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

[Federal Register: October 8, 1998 (Volume 63, Number 195)]

[Rules and Regulations]

[Page 54053-54055]

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

[DOCID:fr08oc98-7]

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

40 CFR Part 52

[TN -201-9828a; FRL-6169-6]

Approval and Promulgation of Implementation Plans; Tennessee: Approval of Revisions to the Nashville/Davidson County Portion of the Tennessee SIP Regarding Control of Volatile Organic Compounds

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Direct final rule.

SUMMARY: EPA is approving revisions to the Nashville/Davidson County portion of Tennessee's State Implementation Plan (SIP) concerning regulatory revisions for control of volatile organic compounds. This regulatory revision to the Metropolitan Nashville and Davidson County, Tennessee's portion of the SIP establishes the emission standard for stationary sources of volatile organic compounds located in Davidson County, Tennessee. The revisions were submitted to EPA on July 23, 1997, by the State of Tennessee through the Tennessee Department of Air Pollution Control (TDAPC).

DATES: This direct final rule is effective December 7, 1998 without further notice, unless EPA receives adverse comment by November 9, 1998. If EPA receives adverse comment, we will publish a timely withdrawal of the direct final rule in the Federal Register and inform the public that the rule will not take effect.

ADDRESSES: You should address comments on this action to Gregory O. Crawford at the Environmental Protection Agency, Region 4 Air Planning Branch, 61 Forsyth Street, SW, Atlanta, Georgia 30303.

Copies of documents related to this action are available for the public to review during normal business hours at the locations below. If you would like to review these documents, please make an appointment with the appropriate office at least 24 hours before the visiting day. Reference file TN201-01-xxxx. The Region 4 office may have additional background documents not available at the other locations.

Air and Radiation Docket and Information Center (Air Docket 6102), U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, 401 M Street, SW, Washington, DC 20460.

Environmental Protection Agency, Region 4 Air Planning Branch, 61 Forsyth Street, SW, Atlanta, Georgia 30303, Gregory O. Crawford, (404) 562-9046.

Tennessee Department of Environment and Conservation, Division of Air Pollution Control, L & C Annex, 9th Floor, 401 Church Street, Nashville, Tennessee 37243-1531, (615) 532-0554. Metropolitan Government of Nashville and Davidson County, Metropolitan Health Department, 311-23rd Avenue, North, Nashville, Tennessee 37203, (615) 340-5653.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Gregory O. Crawford at (404) 562-9046 or E-mail (crawford.gregory@epamail.epa.gov).

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

1. Background

   On November 10, 1994, EPA raised the issue that the exemption in Regulation No. 7, Section 7-16, ``Emission Standards for Surface Coating of Miscellaneous Metal Parts and Products,'' Subparagraph (c)(1), was inconsistent with EPA's Guidelines for ``Control of Volatile Organic Compounds Emissions from Stationary Sources, and therefore, EPA could not approve this provision.

2. Analysis of State's Submittal

   In an attempt to correct the deficiency, the State of Tennessee submitted revisions to EPA on July 23, 1997, to amend regulation No. 7, ``Regulation for Control of Volatile Organic Compounds, Sections 7-16, Emission Standards for Surface Coating of Miscellaneous Metal Parts and Products'' of the Nashville/Davidson County portion of the Tennessee SIP (Nashville SIP).

   From the July 23, 1997, submittal EPA is approving rule revisions to section 7-16(a), 7-16c(11), 7-16(d), and 7-16(f). The revisions are consistent with EPA guidance and are therefore being approved. The revisions are as follows:

   Section 7-16(a) adds the definition of ``heavy-duty truck touchup.''

   Section 7-16(d)(6) is renumbered to (d)(7), and a new paragraph (d)(6) is added to establish the maximum volatile organic compound emission limits for heavy duty truck touchups. This limit is consistent with EPA guidelines.

   Section 7-16(c)(11) is deleted. The definition for heavy-duty truck touchup is now in section 7-16(a), and the new maximum volatile organic compound limit is in Section 7-16(d).

   Section 7-16(f) renumbers Paragraphs (f) and (g) to (g) and (h). It also adds a new paragraph (f) that gives the average VOC content limit for owners or operators of miscellaneous metal parts coating lines that apply multiple coatings during the same day.

3. Final Action

   EPA is approving the aforementioned changes to the SIP. 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 rules 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 December 7, 1998 without further notice unless the Agency receives relevant adverse comments by November 9, 1998.

   If the EPA receives such comments, then EPA will publish a document

   [[Page 54054]]

   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 the proposed rule. The EPA will not institute a second comment period. Only parties interested in commenting should do so at this time. If no such comments are received, the public is advised that this rule will be effective on December 7, 1998 and no further action will be taken on the proposed rule.

4. Administrative Requirements

   1. Executive Order 12866

      The Office of Management and Budget (OMB) has exempted this regulatory action from E.O. 12866 review.

   2. Executive Order 12875

      Under E.O. 12875, EPA may not issue a regulation that is not required by statute and that creates a mandate upon a state, local, or tribal government, unless the Federal government provides the funds necessary to pay the direct compliance costs incurred by those governments. If the mandate is unfunded, EPA must provide to the Office of Management and Budget a description of the extent of EPA's prior consultation with representatives of affected state, local, and tribal governments, the nature of their concerns, copies of written communications from the governments, and a statement supporting the need to issue the regulation. In addition, E.O. 12875 requires EPA to develop an effective process permitting elected officials and other representatives of state, local, and tribal governments ``to provide meaningful and timely input in the development of regulatory proposals containing significant unfunded mandates.'' Today's rule does not create a mandate on state, local or tribal governments. The rule does not impose any enforceable duties on these entities. Accordingly, the requirements of section 1(a) of E.O. 12875 do not apply to this rule.

   3. Executive Order 13084

      Under E.O. 13084, EPA may not issue a regulation that is not required by statute, that significantly affects or uniquely affects the communities of Indian tribal governments, and that imposes substantial direct compliance costs on those communities, unless the Federal government provides the funds necessary to pay the direct compliance costs incurred by the tribal governments. If the mandate is unfunded, EPA must provide to the Office of Management and Budget, in a separately identified section of the preamble to the rule, a description of the extent of EPA's prior consultation with representatives of affected tribal governments, a summary of the nature of their concerns, and a statement supporting the need to issue the regulation. In addition, representatives of Indian tribal governments ``to provide meaningful and timely input in the development of regulatory policies on matters that significantly or uniquely affect their communities.'' Today's rule does not significantly or uniquely affect the communities of Indian tribal governments. Accordingly, the requirements of section 3(b) of E.O. 13084 do not apply to this rule.

   4. Regulatory Flexibility Act

      Redesignation of an area to attainment under section 107(d)(3)(E) of the CAA does not impose any new requirements on small entities. Redesignation is an action that affects the status of a geographical area and does not impose any regulatory requirements on sources. To the extent that the area must adopt new regulations, based on its attainment status, EPA will review the effect of those actions on small entities at the time the State submits those regulations. The Administrator certifies that the approval of the redesignation request will not affect a substantial number of small entities.

   5. Unfunded Mandates

      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 pre- existing 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.

   6. Submission to Congress and the Comptroller General

      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. 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).

   7. Executive Order 13045

      Protection of Children from Environmental Health Risks and Safety Risks (62 FR 19885, April 23, 1997), applies to any rule that: (1) is determined to be ``'economically significant''' as defined under Executive Order 12866, and (2) concerns an environmental health or safety risk that EPA has reason to believe may have a disproportionate effect on children. If the regulatory action meets both criteria, the Agency must evaluate the environmental health or safety effects of the planned rule on children, and explain why the planned regulation is preferable to other potentially effective and reasonably feasible alternatives considered by the Agency.

      This rule is not subject to E.O. 13045 because it is does not involved decisions intended to mitigate environmental health or safety risks.

   8. Petitions for Judicial Review

      Under section 307(b)(1) of the Clean Air Act, petitions for judicial review of this action must be filedin the United States Court of Appeals for the appropriate circuit by December 7, 1998. Filing a petition for reconsideration by the Administrator of this final rule does not affect the finality of this 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 an action. This action may not be challenged later in proceedings to enforce its requirements. (See section 307(b)(2).) EPA encourages interested parties to comment in response to the proposed redesignation rather than petition for judicial review, unless the objection arises after the comment period allowed for in the proposal.

      List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52

      Environmental protection, Air pollution control, Carbon monoxide, Hydrocarbons, Incorporation by reference, Intergovernmental relations, Lead, Nitrogen dioxide, Ozone, Particulate matter, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements, Sulfur oxides.

      Dated: September 8, 1998. A. Stanley Meiburg, Acting Regional Administrator Region 4.

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

      [[Page 54055]]

      PART 52--[AMENDED]

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

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

         Subpart RR--Tennessee

      2. Section 52.2220, is amended by adding paragraph (c)(162) to read as follows:

         Sec. 52.2220 Identification of plan.

         * * * * *

         (c) * * *

         (162) Revisions to the Nashville/Davidson County portion of the Tennessee State Implementation Plan submitted to EPA by the State of Tennessee on July 23, 1997, concerning regulatory revisions for control of volatile organic compounds.

         (i) Incorporation by reference. Regulation No.7, Section 7-16, effective July 9,1997.

         (ii) Other material. None.

         [FR Doc. 98-26893Filed10-7-98; 8:45 am]

         BILLING CODE 6560-50-P