action on one of these rules 
(South Coast Air Quality Management District's Rule 1153) will serve as 
a final determination that a deficiency in the rule has been corrected 
and that any sanctions or Federal Implementation Plan (FIP) obligations 
are permanently stopped. An Interim Final Determination published in 
today's Federal Register will defer the imposition of sanctions until 
EPA takes final rulemaking action on this rule. EPA has evaluated each 
of these rules and is proposing to approve them under provisions of the 
CAA regarding EPA action on SIP submittals, SIPs for national primary 
and secondary ambient air quality standards and plan requirements for 
nonattainment areas.

DATES: Comments must be received on or before May 19, 1995.

ADDRESSES: Comments may be mailed to: Daniel A. Meer, Rulemaking 
Section [A-5-3], Air and Toxics Division, U.S. Environmental Protection 
Agency, Region IX, 75 Hawthorne Street, San Francisco, CA 94105-3901.
    Copies of the rules and EPA's evaluation report of each rule are 
available for public inspection at EPA's Region 9 office during normal 
business hours. Copies of the submitted rules are also available for 
inspection at the following locations:

California Air Resources Board, Stationary Source Division, Rule 
Evaluation Section, 2020 ``L'' Street, Sacramento, CA 95814.
South Coast Air Quality Management District, 21865 E. Copley Drive, 
Diamond Bar, CA 91765-4182.
Ventura County Air Pollution Control District, 669 County Square Drive, 
Second Floor, Ventura, CA 93003.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Christine Vineyard, Rulemaking Section 
[A-5-3], Air and Toxics Division, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, 
Region IX, 75 Hawthorne Street, San Francisco, CA 94105-3901, (415) 
744-1197.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Applicability

    The rules being proposed for approval into the California SIP 
include: South Coast Air Quality Management District (SCAQMD) Rule 
1153, Commercial Bakery Ovens; and Ventura County Air Pollution Control 
District (VCAPCD) Rule 74.12, Surface Coatings of Metal Parts and 
Products. These rules were submitted by the California Air Resources 
Board to EPA on February 24, 1995.

Background

    On March 3, 1978, EPA promulgated a list of ozone nonattainment 
areas under the provisions of the Clean Air Act, as amended in 1977 
(1977 CAA or pre-amended Act), that included the Los Angeles-South 
Coast Air Basin (LA Basin) and the Ventura County Area. 43 FR 8964; 40 
CFR 81.305. Because these areas were unable to meet the statutory 
attainment date of December 31, 1982, California requested under 
section 172(a)(2), and EPA approved, an extension of the attainment 
date to December 31, 1987. 40 CFR 52.222. On May 26, 1988, EPA notified 
the Governor of California, pursuant to section 110(a)(2)(H) of the 
pre-amended Act, that the above districts' portions of the California 
SIP were inadequate to attain and maintain the ozone standard and 
requested that deficiencies in the existing SIP be corrected (EPA's 
SIP-Call). On November 15, 1990, the Clean Air Act Amendments of 1990 
were enacted. Pub. L. 101-549, 104 Stat. 2399, codified at 42 U.S.C. 
7401-7671q. In amended section 182(a)(2)(A) of the CAA, Congress 
statutorily adopted the requirement that nonattainment areas fix their 
deficient reasonably available control technology (RACT) rules for 
ozone and established a deadline of May 15, 1991 for states to submit 
corrections of those deficiencies.
    Section 182(a)(2)(A) applies to areas designated as nonattainment 
prior to enactment of the amendments and classified as marginal or 
above as of the date of enactment. It requires such areas to adopt and 
correct RACT rules pursuant to pre-amended section 172(b) as 
interpreted in pre-amendment guidance.<SUP>1 EPA's SIP-Call used that 
guidance to indicate the necessary corrections for specific 
nonattainment areas. The LA Basin is classified as extreme and the 
Ventura County Area is classified as severe;<SUP>2 therefore, these 
areas were subject to the RACT fix-up [[Page 19555]] requirement and 
the May 15, 1991 deadline.

    \1\ Among other things, the pre-amendment guidance consists of 
those portions of the proposed post-1987 ozone and carbon monoxide 
policy that concern RACT, 52 FR 45044 (November 24, 1987); ``Issues 
Relating to VOC Regulation Cutpoints, Deficiencies, and Deviations, 
Clarification to Appendix D of November 24, 1987 Federal Register 
Notice'' (Blue Book) (notice of availability was published in the 
Federal Register on May 25, 1988); and the existing control 
technique guidelines (CTGs).
    \2\The LA Basin and the Ventura County Area retained their 
designations of nonattainment and were classified by operation of 
law pursuant to sections 107(d) and 181(a) upon the date of 
enactment of the CAA. See 55 FR 56694 (November 6, 1991).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The State of California submitted many revised RACT rules for 
incorporation into its SIP on February 24, 1995, including the rules 
being acted on in this document. This document addresses EPA's proposed 
action for SCAQMD Rule 1153, Commercial Bakery Ovens; and VCAPCD Rule 
74.12, Surface Coating of Metal Parts and Products. The SCAQMD adopted 
Rule 1153 on January 13, 1995 and the VCAPCD adopted Rule 74.12 on 
January 10, 1995. These submitted rules were found to be complete on 
March 10, 1995 pursuant to EPA's completeness criteria that are set 
forth in 40 CFR part 51, appendix V<SUP>3 and are being proposed for 
approval into the SIP.

    \3\EPA adopted the completeness criteria on February 16, 1990 
(55 FR 5830) and, pursuant to section 110(k)(1)(A) of the CAA, 
revised the criteria on August 26, 1991 (56 FR 42216).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    SCAQMD Rule 1153 controls VOC emissions from commercial bakery 
ovens; and VCAPCD Rule 74.12 controls VOC emissions from facilities 
that apply coatings to metal parts or products. VOCs contribute to the 
production of ground-level ozone and smog. SCAQMD Rule 1153 and VCAPCD 
Rule 74.12 were adopted as part of each district's efforts to achieve 
the National Ambient Air Quality Standard (NAAQS) for ozone and in 
response to EPA's SIP-Call and the section 182(a)(2)(A) CAA 
requirement. The following is EPA's evaluation and proposed action for 
these rules.

EPA Evaluation and Proposed Action

    In determining the approvability of a VOC rule, EPA must evaluate 
the rule for consistency with the requirements of the CAA and EPA 
regulations, as found in section 110 and part D of the CAA and 40 CFR 
part 51 (Requirements for Preparation, Adoption, and Submittal of 
Implementation Plans). The EPA interpretation of these requirements, 
which forms the basis for today's action, appears in the various EPA 
policy guidance documents listed in footnote 1. Among those provisions 
is the requirement that a VOC rule must, at a minimum, provide for the 
implementation of RACT for stationary sources of VOC emissions. This 
requirement was carried forth from the pre-amended Act.
    For the purpose of assisting state and local agencies in developing 
RACT rules, EPA prepared a series of Control Technique Guideline (CTG) 
documents. The CTGs are based on the underlying requirements of the Act 
and specify the presumptive norms for what is RACT for specific source 
categories. Under the CAA, Congress ratified EPA's use of these 
documents, as well as other Agency policy, for requiring States to 
``fix-up'' their RACT rules. See section 182(a)(2)(A). The CTG 
applicable to VCAPCD Rule 74.12 is entitled, ``Control of Volatile 
Organic Emissions from Existing Stationary Sources--Surface Coating of 
Miscellaneous Metal Parts and Products'', EPA-450/2-78-0-015, June 
1978. For some source categories, such as commercial bakery ovens 
(SCAQMD Rule 1153), EPA did not publish a CTG. In these cases, the 
district may determine what controls are required by reviewing the 
operation of facilities subject to the regulation and evaluating 
regulations for similar sources in other areas. EPA did publish an 
Alternative Control Technology Document (ACT) entitled, ``Alternative 
Control Technology Document for Bakery Oven Emissions'', EPA 453/R-92-
017, December 1972 as guidance for states when developing rules 
controlling VOC emissions from bakeries. Further interpretations of EPA 
policy are found in the Blue Book, referred to in footnote 1. In 
general, these guidance documents have been set forth to ensure that 
VOC rules are fully enforceable and strengthen or maintain the SIP.
    SCAQMD's submitted Rule 1153, Commercial Bakery Ovens, includes the 
following significant changes from the current SIP:
    <bullet> Executive Officer discretion in specifying test methods 
was eliminated.
    <bullet> The ``exempt compounds'' definition was updated.
    VCAPCD submitted Rule 74.12, Surface Coating of Metal Parts and 
Products is a new rule and includes:
    <bullet> Limits for the ROC content of metal surface coatings and 
solvents used to clean coating application equipment and metal surfaces 
prior to coating.
    <bullet> The use of add-on equipment to control emissions of ROCs 
if noncompliant coatings are used.
    <bullet> Requirements for monthly records of complying coatings and 
daily records of noncompliant coating applied.
    <bullet> Test methods are included to determine compliance.
    EPA has evaluated the submitted rules and has determined that they 
are consistent with the CAA, EPA regulations, and EPA policy. 
Therefore, SCAQMD Rule 1153, Commercial Bakery Ovens; and VCAPCD Rule 
74.12, Surface Coating of Metal Parts and Products are being proposed 
for approval under section 110(k)(3) of the CAA as meeting the 
requirements of section 110(a) and Part D.
    Nothing in this action should be construed as permitting or 
allowing or establishing a precedent for any future request for 
revision to any state implementation plan. Each request for revision to 
the state implementation plan shall be considered separately in light 
of specific technical, economic, and environmental factors and in 
relation to relevant statutory and regulatory requirements.

Regulatory Process

    Under the Regulatory Flexibility Act, 5 U.S.C. 600 et seq., EPA 
must prepare a regulatory flexibility analysis assessing the impact of 
any proposed or final rule on small entities. 5 U.S.C. 603 and 604. 
Alternatively, EPA may certify that the rule will not have a 
significant impact on a substantial number of small entities. Small 
entities include small businesses, small not-for-profit enterprises and 
government entities with jurisdiction over populations of less than 
50,000.
    SIP approvals under sections 110 and 301 and subchapter I, part D 
of the CAA do not create any new requirements, but simply approve 
requirements that the State is already imposing. Therefore, because the 
Federal SIP-approval does not impose any new requirements, it does not 
have a significant impact on any small entities affected. Moreover, due 
to the nature of the Federal-state relationship under the CAA, 
preparation of a regulatory flexibility analysis would constitute 
Federal inquiry into the economic reasonableness of state action. The 
CAA forbids EPA to base its actions concerning SIPs on such grounds. 
Union Electric Co. v. U.S. E.P.A., 427 U.S. 246, 256-66 (S.Ct. 1976); 
42 U.S.C. 7410(a)(2).
    The OMB has exempted this action from review under Executive Order 
12866.

List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52

    Environmental protection, Air pollution control, Hydrocarbons, 
Intergovernmental relations, Ozone, Reporting and recordkeeping 
requirements, Volatile organic compound.

    Authority: 42 U.S.C. 7401-7671q.

    Dated: April 12, 1995.
John C. Wise,
Acting Regional Administrator.
[FR Doc. 95-9707 Filed 4-18-95; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-W