Approval and Promulgation of Air Quality Implementation Plans; Louisiana; Alternative Emission Control Plan for Dow Chemical, U.S.A., Louisiana Division, Plaquemine, LA

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

40 CFR Part 52

[LA-2-1-5200; FRL-5075-9]

Approval and Promulgation of Air Quality Implementation Plans;

Louisiana; Alternative Emission Control Plan for Dow Chemical, U.S.A.,

Louisiana Division, Plaquemine, LA

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Final rule.

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

SUMMARY: The EPA is announcing final approval of the alternative

emission reduction (bubble) plan for the Dow Chemical Plaquemine

facility as a revision to the Louisiana State Implementation Plan

(SIP). The bubble plan uses the emissions reduction credit (ERC) from a

process modification at the Glycol II expander unit in lieu of

controlling emissions from four volatile organic compounds (VOC)

storage tanks. The bubble plan was reviewed for consistency with the

final Emissions Trading Policy Statement (ETPS) published by the EPA in

the Federal Register on December 4, 1986. The ERC is determined to be

valid for emissions trading.

EFFECTIVE DATE: This final rule is effective on November 3, 1994.

ADDRESSES: Copies of the documents relevant to this action are

available for public inspection during normal business hours at the

locations listed below. The interested persons wanting to examine these

documents should make an appointment with the appropriate office at

least two working days in advance.

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Region 6, Air Programs Branch

(6T-A), 1445 Ross Avenue, Dallas, TX 75202.

Air and Radiation Docket and Information Center, U.S. Environmental

Protection Agency, 401 M Street, SW., Washington, DC 20460.

Louisiana Department of Environmental Quality, Air Quality Division,

7290 Bluebonnet, Baton Rouge, LA 70810.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Bill Deese or Russell Parr of the EPA

Region 6 Air Programs Branch at (214) 665-7253 and at the EPA Region 6

address.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Background

On October 19, 1983, the Governor of Louisiana submitted a request

to revise the Louisiana SIP to include an alternative emission

reduction plan for the Dow Chemical facility located in Plaquemine,

Iberville Parish. The State submittal contains verification that

adequate public notice was given and a public hearing was held for the

bubble plan. The EPA proposed to approve the bubble plan in a

rulemaking document published on June 21, 1991 (56 FR 28509). Brief

background information about the bubble plan is provided in this final

rulemaking notice; see the proposed rulemaking notice for a more

comprehensive discussion of relevant issues and details.

In June 1977, a process modification instituted at the Glycol II

expander unit reduced actual emissions of VOC from a waste gas vent by

455.1 tons per year (TPY), from 595.7 to 140.6 TPY. The modification

involved adding an additional reactor to the process that reduced the

amount of VOC entering and being emitted from the incinerator. The

bubble plan uses the emissions reduction from the waste gas vent to

offset uncontrolled emissions from four VOC storage tanks. Louisiana

Administrative Code requires emissions from the four VOC storage tanks

be controlled. Allowable emissions from the four tanks are 0.45 TPY,

and total actual emissions from the tanks are 42.33 TPY. The actual

emissions from one of the methanol tanks (8X) is 0.69 TPY greater than

what was presented in the proposal (1.35 TPY as proposed versus 2.04

TPY as approved), due to an increased turnover rate reported by the Dow

Chemical Company after publication of the proposed rulemaking notice.

Of the 455.1 TPY ERC generated from the waste gas vent, 41.88 TPY is

utilized to offset the noncompliance emissions from the four storage

tanks and 5.7 TPY is utilized for improvement in air quality, leaving

407.5 TPY of ERC remaining. The 5.7 TPY improvement in air quality is a

State requirement imposed on Dow Chemical. The entire trade as approved

is summarized in the following table.

ERC from reduction of Emissions from four VOC

vent emissions (-455.1 storage tanks (+41.88 Net air quality

TPY) TPY) benefit (+5.7 TPY)

Remaining ERC\1\

[-407.5 TPY]

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

Emissions (tons/year)

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

Actual Allowable

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

Before After Before After

Source bubble bubble Change bubble bubble Change ID

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

Storage tanks............. 5.72 5.72 0.0 0.16 5.72 5.56 6L

2.04 2.04 0.0 0.03 2.04 2.01 8X

28.00 28.00 0.0 0.14 28.00 27.86 8S

6.57 6.57 0.0 0.12 6.57 6.45 8T

Waste gas vent............ 595.7 140.6 -455.1 595.7 140.6 -455.1 2L

Air quality benefit....... 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 5.7 5.7

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

Total............... 638.03 182.93 -455.1 596.15 188.63 -407.5\1\

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

\1\The 407.5 tons per year of remaining ERC has been voided for future use by Dow Chemical as credit. This has

been reflected in the State permit number 1838T(M-2) dated October 16, 1991.

The figures in the table for the waste gas vent have had the ethane

component removed because the EPA policy does not treat ethane as a

VOC. Currently, emissions from three of the VOC storage tanks (6L, 8S

and 8T) are controlled.

Discussion

The State submittal was reviewed for compliance with requirements

of section 110 of the Clean Air Act (CAA), 40 CFR part 51, and proposed

and final ETPS published by the EPA on April 7, 1982 (47 FR 15076) and

December 4, 1986 (51 FR 43814), respectively. The EPA Evaluation Report

titled Alternative Emission Control Plan for Dow Chemical, U.S.A., has

been prepared and updated to correspond with circumstances presented in

this final rulemaking notice.

Before the EPA would grant final approval of this bubble, the State

of Louisiana was required to furnish the EPA with the following

assurances specified in the proposed rulemaking: (1) That the State

will document that none of the ERC was ever utilized in former planning

to develop the SIP for the area so the entire 595.7 TPY serves as

baseline; (2) that the State will document that the 407.5 TPY of

remaining ERC designated for the bank is voided; (3) that the State

will submit a revised, more enforceable permit--modeled after the ones

finally issued and approved for Vulcan Materials Company, Geismar

Chemical, and American Cyanamid Company Fortier facility bubbles and,

ultimately, corresponding with the emissions table presented above; (4)

that the State is addressing the post-87 SIP call; (5) that the State

will submit a plan to demonstrate attainment for the area; and (6) that

the State has resources to fulfill the requirements of numbers (4) and

(5). On October 16, 1991, the permit was revised and a copy forwarded

to the EPA. The State of Louisiana provided assurances addressing each

of the six required elements in a letter to the EPA dated September 17,

1991.

Public Comment and EPA Response

Besides responses from the State of Louisiana, the EPA received one

comment on the proposed June 21, 1991, rulemaking in response to

publication of the proposed approval. The Ohio EPA, Division of Air

Pollution Control, submitted the following comment. The comment has

been paraphrased to reflect what the EPA believes is an accurate

summary of the commenters' concerns.

In order for ERC to be valid, the 1977 process change should have

occurred after the SIP baseline year in effect for ozone at the time of

the submittal. This would ensure the emission reduction as surplus. The

proposed rulemaking did not identify the SIP baseline year in effect

when this bubble was submitted to the EPA on October 19, 1983. The EPA

may want to require the affected storage tanks to meet the RACT

regulations in the future ozone SIP without the benefit of the 1977

process change.

EPA Response: The final ETPS of December 4, 1986 (51 FR 43814) sets

out current policy for approving bubbles. The EPA policy differs

depending on whether the bubble is in a nonattainment area with an

approved attainment demonstration (NAWAD) or a nonattainment area

lacking an approved attainment demonstration (NALAD). When this bubble

was submitted to the EPA on October 19, 1983, Plaquemine and Iberville

Parishes were considered NAWAD. With the subsequent SIP call on May 26,

1988, these two parishes were considered part of the Baton Rouge

Metropolitan Statistical Area and, therefore, were converted to NALAD.

The EPA has determined that different requirements should apply to a

pending bubble in a SIP call area, such as this one. Namely, the

existing bubble can continue to use the baseline that was consistent

with the assumptions in the original attainment demonstration. For this

bubble, the EPA interprets the baseline as the emission level

established by the underlying Reasonably Available Control Technology

(RACT) regulation. RACT, in this case, is determined by the regulation

approved by the State of Louisiana in 1980 which requires incineration

(a control device). This control device was already installed when the

process improvement resulting in the additional reduction of VOC was

made in 1977. The additional reductions result from the process

improvement before the incinerator, thereby reducing the amount of VOC

going to the control device.

To be valid for trading purposes, an emission reduction must be

surplus, enforceable, permanent, and quantifiable. First, Dow has shown

that a significant VOC reduction was achieved, beyond what was required

by RACT, by the process modification. Second, the emission reductions

were made enforceable when the State issued to Dow a modified permit

[Permit Number 1838T(M-2)] on October 16, 1991, that delineated the

terms of the emission trade. Third, the emission reductions are

permanent since the process change is permanent. Finally, the ERC's are

quantifiable in that the VOC emissions can be calculated and the

reduction in waste gases produced by the process can be measured.

Therefore, the emission reduction credits associated with this bubble

are valid.

With regard to requiring the affected storage tanks to meet the

RACT regulation in future ozone SIP's, much of this has already been

accomplished. Waste gas vents (emission point 2L) have been rerouted

for recovery by the ethylene recovery unit under State Permit Number

2032. The tanks used for hexane storage (emission points 8S and 8T)

have been replaced by pressurized tanks under State Permit Number 2033.

One of the methanol tank vents (emission point 6L) will be rerouted for

recovery under State Permit Number 2037. Only one methanol tank vent

(emission point 8X) remains uncontrolled as originally proposed.

Emissions from this vent have been revised from 1.37 tons per year to

2.04 tons per year based on an increased turnover rate.

Final Action

The EPA is taking final action to approve the alternative emission

reduction (bubble) plan for the Dow Chemical Plaquemine facility as

submitted by the Governor of Louisiana in a letter dated October 19,

1983, and amended with a permit number 1838T(M-2) dated October 16,

1991, and State assurances provided in a letter from the Louisiana

Department of Environmental Quality dated September 17, 1991.

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.

Under the Regulatory Flexibility Act, 5 U.S.C. 600 et seq., the 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, the 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 section 110 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, I certify that 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 the 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 Office of Management and Budget has exempted this action from

review under Executive Order 12866.

Under section 307(b)(1) of the CAA, petitions for judicial review

of this action must be filed in the United States Court of Appeals for

the appropriate circuit by December 5, 1994. Filing a petition for

reconsideration of this final rule by the Administrator would not

affect the finality of this rule for purposes of judicial review nor

would it extend the time within which a petition for judicial review

may be filed, and would not postpone the effectiveness of this rule.

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, Carbon monoxide,

Hydrocarbons, Incorporation by reference, Ozone, Reporting and

recordkeeping requirements, Volatile organic compounds.

Note: Incorporation by reference of the State Implementation

Plan for the State of Louisiana was approved by the Director of the

Federal Register on July 1, 1982.

Dated: September 7, 1994.

J.D. Winkle,

Regional Administrator (6A).

Part 52, chapter I, title 40 of the Code of Federal Regulations is

amended as follows:

PART 52--[AMENDED]

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

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

Subpart T--Louisiana

2. Section 52.970 is amended by adding paragraph (c)(62) to read as

follows:

Sec. 52.970 Identification of plan.

* * * * *

(c) * * *

(62) Alternative emission reduction (bubble) plan for the Dow

Chemical facility located in Plaquemine, Iberville Parish, as adopted

by the Louisiana Environmental Control Commission on July 28, 1983,

submitted by the Governor on October 19, 1983, and amended by the

Louisiana Department of Environmental Quality with permit number

1838T(M-2) issued on October 16, 1991.

(ii) Incorporation by reference.

(A) Permit number 1838T(M-2) as issued by the Louisiana Department

of Environmental Quality on October 16, 1991.

(ii) Additional material.

(A) Letter dated September 17, 1991, from the Administrator of the

Office of Air Quality at the Louisiana Department of Environmental

Quality to the Chief of the Planning Section at the Air Programs Branch

of the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency--Region 6, furnishing State

assurances.

* * * * *

[FR Doc. 94-24419 Filed 10-3-94; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6560-50-P