Air quality implementation plans; approval and promulgation; various States: Louisiana,

[Federal Register: September 8, 1998 (Volume 63, Number 173)]

[Rules and Regulations]

[Page 47429-47431]

From the Federal Register Online via GPO Access [wais.access.gpo.gov]

[DOCID:fr08se98-7]

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

40 CFR Part 52

[LA-47-1-7388a; FRL-6156-3]

Approval and Promulgation of Implementation Plans; Louisiana: Reasonable Available Control Technology for Emissions of Volatile Organic Compounds from Batch Processes

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Direct final rule.

SUMMARY: The EPA is approving a revision to the Louisiana State Implementation Plan (SIP) rule requiring Reasonable Available Control Technology (RACT) for emissions of Volatile Organic Compounds (VOC) from Synthetic Organic Chemical Manufacturing Industry (SOCMI) Batch Processes. The EPA finds the rules for Batch Processes in the Louisiana SIP are consistent with EPA's guidance for this source category and therefore constitute RACT. This action converts the conditional approval to a full approval.

DATES: This action is effective on November 9, 1998 unless adverse or critical comments are received by October 8, 1998. If EPA receives such comments, then it will publish a timely withdrawal in the Federal Register informing the public that this rule will not take effect.

[[Page 47430]]

ADDRESSES: Written comments on this action should be addressed to Mr. Thomas H. Diggs, Chief, Air Planning Section (6PD-L), at the EPA Region 6 Office listed below.

Copies of documents relevant to this action are available for public inspection during normal business hours at the following locations. Anyone wanting to examine these documents should make an appointment with the appropriate office at least two working days in advance.

Environmental Protection Agency, Region 6, Air Planning Section (6PD- L), 1445 Ross Avenue, Dallas, Texas 75202-2733. Louisiana Department of Environmental Quality, Air Quality Division, 7290 Bluebonnet Boulevard, Baton Rouge, Louisiana 70810, telephone (504) 765-7247.

Documents which are incorporated by reference are available for public inspection at the Air and Radiation Docket and Information Center, Environmental Protection Agency, 401 M Street, SW., Washington, DC 20460.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Bill Deese of the EPA Region 6 Air Planning Section (6PD-L) at (214) 665-7253 at the Region 6 address above.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

1. Background

   1. RACT Rule Requirements

      Sections 182(b)(2)(A) and 182(c) of the Clean Air Act (the Act) as amended in 1990 requires States to adopt RACT rules for stationary sources of VOCs located in ozone nonattainment areas classified as moderate or above that are covered by a Control Technique Guideline (CTG). A CTG has been developed by EPA providing guidance on the level of control that constitutes RACT for SOCMI processes.

   2. Conditional Approval

      On December 2, 1997 (62 FR 63658), EPA conditionally approved the Louisiana SOCMI Batch Processing RACT rule. The rule was conditionally approved because of a deficiency identified in the single unit operation exemption thresholds. The State made a commitment to EPA to correct the deficiency in the rule within one year of the publication of the conditional approval. This condition was codified in 40 CFR 52.994(b).

   3. State Submittal

      In a letter dated March 23, 1998, the Governor of Louisiana submitted a revision to the Batch Processing RACT rule found in Louisiana Administrative Code, Title 33, Part III, Section 2149 (LAC 33:III.2149) entitled ``Limiting Volatile Organic Compound Emissions from Batch Processing.'' The revision eliminates the individual process single unit operation exemptions and sets the overall single unit operation exemption to 500 pounds per year or less. The revision also adds language which clarifies the successive ranking scheme exemptions for aggregate streams of unit operations. Louisiana's rules for Batch Processes are consistent with EPA's guidance for this source category and therefore have been determined to constitute RACT.

      The EPA removed 40 CFR 52.994(b) by mistake in a Federal Register action published March 9, 1998 (63 FR 11374), when EPA removed the entire section 40 CFR 52.994. The intent of the March 9, 1998, action was to remove only section 52.994(a). Because 40 CFR 52.994(b) is already removed, it not necessary to remove it in this action.

2. Final Action

   The EPA is approving a revision to the Louisiana SIP rule requiring RACT for emissions of VOC from SOCMI Batch Processes. Louisiana's rules for Batch Processes are consistent with EPA's guidance for this source category and therefore have been determined to constitute RACT. The rule revision sets the overall single unit operation exemption to 500 pounds per year and clarifies the successive ranking scheme exemptions for aggregate streams of unit operations. This action converts the conditional approval to a full approval.

   The EPA is publishing this rule without prior proposal because the Agency views this as a noncontroversial amendment and anticipates no adverse comments. However, in the proposed section of this Federal Register publication, EPA is publishing a separate document that will serve as the proposal to approve the SIP revision should relevant adverse comments be filed. This rule will be effective November 9, 1998 without further notice unless the Agency receives relevant adverse comments by October 8, 1998.

   If EPA receives such comments, then EPA will publish a document withdrawing the final rule and informing the public that the rule will not take effect. All public comments received will then be addressed in a subsequent final rule based on this rule. The EPA will not institute a second comment period on this rule. Only parties interested in commenting on this rule should do so at this time. If no such comments are received, the public is advised that this rule will be effective on November 9, 1998 and no further action will be taken on the proposed rule.

   Nothing in this action should be construed as permitting or allowing or establishing a precedent for any future request for revision to any SIP. Each request for revision to the SIP shall be considered separately in light of specific technical, economic, and environmental factors and in relation to relevant statutory and regulatory requirements.

3. Administrative Requirements

   1. Executive Orders (E.O.) 12866 and 13045

      The Office of Management and Budget has exempted this regulatory action from E.O. 12866, entitled ``Regulatory Planning Review,'' review. The final rule is not subject to E.O. 13045, entitled ``Protection of Children from Environmental Health Risks and Safety Risks,'' because it is not an ``economically significant'' action under E.O. 12866.

   2. Regulatory Flexibility

      The Regulatory Flexibility Act (RFA), 5 U.S.C. 600 et seq., generally requires an agency to conduct a regulatory flexibility analysis of any rule subject to notice and comment rulemaking requirements unless the agency certifies that the rule will not have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities. Small entities include small businesses, small not-for-profit enterprises, and small governmental jurisdictions. This final rule will not have a significant impact on a substantial number of small entities because SIP approvals under section 110 and subchapter I, part D of the Act do not create any new requirements but simply approve requirements that the State is already imposing. Therefore, because the Federal SIP approval does not create any new requirements, I certify that this action will not have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities. Moreover, due to the nature of the Federal- State relationship under the Act, preparation of flexibility analysis would constitute Federal inquiry into the economic reasonableness of state action. The Act forbids EPA to base its actions concerning SIPs on such grounds. See Union Electric Co., v. U.S. EPA, 427 U.S. 246, 255-66 (1976); 42 U.S.C. 7410(a)(2).

   3. Unfunded Mandates

      Under section 202 of the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995, signed into law on March 22, 1995, EPA must prepare a budgetary impact statement to accompany any proposed or final rule

      [[Page 47431]]

      that includes a Federal mandate that may result in estimated costs to State, local, or tribal governments in the aggregate; or to private sector, of $100 million or more. Under section 205, EPA must select the most cost-effective and least burdensome alternative that achieves the objectives of the rule and is consistent with statutory requirements. Section 203 requires EPA to establish a plan for informing and advising any small governments that may be significantly or uniquely impacted by the rule.

      The EPA has determined that the approval action promulgated does not include a Federal mandate that may result in estimated costs of $100 million or more to either State, local, or tribal governments in the aggregate, or to the private sector. This Federal action approves preexisting requirements under State or local law, and imposes no new requirements. Accordingly, no additional costs to State, local, or tribal governments, or to the private sector, result from this action.

   4. Submission to Congress and the Comptroller General

      The Congressional Review Act, 5 U.S.C. 801 et seq., as added by the Small Business Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act of 1996, generally provides that before a rule may take effect, the agency promulgating the rule must submit a rule report, which includes a copy of the rule, to each House of the Congress and to the Comptroller General of the United States. The EPA will submit a report containing this rule and other required information to the U.S. Senate, the U.S. House of Representatives, and the Comptroller General of the United States prior to publication of the rule in the Federal Register. This rule is not a ``major rule'' as defined by 5 U.S.C. 804(2).

   5. Petitions for Judicial Review

      Under section 307(b)(1) of the Act, petitions for judicial review of this action must be filedin the United States Court of Appeals for the appropriate circuit by November 9, 1998. Filing a petition for reconsideration by the Administrator of this final rule does not affect the finality of this rule for the purposes of judicial review nor does it extend the time within which a petition for judicial review may be filed, and shall not postpone the effectiveness of such rule or action. This action may not be challenged later in proceedings to enforce its requirements. See section 307(b)(2).

      List of Subjects in 40 CFR part 52

      Environmental protection, Air pollution control, Hydrocarbons, Incorporation by reference, Ozone, Volatile organic compounds.

      Dated: August 21, 1998. Jerry Clifford, Acting Regional Administrator, Region 6.

      Part 52, chapter I, title 40 of the Code of Federal Regulations is amended as follows:

      PART 52--[AMENDED]

      1. The authority citation of part 52 continues to read as follows:

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

         Subpart T--Louisiana

      2. Section 52.970 is amended by adding paragraph (c)(77) to read as follows:

         Sec. 52.970 Identification of plan.

         * * * * *

         (c) * * *

         (77) Revisions to the Louisiana Administrative Code, Title 33, Part III, Chapter 21, Section 2149 (LAC 33:III.2149), ``Limiting Volatile Organic Compound Emissions from Batch Processing,'' submitted by the Governor on March 23, 1998.

         (i) Incorporation by reference.

         LAC 33:III Chapter 21, revised paragraph 2149.A.2.b; paragraphs 2149.C.2.a, b, and c become paragraphs 2149.C.2.d, e, and f respectively; and add new paragraphs 2149.C.2.a, b, and c, as adopted in the Louisiana Register on November 20, 1997 (LR 23:1507).

         (ii) Additional material. None.

         [FR Doc. 98-24043Filed9-4-98; 8:45 am]

         BILLING CODE 6560-50-P