Approval and Promulgation of State Implementation Plans: Oregon

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

40 CFR Part 52

[OR59-7274, OR60-7275; FRL-5696-6]

Approval and Promulgation of State Implementation Plans: Oregon

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency.

ACTION: Direct final rule.

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

SUMMARY: The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) approves revisions

to the State of Oregon Implementation Plan for two source-specific

Reasonably Available Control Technology (RACT) volatile organic

compound (VOC) emissions standards: Cascade General, Inc., a ship

repair yard in Portland, Oregon; and, White Consolidated, Inc. (doing

business as Schrock Cabinet Co.), a wood cabinet manufacturing facility

in Hillsboro, Oregon. These revisions are required by the Clean Air Act

(CAA) and were submitted to EPA on November 20, 1996.

DATES: This action is effective on May 6, 1997 unless adverse or

critical comments are received by April 7, 1997. If the effective date

is delayed, timely notice will be published in the Federal Register.

ADDRESSES: Written comments should be addressed to: Montel Livingston,

SIP Manager, Office of Air Quality (OAQ-107), EPA Region 10, 1200 Sixth

Avenue, Seattle, Washington 98101. Documents incorporated by reference

are available for public inspection at the Air and Radiation Docket and

Information Center, EPA, 401 M Street, SW, Washington, D.C. 20460.

Copies of material submitted to EPA may be examined during normal

business hours at the following locations: EPA, Office of Air Quality

(OAQ-107), 1200 Sixth Avenue, Seattle, Washington 98101, and the Oregon

Department of Environmental Quality, 811 S.W. Sixth Avenue, Portland,

Oregon 97204-1390.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Denise Baker, Office of Air Quality

(OAQ-107), EPA Region 10, Seattle, Washington, (206) 553-8087.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

I. Background

Section 172(a)(2) and (b)(3) of the CAA, as amended in 1977 (1977

Act), required sources of VOC to install, at a minimum, RACT in order

to reduce emissions of this pollutant. EPA has defined RACT as the

lowest emission limit that a particular source is capable of meeting by

the application of control technology that is reasonably available,

considering technological and economic feasibility (44 FR 53761,

September 17, 1979). EPA has developed Control Technology Guidelines

(CTGs) for the purpose of informing State and local air pollution

control agencies of air pollution control techniques available for

reducing emissions of VOC from various categories of sources. Each CTG

contains recommendations to the States of what EPA calls the

``presumptive norm'' for RACT. This general statement of agency policy

is based on EPA's evaluation of the capabilities of, and problems

associated with, control technologies currently used by facilities

within individual source categories. EPA has recommended that the

States adopt requirements consistent with the presumptive norm level.

On March 3, 1978, the entire Portland-Vancouver Interstate Air

Quality Maintenance Area was designated by EPA as a non-attainment area

for ozone. The Portland-Vancouver Interstate Air Quality Maintenance

Area contains the urbanized portions of three counties in Oregon

(Clackamas, Multnomah, and Washington) and one county (Clark) in the

State of Washington.

The 1977 Act required States to submit plans to demonstrate how

they would attain and maintain compliance with national ambient air

standards for those areas designated non-attainment. The 1977 Act

further required these plans to demonstrate compliance with primary

standards no later than December 31, 1982. An extension up to December

31, 1987, was possible if the State could demonstrate that, despite

implementation of all reasonably available control measures, the

December 31, 1982, date could not be met.

On October 7, 1982, EPA approved the Portland-Vancouver area ozone

attainment plan, including an extension of the attainment date to

December 31, 1987 (47 FR 44262).

On June 15, 1988, pursuant to Section 110(a)(2)(H) of the pre-

amended CAA, former EPA Regional Administrator Robie Russell notified

the State of Oregon by letter that the State Implementation Plan (SIP)

for the Portland-Vancouver area was substantially inadequate to provide

for timely attainment of the National Ambient Air Quality Standards

(NAAQS). In that letter, EPA identified specific actions needed to

correct deficiencies in State regulations representing RACT for sources

of VOC. Further, the CAA, as amended in 1990 (amended Act), also

requires States to correct deficiencies. In amended Section

182(a)(2)(A), Congress statutorily

[[Page 10456]]

adopted the requirement that ozone non-attainment areas fix their

deficient RACT rules for ozone. Areas designated non-attainment before

the effective date of the amendments, and which retained that

designation and were classified as marginal or above as of the

effective date, are required to meet the RACT fix-up requirement. Under

Section 182(a)(2)(A), States with such non-attainment areas were

mandated to correct their RACT requirements by May 15, 1991. The

corrected requirements were to be in compliance with Section 172(b), as

it existed before the amendments, and as that section was interpreted

in the pre-amendment guidance. The SIP call letter interpreted that

guidance and indicated corrections necessary for specific non-

attainment areas. The Portland part of the Portland-Vancouver non-

attainment area is classified as marginal. Therefore, this area is

subject to the RACT fix-up requirement and the May 15, 1991, deadline.

On May 15, 1991, the State of Oregon submitted Oregon

Administrative Rules (OAR) 340-22-100 through 340-22-220, General

Emission Standards for Volatile Organic Compounds, as an amendment to

the Oregon SIP. On September 29, 1993, EPA approved these revisions to

the Oregon SIP (58 FR 50848). Part of these amended rules included a

requirement for RACT for non-CTG sources.

On November 20, 1996, the State of Oregon submitted to EPA source-

specific RACT VOC emissions standards for Cascade General, Inc., a ship

repair yard in Portland, Oregon; and, White Consolidated, Inc. (doing

business as Schrock Cabinet Co.), a wood cabinet manufacturing facility

in Hillsboro, Oregon.

The RACT determination for Cascade General modifies their existing

permit to contain surface coating performance standards and special

conditions for solvent clean-up operations. The permit now provides

specific limits for VOC emissions from five different coating types

used in ship painting operations (refer to condition 19, Page 2 of 3,

of addendum #2 to operating permit #26-3224, issued by the Oregon

Department of Environmental Quality).

White Consolidated's RACT determination places limits on the VOC

content of coatings used in the finishing steps of wood cabinet

production and VOC handling methods used in solvent related cleaning.

(For more specific information, see conditions 11, 12, and 13, Pages 5

and 6, of addendum #2 to operating permit #34-2060, issued by the

Oregon Department of Environmental Quality.)

This Federal Register document approves the rule revision as an

amendment to the Oregon SIP.

II. This Action

EPA is approving the revision to the State of Oregon Implementation

Plan submitted on November 20, 1996, as an amendment. The RACT

determinations for Cascade General, Inc., and White Consolidated, Inc.,

meet all of the applicable requirements of the Act as determined by

EPA.

EPA is not approving the entire permit, but only the conditions

necessary for implementation and enforcement of the RACT requirement in

OAR 340-22-104(5), (6), and (7). Since the RACT requirements are

contained in the approved SIP, the source specific RACT limits will

remain in effect, even if the Oregon permit expires as a matter of

State law.

The EPA is publishing this action without prior proposal because

the Agency views this as a noncontroversial amendment and anticipates

no adverse comments. However, in a separate document in this Federal

Register publication, the EPA is proposing to approve the SIP revision

should adverse or critical comments be filed. This action will be

effective May 6, 1997 unless by April 7, 1997, adverse or critical

comments are received.

If the EPA receives such comments, this action will be withdrawn

before the effective date by publishing a subsequent document that will

withdraw the final action. All public comments received will be

addressed in a subsequent final rule based on this action serving as a

proposed rule. The EPA will not institute a second comment period on

this action. Any parties interested in commenting on this action should

do so at this time. If no such comments are received, the public is

advised that this action will be effective May 6, 1997.

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.

III. Administrative Review

A. Executive Order 12866

This action has been classified as a Table 3 action for signature

by the Regional Administrator under the procedures published in the

Federal Register on January 19, 1989 (54 FR 2214-2225), as revised by a

July 10, 1995, memorandum from Mary Nichols, Assistant Administrator

for Air and Radiation. The Office of Management and Budget (OMB) has

exempted this regulatory action from E.O. 12866 review.

B. Regulatory Flexibility Act

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 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 EPA to base its actions concerning SIPs on such grounds.

Union Electric Co. v. E.P.A., 427 U.S. 246, 256-66 (S.Ct. 1976); 42

U.S.C. 7410(a)(2).

C. Unfunded Mandates

Under Section 202 of the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995

(``Unfunded Mandates Act''), signed into law on March 22, 1995, EPA

must prepare a budgetary impact statement to accompany any proposed or

final rule that includes a Federal mandate that may result in estimated

costs to State, local, or tribal governments in the aggregate, or to

the 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.

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

[[Page 10457]]

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.

D. Submission to Congress and the General Accounting Office

Under 5 U.S.C. 801(a)(1)(A), as added by the Small Business

Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act of 1996, EPA submitted 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

General Accounting Office prior to publication of the rule in today's

Federal Register. This rule is not a ``major rule'' as defined by 5

U.S.C. section 804(2).

E. Petitions for Judicial Review

Under section 307(b)(1) of the Clean Air Act, petitions for

judicial review of this action must be filed in the United States Court

of Appeals for the appropriate circuit by May 6, 1997. 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), 42

U.S.C. 7607(b)(2).

List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52

Environmental protection, Air pollution control, Incorporation by

reference, Ozone, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements, Volatile

organic compounds.

Note: Incorporation by reference of the Implementation Plan for

the State of Oregon was approved by the Director of the Office of

Federal Register on July 1, 1982.

Dated: February 21, 1997.

Jane S. Moore,

Acting Regional Administrator.

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 MM--Oregon

2. Section 52.1970 is amended by adding paragraph (c) (117) to read

as follows:

Sec. 52.1970 Identification of plan.

* * * * *

(c) * * *

(117) On November 20, 1996, the Director of the Oregon Department

of Environmental Quality (ODEQ) submitted source-specific Reasonably

Available Control Technology (RACT) determinations to EPA as SIP

revisions for VOC emissions standards.

(i) Incorporation by reference.

(A) Two letters dated November 20, 1995, from Director of the

Oregon Department of Environmental Quality (ODEQ) submitting SIP

revisions for RACT determinations for VOC emissions for: Cascade

General, Inc., a ship repair yard in Portland, Oregon, Permit No. 26-

3224 (issued to the Port of Portland), dated October 4, 1995; and,

White Consolidated, Inc. (doing business as Schrock Cabinet Co.), a

wood cabinet manufacturing facility in Hillsboro, Oregon, Permit No.

34-2060, dated August 1, 1995.

[FR Doc. 97-5644 Filed 3-6-97; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6560-50-P