Document ID: EPA-R09-OAR-2009-0958-0001
Agency: epa
Document Type: Proposed Rule
Title: Revisions to the California State Implementation Plan
Posted Date: 2010-03-26T04:00Z

[Federal Register: March 26, 2010 (Volume 75, Number 58)]
[Proposed Rules]               
[Page 14545-14547]
From the Federal Register Online via GPO Access [wais.access.gpo.gov]
[DOCID:fr26mr10-18]                         

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

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

40 CFR Part 52

[EPA-R09-OAR-2009-0958; FRL-9131-3]

 
Revisions to the California State Implementation Plan

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Proposed rule.

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

SUMMARY: EPA is proposing to approve revisions to the San Joaquin 
Valley Unified Air Pollution Control District (SJVUAPCD) portion of the 
California State Implementation Plan (SIP). These revisions concern 
volatile organic compound (VOC) emissions from refinery vacuum 
producing systems and process unit turnaround. We are approving local 
rules that regulate these emission sources under the Clean Air Act as 
amended in 1990 (CAA or the Act). We are taking comments on this 
proposal and plan to follow with a final action.

DATES: Any comments must arrive by April 26, 2010.

ADDRESSES: Submit comments, identified by docket number [EPA-R09-OAR-
2009-0958], by one of the following methods:
    1. Federal eRulemaking Portal: http://www.regulations.gov. Follow 
the on-line instructions.
    2. E-mail: steckel.andrew@epa.gov.
    3. Mail or deliver: Andrew Steckel (Air-4), U.S. Environmental 
Protection Agency Region IX, 75 Hawthorne Street, San Francisco, CA 
94105-3901.
    Instructions: All comments will be included in the public docket 
without change and may be made available online at http://
www.regulations.gov, including any personal information provided, 
unless the comment includes Confidential Business Information (CBI) or 
other information whose disclosure is restricted by statute. 
Information that you consider CBI or otherwise protected should be 
clearly identified as such and should not be submitted through http://
www.regulations.gov or e-mail. Http://www.regulations.gov is an 
``anonymous access'' system, and EPA will not know your identity or 
contact information unless you provide it in the body of your comment. 
If you send e-mail directly to EPA, your e-mail address will be 
automatically captured and included as part of the public comment. If 
EPA cannot read your comment due to technical difficulties and cannot 
contact you for clarification, EPA may not be able to consider your 
comment.

[[Page 14546]]

    Docket: The index to the docket for this action is available 
electronically at http://www.regulations.gov and in hard copy at EPA 
Region IX, 75 Hawthorne Street, San Francisco, California. While all 
documents in the docket are listed in the index, some information may 
be publicly available only at the hard copy location (e.g., copyrighted 
material), and some may not be publicly available in either location 
(e.g., CBI). To inspect the hard copy materials, please schedule an 
appointment during normal business hours with the contact listed in the 
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Joanne Wells, EPA Region IX, (415) 
947-4118, wells.joanne@epa.gov.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Throughout this document, ``we,'' ``us'' and 
``our'' refer to EPA.

Table of Contents

I. The State's Submittal
    A. What Rules did the State Submit?
    B. Are There Other Versions of These Rules?
    C. What Is the Purpose of the Submitted Rule Revisions?
II. EPA's Evaluation and Action
    A. How is EPA Evaluating the Rules?
    B. Do the Rules Meet the Evaluation Criteria?
    C. EPA Recommendations to Further Improve the Rules
    D. Public Comment and Final Action
III. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews

I. The State's Submittal

A. What rules did the State submit?

    Table 1 lists the rules addressed by this proposal with the dates 
that they were amended by the local air agency and submitted by the 
California Air Resources Board (CARB).

                                            Table 1--Submitted Rules
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
             District                  Rule No.              Rule title               Amended        Submitted
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
SJVUAPCD..........................            4453  Refinery Vacuum Producing           12/17/92        08/24/07
                                                     Devices or Systems.
SJVUAPCD..........................            4454  Refinery Process Unit               12/17/92        08/24/07
                                                     Turnaround.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    On September 17, 2007, EPA determined that the submittal for San 
Joaquin Valley Unified Air Pollution Control District Rules 4453 and 
4454 met the completeness criteria in 40 CFR part 51 Appendix V, which 
must be met before formal EPA review.

B. Are there other versions of these rules?

    SIP versions of submitted SJVUAPCD rules are old rules from three 
of the eight counties that now comprise SJVUAPCD: These SIP-approved 
rules are described below:
    Precursor SIP rules for submitted SJVUAPCD Rule 4453:
     Kern County Rule 414.2, Refinery Process Vacuum Producing 
Devices or Systems (approved on August 21, 1981, 46 FR 42459).
     Kings County Rule 414.2, Refinery Vacuum Producing Devices 
or Systems (approved on May 7, 1982, 47 FR 19696).
     San Joaquin County Rule 413.2, Refinery Vacuum Producing 
Devices (approved on May 7, 1982, 47 FR 19696).
    Precursor SIP rules for submitted SJVUAPCD Rule 4454:
     Kern County Rule 414.3, Refinery Process Unit Turnaround 
(approved on August 21, 1981, 46 FR 42459).
     Kings County Rule 414.3, Refinery Process Unit Turnaround 
(approved on May 7, 1982, 47 FR 19696).
     San Joaquin County Rule 413.3, Refinery Process Unit 
Turnaround (approved on May 7, 1982, 47 FR 19696).

C. What is the purpose of the submitted rules and rule revisions?

    VOCs help produce ground-level ozone and smog, which harm human 
health and the environment. Section 110(a) of the CAA requires states 
to submit regulations that control VOC emissions. These rules were 
developed as part of the local agency's program to control VOCs.
    The purposes of amendments to Rules 4453 and 4454 are as follows:
     4453: The rule requires reducing VOC emissions from 
refinery vacuum producing devices by covering hot wells and collecting 
vapors for recycle to refinery gas or incineration. The format is 
improved, the rule is renumbered, the rule purpose and applicability 
are added, and a 90% VOC control efficiency requirement is added.
     4454: The rule requires reducing VOC emissions from a 
refinery process unit turnaround by collecting vapors for recycle to 
refinery gas, incineration, or flaring. The format is improved, the 
rule is renumbered, and the rule purpose and applicability are added.
    EPA's technical support document (TSD) has more information about 
these rules.

II. EPA's Evaluation and Action

A. How is EPA evaluating the rules?

    Generally, SIP rules must be enforceable (see section 110(a) of the 
Act), must require Reasonably Available Control Technology (RACT) for 
each category of sources covered by a Control Techniques Guidelines 
(CTG) document as well as each major source in nonattainment areas (see 
sections 182(a)(2) and (b)(2)), and must not relax existing 
requirements (see sections 110(l) and 193). The SJVUAPCD regulates an 
ozone nonattainment area (see 40 CFR part 81), so these rules must 
fulfill RACT.
    Guidance and policy documents that we use to evaluate 
enforceability and RACT requirements consistently include the 
following:
    1. Portions of the proposed post-1987 ozone and carbon monoxide 
policy that concern RACT, 52 FR 45044 (November 24, 1987).
    2. Requirements for Preparation, Adoption, and Submittal of 
Implementation Plans, U.S. EPA, 40 CFR part 51.
    3. Addendum to the General Preamble for the Implementation of Title 
I of the Clean Air Act Amendments of 1990, 59 FR 41998 (August 16, 
1994).
    4. Issues Relating to VOC Regulation Cutpoints, Deficiencies, and 
Deviations, EPA (May 25, 1988). [The Bluebook]
    5. Guidance Document for Correcting Common VOC & Other Rule 
Deficiencies, EPA Region 9 (August 21, 2001). [The Little Bluebook]
    6. Control of Refinery Vacuum Producing Systems, Wastewater 
Separators, and Process Unit Turnarounds, EPA-450/2-77-025 (October 
1977).
    7. 2007 Ozone Plan, San Joaquin Valley Unified Air Pollution 
Control District (April 30, 2007).http://www.arb.ca.gov/planning/sip/
2007sip/sjv8hr/sjvozone.htm.
    8. RACT Demonstration for Ozone SIP, San Joaquin Valley Unified Air 
Pollution Control District (April 16, 2009).

B. Do the rules meet the evaluation criteria?

    We believe these rules are consistent with the relevant policy and 
guidance regarding enforceability, RACT, and SIP relaxations. The TSD 
has more information on our evaluation.

[[Page 14547]]

C. EPA Recommendations To Further Improve the Rules

    The TSD describes additional rule revisions that we recommend for 
the next time the local agency modifies the rules.

D. Public Comment and Final Action

    Because EPA believes the submitted rules fulfill all relevant 
requirements, we are proposing to fully approve them as described in 
section 110(k)(3) of the Act. We will accept comments from the public 
on this proposal for the next 30 days. Unless we receive convincing new 
information during the comment period, we intend to publish a final 
approval action that will incorporate these rules into the federally 
enforceable SIP.

III. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews

    Under the Clean Air Act, the Administrator is required to approve a 
SIP submission that complies with the provisions of the Act and 
applicable Federal regulations. 42 U.S.C. 7410(k); 40 CFR 52.02(a). 
Thus, in reviewing SIP submissions, EPA's role is to approve State 
choices, provided that they meet the criteria of the Clean Air Act. 
Accordingly, this action merely approves State law as meeting Federal 
requirements and does not impose additional requirements beyond those 
imposed by State law. For that reason, this action:
     Is not a ``significant regulatory action'' subject to 
review by the Office of Management and Budget under Executive Order 
12866 (58 FR 51735, October 4, 1993);
     Does not impose an information collection burden under the 
provisions of the Paperwork Reduction Act (44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.);
     Is certified as not having a significant economic impact 
on a substantial number of small entities under the Regulatory 
Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 601 et seq.);
     Does not contain any unfunded mandate or significantly or 
uniquely affect small governments, as described in the Unfunded 
Mandates Reform Act of 1995 (Pub. L. 104-4);
     Does not have Federalism implications as specified in 
Executive Order 13132 (64 FR 43255, August 10, 1999);
     Is not an economically significant regulatory action based 
on health or safety risks subject to Executive Order 13045 (62 FR 
19885, April 23, 1997);
     Is not a significant regulatory action subject to 
Executive Order 13211 (66 FR 28355, May 22, 2001);
     Is not subject to requirements of Section 12(d) of the 
National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act of 1995 (15 U.S.C. 272 
note) because application of those requirements would be inconsistent 
with the Clean Air Act; and
     Does not provide EPA with the discretionary authority to 
address, as appropriate, disproportionate human health or environmental 
effects, using practicable and legally permissible methods, under 
Executive Order 12898 (59 FR 7629, February 16, 1994).

In addition, this rule does not have tribal implications as specified 
by Executive Order 13175 (65 FR 67249, November 9, 2000), because the 
SIP is not approved to apply in Indian country located in the State, 
and EPA notes that it will not impose substantial direct costs on 
tribal governments or preempt tribal law.

List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52

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

    Authority:  42 U.S.C. 7401 et seq.

    Dated: March 8, 2010.
Jared Blumenfeld,
Regional Administrator, Region IX.
[FR Doc. 2010-6804 Filed 3-25-10; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P